-1
\$\begingroup\$

The question: At what level does each class get its subclass?

When building a multi-classed character for a one-shot I wanted to know when each class receives its subclass, since subclasses provide a lot of personality and power to characters. Searching the internet found a lot of people asking the same question on various sites, clearly a common question.

However the answers were all partial, wrong, or presented poorly making them unsuitable. I checked this site but unfortunately it hadn't been asked here as far as I could see.

I created a question and self answered it as clearly as possible with the pertinent commentary about which classes are unusual.

This question was closed because the question could be answered by reading the rule book. This is however not a hard and fast rule, at least in the 5e sub-community, as the vast majority of questions receive answers from the rulebook. On the front page for example is a highly analogous question asking which PC races do not speak common, which is answered simply by checking the rule book and looking at each race. Many high rep users and moderators have interacted with this question - a moderator even answered the question.

I'm looking for a way to preserve this valuable Q&A for myself and others and hopefully understanding this new rule.

\$\endgroup\$
4
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ "When building a multi-classed character for a one-shot I wanted to know when each class receives its subclass, since subclasses provide a lot of personality and power to characters." - Add this information to the question. This is the reasons the question exists, the current form of the question doesn't have this information. \$\endgroup\$
    – linksassin Mod
    Commented Apr 13, 2022 at 4:13
  • \$\begingroup\$ @linksassin I prefer a low-noise approach to asking/answering. That information isn't pertinent to the question and in fact again we see that the vast majority of questions on the site do not include similar backstories. You can see, for example, in the question I referenced earlier this new requirement is not met. Could you please link the relevant meta so I can add it to the question, along with the meta about analysis you talked about in the other thread. Cheers. \$\endgroup\$
    – user73918
    Commented Apr 13, 2022 at 4:29
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ It is pertinent. We need to know why the question is being asked to be able to give answers with some context. Not every site expectation has or needs a meta. Other users are able to follow guidance without the need for such things. \$\endgroup\$
    – linksassin Mod
    Commented Apr 13, 2022 at 4:42
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Some relevant discussion is ongoing in the chat room for that Q&A: chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/135509/… \$\endgroup\$
    – user73918
    Commented Apr 13, 2022 at 4:57

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
-2
\$\begingroup\$

It's not solving a question, it's presenting known rules in a new way

For me, this is just preservation of notes. Even in this Meta, the author states, "I'm looking for a way to preserve this valuable Q&A for myself..."

To that point, in both the original question and the reformulated question, it was important that the answer contain the name of the feature that allows subclassing. But if this was just research on who subclasses when, all you need is a number. Not a whole table with names.

There is no value in having the names, other than in presentation of information. This is a lookup table for after the fact.

These are details that would make more sense as a GitHub markdown file than as a Q&A.

\$\endgroup\$
3
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ One of the primary goals of this site is to become a complete repository of information on our topic. This isn’t a problem this is a feature. \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Commented Apr 13, 2022 at 19:09
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KRyan, (1/2) So long as I can form things as a question, and it's not an opinion, then anything is valid? Should we reopen/upvote all the "read the book to me" questions? Should I start creating questions of "What are all the simple melee weapons?", "What are all the martial melee weapons?", "What are all the cantrips a Wizard can learn?" There are an infinite number of questions like this. All of which would be answered with, "Did you read the books?" \$\endgroup\$
    – MivaScott
    Commented Apr 13, 2022 at 21:21
  • 6
    \$\begingroup\$ The requested table was not found on any page in any book. A complete list of wizard cantrips from all sourcebooks is definitely not just “read the book for me,” and is in fact a highly-valued feature found on many D&D 5e serving sites. And the issue with simple weapon and martial weapon tables is more about being dubious with respect to fair use than it is about whether or not that is a valid thing to ask and answer for. \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Commented Apr 13, 2022 at 21:32
-3
\$\begingroup\$

Problems raised by others:

  1. Relevance: some users are not sure why someone would ask this question. The contextual information in this thread sorted that out.

  2. The information is too easy to find: some users feel that answering the question simply involves reading through the rulebook, finding the relevant sections, pulling out that information, and compiling it. This is a harder problem to solve, I feel it's "hard enough", or at least "harder than the average question". More discussion is needed on this topic.

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ To point #2: I'm of the opinion that thinking a question is "too easy" is what downvotes, not close-votes, are for. See also rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/a/6964/23970 \$\endgroup\$
    – nitsua60 Mod
    Commented Apr 13, 2022 at 14:53

You must log in to answer this question.