19
\$\begingroup\$

The vast majority of the questions we get are asking us to review their homebrew, either directly ("Is this balanced?") or indirectly ("What LA should this race have?" or "How much should this magic item cost?").

However, we also get a nontrivial number of questions about homebrew that are not asking us to review it. Here are some examples from the past 3 months:

Note that a lot of these seem to fall into two categories: "What are the things I should know about X before I think about messing with it via homebrew?" or "We're using homebrew Y, how can/should we handle situation Z involving it?"

Should we split/rename the tag into some larger number of tags?

\$\endgroup\$
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ If nothing else, having its own tag will make it a lot easier to do data analysis on these questions. \$\endgroup\$ – Miniman May 26 at 14:46
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ This would significantly improve searching for older topics about homebrewing in general as opposed to reviewing specific homebrew material. \$\endgroup\$ – Akixkisu May 26 at 16:43
  • \$\begingroup\$ I think this makes sense but I am concerned about new users struggling to use these tags correctly. \$\endgroup\$ – linksassin May 27 at 1:19
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @linksassin Fixing tags on their questions is pretty easy. \$\endgroup\$ – Oblivious Sage May 27 at 1:52
  • \$\begingroup\$ Seems like everyone is in favour of this change. How do we start it? \$\endgroup\$ – linksassin Jun 5 at 8:15
  • \$\begingroup\$ @linksassin We need a mod to rename the tag. It will probably happen after the election. \$\endgroup\$ – Oblivious Sage Jun 5 at 12:16
28
\$\begingroup\$

Yeah, let’s do it. These are distinct categories that have separate reader and expert audiences.

Since review has emerged as a distinct question topic it should have its own tag, especially if it’s flooding the existing tag.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I don't recall exactly which tools are available to mods. Can we rename the existing tag to [homebrew-review] and then re-tag the smaller number of questions that really should have [homebrew], or do we need to retag all the of review questions? \$\endgroup\$ – Oblivious Sage May 26 at 18:02
  • \$\begingroup\$ @ObliviousSage Yeah, that rename strategy is possible with the diamond tools. \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie May 27 at 3:19
  • 7
    \$\begingroup\$ Point of order: having will both a [homebrew] and [homebrew-review] tag will mean (newer) users will tag with both. The wiki for the [homebrew] tag will need to state it is not for review questions and will be doing enforcement (tag edits) of this. \$\endgroup\$ – Someone_Evil May 27 at 9:11
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Someone_Evil Yeah, adjustments are normal when splitting up a tag. And few new users read usage wikis: it’ll be up to curators to make sure they’re categorised right. \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie May 27 at 14:30
  • \$\begingroup\$ After creating the tag earlier today there were some questions brought up. Is proceeding to use the tag going to hinder diamond moderator's ability to "split/rename" the tag? Or is that not a concern and we can proceed to use the tag like any other? \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose Jun 5 at 17:12
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Rubiksmoose I think it should be okay. “Rename” is just the colloquial name for using the tag merge tool when there’s no existing tag to merge with, and it works the same as when there is a tag there already. It doesn’t make it easier, but not any harder either. \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Jun 6 at 14:30
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Rubiksmoose Any chance of this rename happening now that the election is finished? \$\endgroup\$ – Oblivious Sage Jun 14 at 14:45
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @ObliviousSage It looks good to me. We'll get the ball rolling on our end. Thanks for putting this back on the radar. \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose Jun 14 at 15:26
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Rubiksmoose Not to pester you, but did the ball fall of the track at some point? Or maybe it is just much slower than I would have expected. \$\endgroup\$ – Someone_Evil Jul 14 at 19:48
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Someone_Evil Not all all pestering :) So, I've been moving for the last month or so so I've had limited time. And depending on how we are going to do this it could be fairly work-intensive (and might need some more groundwork). All of which to say, we haven't made any progress yet but it is not forgotten (though I'm happy to be reminded and push it to the top of my list if needed). \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose Jul 14 at 19:51
3
\$\begingroup\$

No additional tag needed

It's all homebrew. Making it, developing it, using it, revising it, etc. It's all "made up" rules.

In my opinion, a separation of creation vs impact is unnecessary and there will just be a bunch of tag-bleed between the two anyway.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ I think you might be a bit late. The tag already exists and I think we are going ahead with it. \$\endgroup\$ – linksassin Jun 18 at 1:59
  • \$\begingroup\$ @linksassin I believe the site standard is still to answer, correct? \$\endgroup\$ – goodguy5 Jun 18 at 8:46
  • \$\begingroup\$ Yeah that's fine. Just letting you know that this change is basically already happening. So arguments against it are now arguments to make the tags synonyms. \$\endgroup\$ – linksassin Jun 18 at 8:49

You must log in to answer this question.

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