5
\$\begingroup\$

One of the things DragonsFoot does which seems fairly useful is mark questions where a "by the book" response is wanted - that is one which excludes house rules, "spirit of the game" explanations and so on and focuses just on what is actually written in the rulebooks.

Is it worth having a tag for this? Or another standardised format for how it's specified?

\$\endgroup\$
16
\$\begingroup\$

We do, it's "[dnd-4e]!" Zing!

So the problem here is that we could have a "[by-the-book]" tag and use it to demarcate questions where the OP doesn't want to hear your kewl house rule but wants a RAW answer. The problem is, that's a meta tag and use of those is discouraged for various reasons - a tag should be able to stand alone as the only tag on a question.

Given that, it's probably best to just specify your tolerance for legalism in the question itself.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ I agree: include the requirement in the question. If the question specifically asks for "only rules as written" or "no houserulings please", any answer that provides that form of answer (which by definition is not answering the question!) will be summarily downvoted. \$\endgroup\$ – yhw42 Feb 9 '11 at 15:51

You must log in to answer this question.

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