2
\$\begingroup\$

We have some old 4e tags that should probably be cleaned up:

These should be replaced with the more general tag. This change is in a similar vein to the recent decision not to have tags for the 3.P schools of magic, and to instead use the tag as well as possibly more thematic tags such as mind control, creating undead, etc. as needed by the community.

So far the following tags on these questions have been replaced with :

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ For large tag sets, we can use a mod-tool to rename them all at once, if it's decided to be done. (That avoids editing/bumping large numbers of Qs.) \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Apr 15 '18 at 15:41
  • \$\begingroup\$ @SevenSidedDie None of these are large sets; at most a dozen questions. \$\endgroup\$ – Oblivious Sage Apr 15 '18 at 15:47
  • \$\begingroup\$ Cool. It's still an option for small sets (it's not burdensome to use), but then it's a trade off between just doing it and waiting for a mod. :) \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Apr 15 '18 at 15:54
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @SevenSidedDie I'll probably knock them out in small bursts of 5-6 questions at a time, waiting for each burst to fall off the front page before doing another. \$\endgroup\$ – Oblivious Sage Apr 15 '18 at 15:58
  • \$\begingroup\$ The [powers] tag itself is kind of awkward: it’s very 4e-centric. And on its face, it seems like a superset of [spells]. But nonetheless it still seems like the right tag to use. \$\endgroup\$ – KRyan Apr 15 '18 at 17:07
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KRyan there's a few other games that have powers; D&D 4e uses the term because it's one of them (and is ~75% of its questions because of volume). \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener Apr 15 '18 at 17:30
  • \$\begingroup\$ @doppelgreener Sure, but “power” isn’t the term used in a lot of games. E.g. Exalted and its charms, which are the same concept as 4e powers. Or 3.5e’s use of “power” to refer specifically to psionics. \$\endgroup\$ – KRyan Apr 15 '18 at 17:32
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @KRyan I don't disagree with any of that, I'm just not sure why it occurs as 4e-centric or as awkward. In those games that have a concept of powers, [powers] is the topic; D&D 4e is one of those and so uses it, and D&D 4e hasn't defined the [powers] tag AFAIK to the detriment of any other games that share the tag. \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener Apr 15 '18 at 17:36
  • \$\begingroup\$ @SevenSidedDie Are tags with no questions still deleted if they have a tag wiki entry? I just noticed the [encounter-powers] tag has one. \$\endgroup\$ – Oblivious Sage Apr 16 '18 at 20:14
  • \$\begingroup\$ @ObliviousSage They're not deleted, but I'm not 100% sure what that implies. It's probably not worth worrying about in this case though. \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Apr 16 '18 at 20:49
  • \$\begingroup\$ @SevenSidedDie I'll keep an eye on the tag and if it's still around in a couple days without any questions then we can revisit the matter. \$\endgroup\$ – Oblivious Sage Apr 16 '18 at 23:54
0
\$\begingroup\$

I would request you don't burninate . Leave it as-is.

The other tags are "a power, but with this timing or categorisation". That's not all that functionally important. I don't personally object to burninating those.

But sustained powers are a whole bag of mechanics on their own requiring unique understanding because of what's involved in a power being sustained. That's a distinct topic materially worth tagging and enabling people to search.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I'm not sure I agree, but it's a reasonable enough position that I'm willing to leave the tag alone. We might want to do a search for questions that should have it but don't; I suspect we've gotten more than 6 questions about sustaining powers. \$\endgroup\$ – Oblivious Sage Apr 16 '18 at 23:43
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thank you. I agree with that searching. \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener Apr 16 '18 at 23:47
  • \$\begingroup\$ It occurs to me that we also might want to rename or synonymize the tag to allow it to be used more broadly; sustaining powers is thematically equivalent to concentration in other editions of D&D, and I'm sure if we go looking we can find similar mechanics in other games (keeping an effect active by devoting "effort" to it). On the other hand I could see that leading to confusion, so maybe not. \$\endgroup\$ – Oblivious Sage Apr 16 '18 at 23:53
  • \$\begingroup\$ @ObliviousSage I'd rather let D&D 4e tag them as sustained powers, D&D 5e tag it as concentration, and so on for other games rather than enforce a universal tag based on surface similarities. Merging them will probably be unhelpful, at the very least for being able to recognise the tags attached to a post for what they mean, and will cause trouble if we enforce "concentration is the tag for this concept" but that one game has both that concept (but not called concentration) and an entirely different mechanic called concentration. \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener Apr 17 '18 at 0:01
  • \$\begingroup\$ I was just brainstorming in text form, so I'm not wedded to the idea. That seems like a pretty good counterargument. \$\endgroup\$ – Oblivious Sage Apr 17 '18 at 0:08
  • \$\begingroup\$ @ObliviousSage I read it that way; no problem. I appreciate the opportunity to try to articulate something that had been sitting on my mind. :) \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener Apr 17 '18 at 0:10
  • \$\begingroup\$ Can you drop [status-completed] on this question, since all the tags that we agreed to burninate are now deader than Hitler (who is in cryo-storage in Brazil)? \$\endgroup\$ – Oblivious Sage Apr 23 '18 at 3:02
  • \$\begingroup\$ Sure thing, added :D \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener Apr 23 '18 at 7:22

You must log in to answer this question.

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