What should the dc tag be called?

Question

I recently saw a post about creating a dc tag and then used it on a (Fate 2.0) question I had been thinking about for a while. It has been brought to my attention that the name is disputed on the grounds that 'dc' is a system specific term and should be reserved for that use. I disagree, as both I and those I game with use the term in a much more general manner (and not all of us played D&D as our first system, though the people who taught us probably did, I think). I am in favor of keeping the tag as is and adding synonyms as they are created/used in questions, but a good deal of discussion about the name of the tag seems to be happening in comments (on my question, on the question of whether the tag should exist, etc.) and it should really have it's own question.

So, what do you think? What should the tag be called and why?

Answer 1

We should endeavor to use tags that match the verbiage used in the appropriate systems. So a DC tag should be difficulty-class, but if another system has a similar mechanic, it should be tagged with what it's called be it target-number or mashed-potatoes.

My rationale for this is pretty simple. If a question is about DCs in D&D, "target number" isn't something someone is going to search, and it doesn't classify things well at all within that system.

The word "Target Number" has no meaning in D&D, and thus the tag difficulty-class should be used. On a Fate question, difficulty would be the appropriate tag.

Answer 2

As a term used consistently by a single (albeit popular) engine, the d20 System, "difficulty class" is a term which users who aren't familiar with that engine won't be able to find when tagging their questions.

Call it something generic/common with synonyms for system-specific terms as necessary.

From the comments on that main site question:

Fate 2.0 got the term "Difficulty" from Fudge, which existed long before d20, so it's pretty safe to say that it is not just meaning DC without saying "DC". The wider community doesn't fit your view based on your local players—that is something only done by the subset of RPG community who mostly got into RPGs with D&D. The original generic term, and still the most widely used, is "target number". Ironically, D&D invented "DC" to avoid using the existing most-common term, and to parallel its existing "AC". It might even have got it from Fudge. (SevenSidedDie)

I think difficulty is the term most commonly used by a wide variety of systems (Fate, AITAS, and so forth). "Difficulty class" is prevalent in some circles because it's the term used by a popular engine (the d20 System), but anyone who doesn't use the d20 System will not think to use that term unless they've acquired it via cultural osmosis. We should not assume that our users come to us pre-immersed in RPG culture.

Thus, using a generic term and common synonyms seems most reasonable to me: tagging with DC makes it harder for non-d20S-familiar users to find the right tags. Using difficulty (or whatever else winds up being chosen, like target-number) with synonyms to other system-specific terms seems the most accessible.

difficulty seems ideal because it'll be picked up by people looking for difficulty-class, and because many systems use it as the "official" term for their implementation of the concept.

It's awkward, but it's the best I can come up with.

Answer 3

I think using a different term, perhaps target-number as suggested, would be valuable if that term really is more commonly used. I understand that the prevalent use of the term DC (difficulty class is not actually a term I hear used ever, except as the first part of an answer to "what does DC mean?") is probably due in part to the prevalent use of D&D and the various other d20 systems, but if the use of the term to apply to any rpg is widely accepted, I think it would be best to use it, as it would actually cause less average confusion to new users as they are more likely to be familiar with the term. Also, if the term ever becomes part of standard rpg jargon (like 'GM'/'DM', XdN notation for dice, 'system', 'PC', 'NPC', adventure, etc) then we should give primacy to the term as it is used by experts, even at the expense of immediate accessibility, and explain what the terms mean as necessary.

In this case, however, I don't think that my use of the term represents a significant enough percentage of the population to be deemed jargon, though I am still unsure if it is popular enough to be the most common term used and thus superior to, for example, 'target-number'. I generally think that it is best to let the community sort these kinds of things out via tag usage or avoidance, but if 'dc' is popularly perceived as D&D specific, I should at least use a different tag on my 'FATE' question.

My problem with Wax Eagle's approach (having one tag per system) is that I'm not sure it would be possible to address questions tagged 'dc' (or equivalent) and 'system-agnostic' if that tagging method is followed, yet I think good questions with those tags (or even just 'dc' by itself) exist. If we have one tag per system and I ask a question with just that tag, aren't I locking myself into that system?

More importantly, the idea of a 'dc' or 'target-number' or whatever else it may be called is one Platonic idea, regardless of the Platonic form it has in any given system. It's expression in each system is merely a reflection of the one Idea, and it would be useful to have a tag that refers to the Idea of the 'dc'/'target-number', rather than an individual form.

In fact, if we had such a tag, we could, as BESW suggested, make all of the suggested system-specific tags synonyms. I think that in doing this we would lose nothing, as the Form of a given system can be made clear by using both the dc Idea tag and the tag for the specific system in question, which seems much more natural and aesthetically correct to me.