I've browsed through the questions and found these ones:

  1. Questions about issues with
  2. Questions about aspects of role-playing games or
  3. Question about
  4. Questions about a random TRPG problem, in which players are involved somehow

There are more descriptive tags for types 1-3 questions, and type 4 is basically the majority of questions on RPG.SE. Do we really need the tag?

  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ Previous related discussion: is [players] a meta tag (2010); Worth of "GM" and "players" tags (2013). \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Aug 6 '18 at 7:30
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ You must be a DM; I'd stick to just having rocks fall and everyone dies. (In case you are not sure, that's an attempt at a joke). \$\endgroup\$ – KorvinStarmast Aug 6 '18 at 12:57
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ I propose changing the question: Do we really need players? instead. (This is a worse version of Korvin's joke.) \$\endgroup\$ – HellSaint Aug 6 '18 at 21:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ Semi-related: How can we improve the description of the [npc] tag?. I'm surprised there hasn't been a similar meta question about the [character] tag (or a question in earnest about the [npc] tag either, though it's not as much of an issue there). \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Aug 5 at 6:05
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I don't know if this was passed on to the community team after there was consensus here and doppelgreener added the [status-planned] tag, but I've done so now. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Aug 5 at 6:07

We don't need it.

I will agree with what was stated in the answers of the Worth of "GM" and "players" tags question.

My opinion on tags is simple: if I go into the tag query, I should know what I will be looking at. IMO tags are mostly used for filtering and searching. If I have a metagaming problem and I want to check if it was already asked, I will search the tag. If I feel I have decent lawyering skills, I will put the in my favorites and look for answering these. Point being: the tags I personally consider useful are tags that describe what the question is about.

The tag doesn't. As you said, if I look through this tag, I don't know if I'm looking at "I am a player" questions (which doesn't actually need a tag, imo), "I have a problem with a player" questions (which can be either my problem with him being as a player or as a person, so either or something or as you said) or even simply "There are players involved" (which any question about an actual table will have, supposedly). Point being: I don't have a clue what I would be looking at if I went through the tag. (tbh I didn't even know it existed until now). Many of the questions are actually questions, and I wouldn't expect that in a tag called "players".

Okay but how do we know that's not just you being dumb?

Well, I searched through the tag. I still don't know what the tag is about.

  • How can I interest a player in playing online? - this is simply and possibly a system (in this case, tagged as agnostic, but I do think the system makes a difference here.)
  • How can I, as a player, help a struggling GM at a one-time game? - this is a question that I can't think of a good describing tag, but it's also not a question I would
  • Keeping the world alive whilst PCs take a rest mid-adventure? - the tag doesn't tell me anything (actually it's more like a gm-techniques than anything actually related to players), the LMoP, dnd-5e and rests do. They are enough. I actually took the liberty to edit out the players tag and add the gm-techniques. :P
  • How to extract yuan-ti poison? - "There is a player involved and he wants to try something, are there rules for it?", really, we don't need a tag for the "there is a player involved and he wants to try something" part. The tags just need to tell what is "it" (monsters, poison) and where should we look for these rules (i.e. the system, dnd-5e), imo.
  • How to deal with a player missing the first session of a campaign - this is the only case where was the only tag in the question. We have the for it, though, which actually describes something (that we are dealing with a problem related to players missing one or more sections). Reason I am saying "was" the only tag - I edited it :P

I'm not going to paste and justify all the questions, but I have at least read the title of most of the 123 questions and I didn't see a case where the tag was useful.

  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Yeah, the [players] tag is way too broad (and nonspecifically used) to be of use. Any specific uses of such a tag are probably better served by a more specific tag. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Aug 7 '18 at 5:03

You must log in to answer this question.

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