7
\$\begingroup\$

This tag has (only) 4 questions and is only recently created (early March).

seems useless and should be removed.

Can we burninate this tag?

\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Can we just burninate this tag entirely? (I was in the middle of writing the burninate request when this popped up actually) \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose Apr 19 '18 at 15:39
  • \$\begingroup\$ It seems appropriate. I can't think of a use of this tag that can't be covered by other tags, like feats, classfeats, etc. \$\endgroup\$ – Vylix Apr 19 '18 at 15:40
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ It seems to be used for 3/4 of the questions for monster abilities. Which I think still falls neatly under monsters. That being said, did you want to make this a burninate request officially then? \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose Apr 19 '18 at 15:47
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Rubiksmoose done and done \$\endgroup\$ – Vylix Apr 19 '18 at 15:58
11
\$\begingroup\$

I agree. The tag should be removed. Of the 4 questions it is attached to (one of which is closed), 3 would be better categorized by and the fourth apparently tries to apply it to spell effects which falls under . Additionally it seems like an unnecessary and confusing tag to even have (without really coming up with a narrow definition), after all what isn't a special ability in D&D 5e for example?

The tag name is formatted incorrectly as well.

For, all the reasons above, I say let it burn.

Update: Tag has been removed by @ObliviousSage and is no longer special.

\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

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