13
\$\begingroup\$

Pretty straightforward question. Pathfinder's 2nd edition has just been released, and correspondingly there is a tag (as well as the tag for the playtest version(s) of the 2nd edition).

The tag has traditionally been used for the 1st edition, namely because there was no 2nd edition when the tag was made. However, now that Pathfinder 2nd edition has been released, the term Pathfinder could refer to either the first edition alone or the category that covers both editions of Pathfinder.

Should we rename the tag to for clarity (and consistency with other such tags)? The former would then become a synonym of the latter.

\$\endgroup\$
18
\$\begingroup\$

Yes, we should.

To avoid confusion on the part of both question askers and question answerers. The use of edition tags has generally been very helpful for this site.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ I've gone ahead and made this change. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Aug 5 at 5:41
18
\$\begingroup\$

Yes, rename it! But we don’t want the edition-less synonym confusing things.

should be renamed but without leaving it as a synonym. We should just not have a Pathfinder tag without an edition marker.

All that keeping a synonym would do is give us a bunch of new 2e questions accidentally tagged 1e as well, which we would have to clean up every time, possibly with closes involved.

Having only or to choose from will empower new askers to tag accurately from the start.

We also don’t need to keep as a pan-edition tag for a game with only two editions. Even if we did need it, we’d still see it mostly misapplied, more often than correctly used. Without needing it anyway, we should just avoid that headache and not keep around for any use. (We can re-examine that in ten years when/if PF3e happens.)

\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I've gone ahead and renamed the tag. For now, I've left [pathfinder] as a synonym pointing to [pathfinder-1e]. If it causes problems, we can always break the synonymization in the future. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Aug 5 at 5:42
5
\$\begingroup\$

Yes, with a caveat:

We should use a similar system to how we organize the D&D tags.

We would need to rename the existing tag to , as proposed, but create a new, generic tag for questions about the topic of Pathfinder that do not necessarily pertain to a particular edition, exactly how the tag is used.

Ultimately this will look like this:

\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ This follows historical precedent with D&D and other versioned RPG's. L5R-4e, etc. \$\endgroup\$ – JohnP Aug 1 at 19:59
  • 8
    \$\begingroup\$ Personally, I see no real need for a generic tag. There's only 2 editions; if a single question asks about both editions, it can probably just have both tags (I don't expect questions to be relevant to both final editions and the playtest version of one of them). Of course, this may change years in the future, but if that becomes an issue we can handle it then. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Aug 1 at 20:07
  • \$\begingroup\$ @V2Blast if it can be done now with minimal effort and will eventually be the route we go anyway, why not do so now? \$\endgroup\$ – G. Moylan Aug 1 at 20:09
  • 8
    \$\begingroup\$ I think an umbrella tag with only two systems (and one being new/currently playtest) will cause more confusion/incorrect tagging without providing any real utility. \$\endgroup\$ – Someone_Evil Aug 1 at 20:10
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Someone_Evil - As a minor nitpick, it's no longer playtest with the official core release. :p \$\endgroup\$ – JohnP Aug 1 at 20:26
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ “Why not do it now”: because then we’ll have far more people using [pathfinder] for single-edition questions than for this new special use. It would quickly become a headache of many questions being closed as unclear due to being able to trust the tags to be correct. We should just not have it at all until it’s clearly needed. (It might never be needed.) \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Aug 2 at 4:24
  • \$\begingroup\$ @V2Blast I expect that if we had a generic tag, it would be used more for world-setting questions and history-of questions than rule-based ones. That said, I also agree that it's likely to cause a lot of confusion and mis-tagging right now. \$\endgroup\$ – Bobson Aug 6 at 14:27

You must log in to answer this question.

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