3
\$\begingroup\$

As per What to do when an edit guesses the system being used rather than waiting for the querent to clarify?, editors should not guess the missing system tag (e.g. ) without asking the question maker, in case they are wrong. This is reasonable, as it's hard to be 100% sure (e.g. Pathfinder is easily mistaken for D&D 3.5).

However, in this question, Can you use darts as improvised "light melee weapons" to trigger Two-Weapon Fighting?, the system is determinable with 100% certainty. The user quotes the Two-Weapon Fighting rules on page 195 of the Player's Handbook, which are identical verbatim to the Two-Weapon Fighting rules on page 195 of the D&D 5th edition Player's Handbook. In this case, it's 100% certain that the player is asking about D&D 5th edition.

In those cases where the system is 100% certain, is it reasonable for an editor to add the correct system tag?

\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Did you read the top answer to the question you linked? \$\endgroup\$ – Miniman Sep 23 '18 at 3:55
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Yes. That answer says "It's not appropriate to edit based on a guess." I'm asking if it's reasonable to edit based on a certainty, not a guess. \$\endgroup\$ – Quadratic Wizard Sep 23 '18 at 3:57
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ @QuadraticWizard Even if you know the OP's quoting parts of the 5e rules, they might actually be playing some mishmash of multiple systems (as has definitely been the case before - as pointed out in the linked meta question). And if they don't come back to clarify, they won't be back to see answers anyway. You can't be "100% certain" unless the asker clarifies the system they're playing. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Sep 23 '18 at 4:07
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ No really, the answer to the duplicate question is correct. \$\endgroup\$ – mxyzplk says reinstate Monica Sep 23 '18 at 4:23
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ "Why? Because we're also trying to train new users on how to use the site. If the OP never bothers to come back to clarify their question - then what good are answers going to do them anyway?" \$\endgroup\$ – Miniman Sep 23 '18 at 4:23
  • 9
    \$\begingroup\$ Also, a quote doesn't prove anything - it's happened several times in the past that a querent has posted a quote from a completely different system than the one they were playing, unaware that there was more than one system. \$\endgroup\$ – Miniman Sep 23 '18 at 4:28
  • \$\begingroup\$ In addition to what Miniman says, I can trace several sentences within rules through the WoD that nobody ever bothered to revise or change, pretty much Copy-pasting them since 2nd edition. This might not be true for all systems, but it is caveat enough so a quote is not a good indicator alone. In some cases, the user even might deliberately quote other games or other versions of the same game to illustrate their question! \$\endgroup\$ – Trish Sep 23 '18 at 9:01
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ I'll note that HeyICanChan's answer from the linked question suggests that it is okay to edit if you are absolutely certain (owing to, for instance, an "achingly obvious tie" to the system) and it is a close second to the top answer. Personally I feel current policy is going to an extreme to mitigate a very small risk - yes, it is possible that the querent has mixed up their systems or playing some bizarre hybrid game, but is that really so likely that we have to go such lengths to avoid making answers that might end up being invalid? \$\endgroup\$ – Carcer Sep 23 '18 at 9:23
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Carcer "Why? Because we're also trying to train new users on how to use the site. If the OP never bothers to come back to clarify their question - then what good are answers going to do them anyway?" \$\endgroup\$ – Miniman Sep 23 '18 at 13:44
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Miniman we still allow people to post new answers to ancient questions which almost certainly won't do the asker any good any more, but that's not a problem. It's a Q&A site because the corpus of questions and answers is also useful to others who come looking later. The original querent is not the only one who may or may not benefit from having their question answered. \$\endgroup\$ – Carcer Sep 23 '18 at 13:50
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Carcer on the other hand nothing is stopping someone else who wants that information or find it useful from asking it themselves. \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose Sep 23 '18 at 16:40

Browse other questions tagged .