2
\$\begingroup\$

In my question about validating a Sorcerer's Spell List, I observed that any rule/table that could be applied to Sorcerers could also (with some numerical adjustment) be applied to other classes that use the same "Learn a new spell at each level, swap an older spell each level" system for learning spells. This includes, in 5th edition, Bards, Warlocks, Eldritch Knights (the Fighter Subclass), Arcane Tricksters (the Rogue Subclass), and Artificers (the Unearthed Arcana class), as well as any Homebrew classes that obey the same basic behavior.

So right now, I'm in the process of generating tables similar to the table that Axoren provided for Sorcerers, but adjusted to handle other classes instead, like Bards (who learn more spells), Warlocks (who never "learn" spells above 5th level), etc.

What I'm uncertain about is how I should post these tables. I had some ideas:

  1. Post each table as a separate answer to the original question, providing some extra context for each regarding each class
  2. Post each table in a massive answer to the original question
  3. Create new questions for each class, linking back to the original question for context, and posting the tables as self-answers for each class
  4. Create a new question for all classes, post the tables as self answers to that question
  5. Create a new question for all classes, post the tables in one big self answer to that question

What do you all feel is the most appropriate way to post these tables? Is there a different method I haven't even thought of?

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • \$\begingroup\$ We can actually include tables in our posts using LaTeX, which may improve matters by making them able to be copy and pasted. On the other hand, highlighting might be harder. Would you be OK with me trying my hand at rendering the tables in LaTeX? Obviously, you can always revert, but it’s a big enough change that I wanted to run it by you first. It may also make it more difficult for you to update in the future, if you ever need to. \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Commented Sep 19, 2018 at 14:13
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Semi-relevant MSE post: Stack Exchange is rolling out native table support that isn't reliant on MathJax. It goes into testing today on MSE and on the DBA Meta, then rolls out to DBA.SE itself a week later, and will be available network-wide a week after that. It uses "GitHub-flavored Markdown" table syntax (since CommonMark doesn't include a specification for tables at the moment). \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast Mod
    Commented Nov 24, 2020 at 1:03

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
6
\$\begingroup\$

#3 works best

People like tools, and this is a good tool for those needing to verify the accuracy of a character sheet.

Keeping each class as it's own question makes it easy to find what someone is looking for (they'd likely be looking to validate a class list), so making it easy to find is the priority.

Yes, it's a lot of questions and self-answers, but in this case I think it makes the most sense in terms of searchability and usefulness.

The question you're asking is How do I validate the spell selections for [x class]?

\$\endgroup\$
5
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ I'm just not sure S.E is best at housing tools like this. \$\endgroup\$
    – David Coffron
    Commented Sep 18, 2018 at 17:15
  • \$\begingroup\$ @DavidCoffron A good point and I'm not sure what policy(if there is) about the external hosting. But it's an RPG question with an answer. That seems like it's good. \$\endgroup\$
    – NotArch
    Commented Sep 18, 2018 at 17:48
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ We link to external hosts of more comprehensive answers all the time (dndbeyond for example). As long as you are quoting the information relevant to the question in the answer, I don't see why it would matter if the source was made before or after the answer was established. \$\endgroup\$
    – David Coffron
    Commented Sep 18, 2018 at 18:12
  • \$\begingroup\$ I.e. if the tables were made by someone else before and the answerer linked to it as a reference point with relevant quotes, it would be acceptable. \$\endgroup\$
    – David Coffron
    Commented Sep 18, 2018 at 18:13
  • \$\begingroup\$ @DavidCoffron okay, then my answer remains the same. \$\endgroup\$
    – NotArch
    Commented Sep 18, 2018 at 18:14
3
\$\begingroup\$

Use option #3, for the reasons explained in NautArch's answer.

But...

Don't do them all at once (like within the same day or two) or you risk the following problems:

  1. If people see what look like samey question titles, they are more likely to skip over them. Fewer people looking at your questions means fewer upvotes, and due to the amount of work you're putting in I'd like to see you get rep for it.

  2. If there's a flaw in your technique or presentation, it will be easier to revise the first few questions with improvements before posting new questions with those improvements in mind (for example, to clarify commonly misunderstood wording or table formatting in your early questions before using that consistently from then on). If instead you post them all at once and subsequently find an issue, you will have to go back and fix it for all of them.

Instead, trickle them out over the course of a few weeks. I think you'll get more rep and fewer hassles doing it that way.

\$\endgroup\$
0
0
\$\begingroup\$

Post it somewhere else with a link to it.

This is certainly a valuable tool to develop but I don't think it fits in the Q&A format. I suppose the best option you mentioned is to ask a new question for all classes and self answer. Something like:

Q: Are there more tables like the one in this answer for other classes?
A: [the other tables]

We've had similar questions asking for a general case before, but that could still be a little unwieldy.

If it were me, I would post the whole collection of tables to an RPG forum and provide a link to the forum in the answer as a reference for the Sorcerer table. This way it doesn't clog up an answer with so many tables. If you wanted to do this within the StackExchange network, you may be able to have a chat room set up to house the tables (probably a question for a moderator).

\$\endgroup\$
7
  • \$\begingroup\$ I don't know if RPG.SE has different rules, but other SE sites generally discourage important information being provided only by way of a link to a third party site. \$\endgroup\$
    – Xirema
    Commented Sep 18, 2018 at 17:37
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Xirema well the important information is quoted in the question itself (the Sorcerer table). You are just linking to the "source" \$\endgroup\$
    – David Coffron
    Commented Sep 18, 2018 at 17:38
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ The general guideline is found in Your answer is in another castle. We're also interested in guarding against link rot since we want this to be a useful resource for years to come. One helpful guideline I've found is that answers should remain useful even when all links in them are dead, because they might be tomorrow. If the tables are the substantial answer, "check them out over behind this link" is a link-only answer and thus Not An Answer. \$\endgroup\$
    – doppelgreener Mod
    Commented Sep 18, 2018 at 18:28
  • \$\begingroup\$ +1: this is really a blog post, not Q&A. \$\endgroup\$
    – Miniman
    Commented Sep 18, 2018 at 22:10
  • \$\begingroup\$ I disagree with posting to an RPG forum because of the snafu that Wizards of the Coast caused when they took down their forums without archive, causing lots of dead links on our site to lead nowhere. If it's to be posted anywhere, it should be in a lasting content-uploading service like Imgur, which is already fairly partnered with StackExchange (we have our own subdomain for image traffic with them: stack.imgur). The individual table images can be posted as an album which can have descriptions listed underneath. \$\endgroup\$
    – Axoren
    Commented Sep 18, 2018 at 22:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Axoren That sounds like its own answer (the imgur mention) \$\endgroup\$
    – David Coffron
    Commented Sep 18, 2018 at 22:32
  • \$\begingroup\$ @DavidCoffron It would just be your answer with a better destination. If you still think so, I'll post it later. \$\endgroup\$
    – Axoren
    Commented Sep 18, 2018 at 23:15
-3
\$\begingroup\$

My personal Gut Instinct is that #1 is the best, because

  • It keeps all the information in one article
  • It allows the other tables to be voted on relative to Axoren's (very well written) original answer

There's a couple downsides, though:

  • As written, the question is about Sorcerers, with only token lip-service paid to those other classes. I may need to rewrite the question to emphasize those other classes
  • If I post 5 additional self-answers, it might be seen as Karma-farming
\$\endgroup\$
1
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Don't worry about rep-farming. You're doing some work to create the resource that you find useful, then sharing it with everyone. It might strike some as excessive if you posted all ten in a day, but spreading them out a bit should be fine. I know that I, personally, look much more favorably on a "can someone compile this info for me" question that is self-answered than one that isn't =) \$\endgroup\$
    – nitsua60 Mod
    Commented Sep 18, 2018 at 18:19

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .