Just a note, I just added tag wikis for and and cleaned up a few questions for each. I decided against synonymizing because a distinction was apparent in their emergent usage, and because it parallels the distinction we have between e.g. and .

Actually, for the most part, the emergent usage was pretty good: were for questions about a (usually Pathfinder) class by that name, and was for questions about the production and usage of alchemical items. I have codified this distinction in the tag wikis. Only a few questions needed to be edited to fit the scheme.

There are a couple of questions that have both tags, but they’re explicitly about creating or using alchemical items as a member of an alchemist class, so that seemed OK.

I did leave a question that was asking about the “Alchemist” feat and how it was used to produce certain items tagged with rather than , since despite the feat’s name it seemed much more appropriate to that tag.

Anyway, wanted to start a meta discussion about the tags in case anyone wanted to chime in.

  • \$\begingroup\$ Still quite new here, is it generally accepted to start discussions in META? Since it's against the rules at the main site, it confuses me a little. \$\endgroup\$
    – Joninean
    Jun 26, 2015 at 8:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Joninean Yes, since meta is for the community to make decisions about the site, more discussion is expected and allowed, e.g. "questions" and "answers" can flex their definitions more, comments happen more and usually stay permanently, etc. \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Jun 26, 2015 at 11:54

1 Answer 1


This looks like solid reasoning for how to clean up these tags and keep them distinctly useful. Thanks for taking that on!


You must log in to answer this question.

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