Recent conversations on meta and in chat have suggested that we don't do a particularly good job of scoping questions to the asker's approaches to gameplay. We have an established pattern of tagging questions based on specific systems both because this narrows the scope of good answers and because it makes it easier for answers surface questions that are in their purview.
Example tags could include:
- rules-as-written When the game takes the system as-is, and does not wish to modify or extend it with house rules or unofficial content.
- simulationism When the game is concerned strongly with emulating the real world in a believable way.
- narrativism When the game is concerned strongly with presenting an engaging story.
- collaborativism When the game is developed with equal influence from all players.
I have included rules-as-written here because it is most accurately a description of a style of play. I think some of the wrangling over the purpose of this tag has been caused by the fact that it has lived on as the only game style tag, and thus we haven't properly figured out what to do with it.
Should we encourage the use of such tags to distinguish different game styles in support of explicit game style definition in the question itself?