Which questions with Aegis do lack the [Aegis] tag?

Question

Apparently, the tag aegis is currently only used for some 19 questions about a pathfinder-1e feature. Which is confusing since there are 54 questions that use the word but not the tag

I see questions from Pathfinder 1e (often with Psionics), DnD 4 and DnD 5, and two cases of Ars-Magica. Some might fit the bill, most not.

Are there other cases of aegis that just lack the tag? What might become the tag definition based on our tagging and re-tagging?

I am by far not an expert in Pathfinder psionics, so I can't possibly try to come up with something.

Answer 1

It looks to be a couple of different things going on here. I'll start by trying to break it down by system. Keep in mind I'm not intimately familiar with most of these systems, so I'll try to leave it open, and I welcome any corrections and/or informed opinions.

Pathfinder 1e

This is where the tag has current use, it seems to be a perfectly sensible tag for the concept it is within that system (to an outside observer), but there's a bunch of under tagged questions. I don't know how many or which of the 32 questions are actually about Aegises, but I'd rather leave that for someone who knows the system.

D&D 4e

Skimming through the 16 questions, it seems to be included in the name for a bunch of Swordmage powers. If Aegis is the name for a distinct concept/mechanic that would probably warrant a tag, otherwise it doesn't need it.

D&D 5e

The two questions are about a magic item from an adventure module which happens to have Aegis in its name. These aren't relevant to the tag.

D&D 3.5e

The same goes for the question in 3.5, it shows up in the search because of the name of a magic item. No need for the tag.

Ars Magica

I don't know what an Aegis is within the context of Ars Magica, but none of the three questions from Ars Magica 5 seems to be about Aegises. In one it's part of a name, and in the other two it's part of the requirements or concerns. Classic false positives when doing this kind of undertag-search.

Solution

On the basis of the questions we have, there is one relevant system and one maybe. Based on current tagging, the aegis tag is only relevant to PF-1e and the tag description should be fine to reflect that. If the 4e questions should have this tag (and here we need a 4e Swordmage expert), it should get tagged as such and the description expanded to match that. Worse comes to worst, we could simply make it "about mechanics called Aegis is various systems." That's fine to, it doesn't seem to be a widely used concept enough that cross-system meaning is of great importance.

Answer 2

I don’t think this actually corrects anything Someone_Evil has already said, but since there was some uncertainty:

D&D 3.5e

“Aegis” isn’t any particular thing. The word almost-certainly shows up here and there, but it’s not something tag-worthy.

Pathfinder 1e

Aegis is a psionic character class published by Dreamscarred Press, a third-party publisher (who, disclaimer if that’s relevant here, I’ve worked for). As a class, particularly one that has unique mechanics, it makes perfect sense to have a tag for it. Once upon a time, DSP considered possibly publishing work in D&D 5e, or Pathfinder 2e, and that might have eventually included the aegis, but as far as I know, DSP is pretty much defunct at this point.

D&D 4e

One of the core class features of the swordmage class is their “aegis,” and that’s where they choose which sort of swordmage they want to be—they have a choice of “aegis of assault,” “of shielding,” and “of ensnaring.” The aegis is a key part of what makes a swordmage a swordmage, and which one you have has pretty significant ramifications for how you do what you do. But swordmage can and does easily cover questions about them.

D&D 5e

Like 3.5e, 5e doesn’t really have anything “special” for the word “aegis,” it’s just a word that gets used sometimes. Nothing that requires tagging.

Ars Magicka

Completely unfamiliar with this, can’t add anything to what Someone_Evil said.

Opinion

It looks like aegis refers pretty much solely to the Pathfinder 1e class; that’s the only place it’s used, and it seems like it’s the only place it should be used. The Ars Magicka questions look like maybe they could have used the tag, but I lean towards deferring to the people who asked those questions (who surely know more about the system than I), and assuming those questions are fine without it.

Thus, the questions we should be concerned with missing the tag are those with pathfinder-1e and mention the aegis, but without aegis. I.e., this search: [pathfinder-1e] aegis -[aegis]. Seems there are 60 questions in there.

One issue, though: the aegis is a psionic class. That also implies that questions about the class should also have psionics—which is a little awkward. Because psionics are third-party in Pathfinder, we have used the tag to “section off” that content—which is probably helpful to a lot of readers; it is for me—but it turns the tag into something of a meta tag. We include it because we’re discussing DSP content from one of those books, whether or not we’re actually asking about the psionic mechanics, or even asking about psionic material in the first place. That implies we should also maybe take a look through [pathfinder-1e] aegis -[psionics], which has 27 results, and add psionics to several of those. Or we should rethink how we use psionics, at least within pathfinder-1e (in other systems where psionics is part of the official system, it doesn’t have the same problems).

Either way, for both searches, we must still be careful about false positives. I see several of those questions in both searches where there is a mention that the character is an aegis, but that information is entirely tangential to the question, which has little to nothing to do with the aegis’s mechanics or even any psionic material at all, even when using the expansive definition often used in pathfinder-1e.