5
\$\begingroup\$

I was thinking of putting up some questions on the site that I wasn't certain were appropriate in their scope.

We've been playing some D&D 4e lately. I've noticed that whilst we have many questions on 4e, especially 4e rules issues, we don't have many on 4e "strategy". So would questions with the following kinds of topics be appropriate, too broad, too general, offtopic, etc.?

"How do I build the most effective 4e controller?"

"What should my 4e leader focus on doing?"

"How can my striker and my partner's defender best synergize their abilities and coordinate?"

"What sort of items should my save-focused wizard be prioritizing?"

"Can an effective party be built without a dedicated defender? How?"

etc.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Check out today's Real Questions Have Answers blog post. Some good discussion about what makes a question not devolve to receiving crappy answers. \$\endgroup\$ – yhw42 Jan 17 '11 at 16:52
5
\$\begingroup\$

I would like to answer some questions along those lines. For me, the most successful questions would be very specific. The below is my 2 cents on your proposed questions.

  • How do I build the most effective 4e controller?

This question cannot be answered IMHO. It is dependent on the makeup of your party. The best controller for your party may not be the best controller for someone else's party. There is no single solitary best answer in real gameplay. I'm sure someone could answer which controller can give out the best DPS. But in a lot of situations, the better controller would do less DPS and hand out the stunned condition at the drop of a hat.

  • What should my 4e leader focus on doing?

Again, party dependent.

  • How can my striker and my partner's defender best synergize their abilities and coordinate?

Replace with, "How can my Barbarian and my partner's Paladin best synergize their abilities and coordinate?"

  • "What sort of items should my save-focused wizard be prioritizing?"

This is a pretty good question. Very specific and focused. "I need items for this purpose" To avoid the list becoming too large, it might be nice to restrict it to a certain tier. Restricting it to a certain level might be too localized, I dunno. It's a fine line.

  • "Can an effective party be built without a dedicated defender? How?"

For me, this is better directed to a forum. It seems likely to generate an extended discussion which isn't what StackExchange sites are good for.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Minor quibble -- "To avoid the list becoming too large," we really shouldn't be looking for questions that are just a list of gear. They're sort of our equivalent to "software recommendation" threads (super-specific, quickly outdated). Such a question should be looking for advice on what to look for in gear, with a few stellar examples given (although mentioning what tier you're in is probably good general advice, as it changes things a bit). \$\endgroup\$ – AceCalhoon Jan 17 '11 at 16:51
  • \$\begingroup\$ On the other hand, having thought about it a bit, I wouldn't mind a question of the form "Is there a magic item that provides/does X?", so I might just be splitting hairs. \$\endgroup\$ – AceCalhoon Jan 17 '11 at 18:12
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Ace - lol, I've been trying to come up with a response since your first comment. The best I can say is that certain requests for magic item lists won't pass the smell test for me, while others will. At the moment, I can't better define it :) \$\endgroup\$ – Pat Ludwig Jan 17 '11 at 18:14
  • \$\begingroup\$ That is a fine line. Where's @GraceNote. \$\endgroup\$ – C. Ross Jan 19 '11 at 18:25
4
\$\begingroup\$

Well, the "canonical" references would be these recent blog posts:

Good Subjective, Bad Subjective

Real Questions Have Answers

I think most of those examples are a little broad. Pat Ludwig's examples are pretty good, although I would think that "Can an effective party be built without a dedicated defender? How?" is doable, assuming the question text scoped the questions properly (i.e. excluded the DM tuning encounters specifically for the group).

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Agreed. Most of these potential questions aren't real good by those measures. Having said that, I think the "Real Questions Have Answers" post is going a bit too far, but a number of the ones in the OP are pure subjective opinion bait. \$\endgroup\$ – mxyzplk - Justice for Monica Jan 18 '11 at 1:46
1
\$\begingroup\$

My opinions are here. Roughly speaking, questions that allow discussion of theory and design patterns are good, questions that have a specific party configuration are good, and questions that just need a link to the CharOp forum are horrible.

\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

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