8
\$\begingroup\$

I would like to rescue a question - may i do this with a 5e question?

I put the first down here and it was annihilated due to a lack of popularity or something? Also, no answer.

I put down the second one here - which i feel was fairly well written. Role-player stackers said 'nope, you already tried - to the Abyss with you!' Okay then?

Honestly, i get that my questions are not popular - but i am trying to reform / mend ways / pay for sins. Also, at this point would really be thankful to have an answer (of some kind). I have invested a lot of time and effort to only be kicked in the face, thrown down a hole and laughed at.

If i am not allowed to re-ask my question, please delete both if possible. It is useless to have questions without answers, it only makes us all look silly.

Thank you for listening.

\$\endgroup\$
0
6
\$\begingroup\$

Your question was originally closed for “needs more focus”, and each of these steps are concrete ways you can focus your question on the actual problem you are trying to solve.

Step 0: Interact with comments.

Usually, close voters will leave a comment explaining why the question was closed. Your question is no exception. All of the steps I am about to offer were in one form or another explained and asked about in comments under your original question. Comments are the primary means we use for quickly workshopping a question into something the stack is equipped to handle.

Step 1: Narrow the scope to the game you are playing.

In your question, you write (emphasis mine):

What rules exist in any edition to tabulate density of crowded groups in tight, pressing, forced or out-of-combat situations?

There are many editions of D&D. Unless you are currently playing games of every edition of D&D, you don’t need to know the squeezing rules for every edition of D&D. You should narrow the scope of the question to focus on the particular edition you are playing.

Step 2: Narrow the scope to a particular at-table scenario.

In your question you offer several different scenarios:

  • Seven goblins in a snowfall, backed up to a tiny bluff. Whilst huddling up to a tiny fire they are hit by bon-firing / cantripping that hits a large number of them.
  • Whilst thirty-three zombies cluster-reach through a portcullis a large urn of oil (above) pours & splashes down and is set ablaze.
  • Three clumsy ogres slip-fall into a 10' cube-pit and seek to angrily push-throw one another out.
  • A blue dragon (lightning: 'long and narrow') breathing on the crush of two phalanx groups clashing - how many are shocked?

At the same time, this is both too much, and too little information. Narrow the focus to one of these scenarios, the one that either has, or is most likely to, come up in actual gameplay, and give us more details about that one. These are all very different scenarios that will likely require unique judgments.

Step 3: Remove the requests for irrelevant answers.

This is Role Playing Games SE. We answer role playing questions with role playing experience. This means your question should be answered with two things: experience working with the written rules, or real at-table experience implementing house rules helpful to the situation. That’s it. Experience as a dance hall manager is entirely irrelevant. The only way such experience would be helpful in an answer would be something like:

Here’s what the rules say, here’s how I have ruled it in this real situation from my gaming table, and this seems consistent with my experience as a night club bouncer.

Real world experience can help to confirm or deny the intuition behind existing rules.

\$\endgroup\$
11
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Thanks Thomas. Notes: if i 'interact with comments' i upset the locals - and i go NUTS - then get banned (my experience EVERY time... do i suck... & i know!). With ADHD, i do not grasp 'scope'. Or 'time'. Or 'boundaries'. 'Too much & too little information... at the same time!!' Yes. That's me. Just... focus!!! Ha ha ha!! Like asking a paraplegic to climb stairs! i cannot grasp time or boundaries. Annoyingly, i still want to know how many people fit into a 10x10 space. I will ask elsewhere, it seems. Thanks though. I didn't get banned yet, this is a 'win'. Yay, live another day. \$\endgroup\$ Feb 6 at 16:54
  • \$\begingroup\$ @TimofTime I don't think you need to pay for sins, or anything like that. But I've noticed that your questions (especially early drafts) tend to be toward the edge of what the stack's best practices are. The users doing the most mod activity currently seem to have a pretty hard-edged, rules-based sentiment, and so that leads to some friction. I don't agree with the treatment you've received here, and some users are less than kind, but that isn't the only issue. I haven't seen you in chat much, would you be open to workshopping questions there? \$\endgroup\$
    – Upper_Case
    Feb 6 at 17:01
  • \$\begingroup\$ Upper_Case Thank you! keen & willing, that's me. I have energy to spare, i.e. WAY TOO MUCH. Yes, i am sure the users are 'less than kind' - but i am also sure that i have inadvertently 'asked for it' too? Please - link me this 'chat' (i think i found it once before... then i lost it... then i forgot), i would greatly appreciate that. Can my user-name be hooked up with a warning of some kind? 'ADHD + bipolar... this guy is enthusiastic... and doesn't get it... and cannot focus... and freaks out... and is then very sorry. Caveat Emptor!' \$\endgroup\$ Feb 6 at 17:14
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @TimofTime First and foremost, you have not "asked for" being treated badly. Users are expected to be nice, and it isn't your fault when they aren't. I've found chat to be very friendly, and helpful in figuring out how to best ask questions on the stack. Here is a link to RPG general chat, and the link can also be found in a sidebar on the righthand side of the screen on the Meta page. I don't know about adding easily visible information to your username or posts, but more experienced users might know about more options. \$\endgroup\$
    – Upper_Case
    Feb 6 at 17:17
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Upper_Case I'm worried there is a perception of unfriendliness that isn't actually there but is a reaction to the valid criticism of their questions. If you think comments are unfriendly, have you flagged them? \$\endgroup\$
    – NautArch
    Feb 6 at 17:46
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @NautArch Sometimes I flag, and certainly for really egregious issues. But what I'm referring to is mostly a tone thing (it's a critique of a real issue, but it's phrased aggressively or has value judgements in it), coupled with a strong enthusiasm for closing questions quickly and piling on downvotes. They are all valid activities on the stack, but I think that newer and less experienced users probably find them unpleasant and opaque. There are also limited mechanisms for nudging people to behave differently, and moderate abrasiveness isn't enough to draw a suspension (for example). \$\endgroup\$
    – Upper_Case
    Feb 6 at 18:00
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Upper_Case That's a fair assessment, but I honestly think that lately most comments have been to try and work with OP but they have not been received well and not listened to. After repeated events, folks may get frustrated as well, but I'm not seeing that other than in downvotes, which aren't necessarily inappropriate. \$\endgroup\$
    – NautArch
    Feb 6 at 18:03
  • \$\begingroup\$ @NautArch I agree, for this specific case. But there are also issues with, for example, certain users asking questions at the edge of what's tolerated and receiving a positive response, or posting comments that are definitely not meant to improve a question or answer but rather to be funny or cute which are well received. Meanwhile, another user may post a comment and get slammed for violating the commenting guidelines. If we had a sandbox for workshopping questions before posting, that might help, but playing out on main seems harsh (for some users). \$\endgroup\$
    – Upper_Case
    Feb 6 at 18:03
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Upper_Case have you not seen the earlier questions where they have been asked several times across several questions to workshop in meta or go to chat? We can lead a horse to water, but we can't make them drink. There needs to be responsibility on both sides here. \$\endgroup\$
    – NautArch
    Feb 6 at 18:11
  • \$\begingroup\$ @NautArch I'm not disputing that these particular questions are tough to fit into the SE format and are problematic. Improvements are absolutely possible and necessary, and many SE users have tried to guide those changes into being. The OP has stated that there is a fundamental issue that they have with asking questions here, which may or not be surmountable; I won't pretend to know. I perceive a separate, simultaneous issue in which a few users, intentionally or not, project an unwelcoming atmosphere to users who don't already "get it". If you don't see anything similar, maybe I'm just wrong. \$\endgroup\$
    – Upper_Case
    Feb 6 at 18:17
  • \$\begingroup\$ @NautArch True: i AM 'silly & fun' - comic relief allows focus-attention. ADHD means NO grasp of boundaries: 'we don't think OUTSIDE the box, we cannot SEE a box'. I work 'f-king HARD' over DAYS to write one (1) question. Your job is (??), to remind me of of 'rules' - it hurts, hurts, hurts. 'RAF' answers work. 'RAW' answers HURT. ADHD does NOT fit in autistic-strong culture (see previous ADHD folk who left you). How to go forward? 'Sandbox' is brilliant, BUT: I assure you, rule-loving community will HATE me there as well. Trust me on this... lifetime of it. I am sorry, my 'best' sucks. \$\endgroup\$ Feb 6 at 19:32

You must log in to answer this question.

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