6
\$\begingroup\$

I've recently posted a couple of questions that I think are both not entirely obvious or clear cut rules questions, and that as far as I could tell were also no dupes.

Both of them were met with immediate negative reception (i.e. downvotes). There was no comment as to why the downvotes, which is not that unusual.

I suspect it may be because these are questions that I personally could try and formulate an answer to, and so other regulars may feel these are somehow fake questions; in other words, these questions might receive a more neutral or more positive reception, if posed by a newcomer, where they would be taken as honest rules questions.

The context in which they are posed is that we are at an extended role-playing weekend, with me being one of the players. And because in this situation, my interpretation might be biased by what is more beneficial to the player characters, I am mostly asking for independent, well-informed rules interpretation on the matter. I felt adding all this to the questions would not be appropriate, when the question by itself seems to me a valid question anyone should be able to pose.

Is there anything I could do different or better here? Would it help to provide my take as a self-answer?

\$\endgroup\$

1 Answer 1

8
\$\begingroup\$

How do I ask a Good question?

Sharing your research helps everyone. Tell us what you found and why it didn’t meet your needs. This demonstrates that you’ve taken the time to try to help yourself, it saves us from reiterating obvious answers, and above all, it helps you get a more specific and relevant answer!

Both of the questions you link are missing evidence that you’ve researched this yourself or at least tried to work through the answer. On the first one, about Wall of Force in water, I did comment why I downvoted:

It isn’t clear to me which part of the spell description is causing confusion here. It targets “a point you choose within range” and doesn’t mention anything about terrain, can you add some details about what is making you think terrain might interfere with the spell?

You just ask the question without providing any details about how you’ve thought through the problem, what part of the spell description is tripping you up, or any other details that show you’ve tried to work this out yourself. The second question is similar in that you ask the question without providing the thought process or preliminary investigation that led to the question.

To me, both questions have very straightforward and obvious answers, but it’s okay if you don’t feel the same way. But for my vote, I want to see that you’ve thought about the question enough to explain why it isn’t obvious to you. And I don’t see that either question does this.

\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

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