9
\$\begingroup\$

Why do we use [Published-Adventures] instead of more specific tags? suggests that we might start tagging some of our questions with adventure-specific tags. or , for instance.

Someone has tagged a few questions with , as we've seen a recent flurry of questions about that product. I started to write up a wiki for it and realized that there's probably a lot we can be repeating across specific-published-adventure tags.

So, have at it: what do you think the template for a tag description for a specific published adventure should be? If we can do a decent job here, perhaps we'll make our lives easier going out as these tags multiply.

\$\endgroup\$
14
\$\begingroup\$

I think we can keep it short and sweet. Tag wikis and excerpts are intended to contain site-specific instructions for their tags' usage rather than a general description of the topic. Usage instructions naturally include enough description of the topic so that tags can be accurately chosen for a question, but they don't need to go into detail.

For just usage instructions, I would go with something like:

For questions about the adventure <title> (<year>) published by <publisher>. Please keep your question's title spoiler-free and use spoiler blocks in the body.

Easy, short, and informative. If we want to get fancy, we can make the title a link to the publisher's page for the adventure.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ There are instances of the same adventure published for several editions of a game. Tomb of Horrors, at least. Should they have the same tag or separate tags? \$\endgroup\$ – Thanuir Oct 9 '17 at 11:24
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ @Thanuir Same tag, but also use the edition-specific game tag. \$\endgroup\$ – mattdm Oct 10 '17 at 12:31
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Yeah, that's what I'd suggest for now. We probably don't need to make separate (e.g.) [tomb-of-horrors-1e] and [tomb-of-horrors-5e] tags, and if we find we do in the future it's easy enough to do then. \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Oct 10 '17 at 14:39
  • \$\begingroup\$ What about the <year> and <publisher> in the usage suggestion, above? \$\endgroup\$ – Thanuir Oct 11 '17 at 6:20
  • \$\begingroup\$ Again, I don't think we need to pre-emptively create tags or distinctions between tags. Tags should be created in response to needs rather than in anticipation of needs. (We humans are bad at prediction.) It's easy to add new tags like that later if needed. \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Oct 11 '17 at 15:22
-1
\$\begingroup\$

Keeping the spoilers in the wiki to a minimum seems like a must for me, but items that seem to be a must:

  • Publishing/Reprint dates
  • Author
  • Publisher
  • Campaign Setting (if available)

Besides these general information, some slight overview might help. Something like the first sentence of a Wikipedia article or from the back book cover. For the Tomb of Horrors this might read

Tomb of Horrors was designed as a challenge for expert players who boasted of having mighty player characters able to best any challenge.

\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

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