We have this question about reopening a question and tagging it on the grounds that the OP linked to the system-specific rule document. As much as I've been on the side of waiting for explicit mention of a system, I'll agree that this counts as such mention.

We do have this policy stating that questions about D&D Beyond are indisputably about because that's what D&D Beyond uses... but it's specific to that system.

Can (or should) we generalize this policy? Are there any problems with doing so that anyone can foresee?

As of 15/06/2021 both answers to this question are positive toward this change with post scores of +20/-3 and +14 respectively. Therefore this change has been added to the policy meta.

  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Is there a reason you need “policy” and not just common sense community moderation given those precedents? \$\endgroup\$ – mxyzplk Jun 5 at 5:44
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @mxyzplk I'm not sure I follow. What would you recommend be done here? \$\endgroup\$ – Stop Being Evil Jun 5 at 6:01
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ This proposal appears to have good community support. I'm going to wait another day or two then, if there are no conflicting views posted, I will update the policy Q&A accordingly. \$\endgroup\$ – linksassin Mod Jun 9 at 7:22
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ It was my most useful mistake on the site. \$\endgroup\$ – András Jun 9 at 7:38

Citing materials is a way for someone who doesn’t know there are different editions of the game to tell us what edition they’re using.

When I got into Dungeons & Dragons, I didn’t know there were editions. I went to my local game store and said “how do I get started with D&D?”, and the clerk said “Buy this” and handed me the Player’s Handbook. I didn’t know there were proper editions of D&D. I just figured they had been making books since the 80s and you just used whatever you wanted.

It wasn’t until I started reading this site that I learned that D&D had different editions. Before I started using the site, I didn’t even know that D&D had editions to specify. But I could have included in a question for the site, “In the Player’s Handbook it says [direct quote from the 5th Edition PHB]”. By including this quote, I have specified the edition I’m using without even knowing it.

This is a common sense step toward improving the way new users relate to the policy we currently have. Users who don’t even know that games have editions should find their inquiries unimpeded by our policy when they cite and quote materials that definitively identify the game system being used.


Yes we can, and we shouldn't even need to ask this meta in order to do that.

We already discussed that we should "let experts be experts". Stack Exchange isn't meant to run on absolute objective rigid adherence to black-and-white law, we're meant to be the people synthesizing our available guidance into considered and careful subjective judgement. The don't guess the system policy quantifiably does not even have popular support anymore.

As experts operating with considered judgement, we should be considering that when someone unambiguously indicates their system by indicating system-specific documentation while providing nothing to contradict such an indication, they have indicated their system sufficiently to us.

But we shouldn't even be in a place where we need to be asking for this permission and having it confirmed—because we should be operating on a system of careful considered judgment which would indicate this is already the appropriate response based on discussions we've had to date.

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Thanks for saying what I was thinking. \$\endgroup\$ – KorvinStarmast Jun 5 at 16:10

You must log in to answer this question.

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