12
votes
\$\begingroup\$

Following the results of Revisit III: Don’t Guess the System policy this meta now refers to an outdated policy.

The following questions were tagged with , and did not mention D&D 5e explicitly; the tag was then added by somebody besides the OP, and the questions were not closed between being asked and being added:

A diamond moderator (Rubiksmoose) confirmed in a comment that none of these had comments clarifying what system was being asked about. Were these edits done incorrectly then? Should they have been reverted like answers to the following suggest:

Note that the examples above are all from the tag, but this question is asking also about questions that discuss D&D Beyond in their title, body, tags, comments, or elsewhere; tags were merely what I found I could actually search for. So the general question is as follows:

Is it acceptable to edit into a question about D&D Beyond?

Meta status as of 12/11/2020

NathanS's answer stands at +24/-0 votes and is the accepted answer. All other answers are at +0/-5 or lower. NathanS's answer represents the community's agreed policy going forward.

\$\endgroup\$
6
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Oh slight correction: that first post you list was not closed because it did not have a system, I closed it because it was lacking other information needed to solve the issue so it might not be the best example. I can see why you thought it was closed for that reason given my comments though. \$\endgroup\$
    – Rubiksmoose
    Commented Jun 8, 2020 at 20:21
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Yeah sorry about that! My intent was not to undercut your question (which I think is very much still a valid and worthwhile one), just to clarify my reasoning. \$\endgroup\$
    – Rubiksmoose
    Commented Jun 8, 2020 at 20:24
  • \$\begingroup\$ Related (perhaps a duplicate?): "What to do when encountering a non-system tag that describes a system?" \$\endgroup\$
    – Exempt-Medic
    Commented Jun 8, 2020 at 20:37
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Definitely related, but I don't think duplicate because this is specifically about a tag that describes a specific tool that can only refer to one game/system. I don't think there's going to be a game or something that happens to also be called D&DBeyond and thus causes us any tagging confusion (this is judging by what I think the answers to that other question are saying, which applies to other tags like [magus] or even [unearthed-arcana], but not in this case). \$\endgroup\$
    – NathanS
    Commented Jun 8, 2020 at 22:18
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ ... In other words, this tag isn't just a term associated with one or more games, like the tags discussed in that other question; I think that's the key difference between that other question and yours. \$\endgroup\$
    – NathanS
    Commented Jun 8, 2020 at 22:25
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Given that tags aren't the only place this information could appear, perhaps this question could be edited to focus on explicit references to D&D Beyond in general, no matter where they appear (title, body of the post, tag, comment, etc.)? It'd still be focused on explicit references to "D&D Beyond" or "DNDBeyond", just not focused on that information being in a tag specifically. (EDIT: The question was edited by OP accordingly.) \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast
    Commented Jun 11, 2020 at 22:07

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
27
votes
\$\begingroup\$

The tag (or otherwise describing D&DBeyond in the question) should be treated as equivalent to the OP stating "I'm playing D&D 5e"

For the simple reason that D&DBeyond is only about D&D 5e, and cannot possibly refer to any other game or edition.

It's not the same as "5e", which can be thought of by some as ambiguous when there isn't enough context. It can only refer to D&D 5e, and closing the question as unclear because we're trying to force (probably a new user) to play our policy game is lunacy.

Still, especially for new users, a comment should explain why they need the on this and future questions, and to teach them that they should include game tags in all their (game specific) questions, but in this case, the tag should be added by someone else before (i.e. instead of) closing the question, teaching by example, because closing the question at that point achieves nothing.

\$\endgroup\$
11
  • \$\begingroup\$ You say "It's not the same as "5e", which can be thought of by some as ambiguous when there isn't enough context" however afaik the current policy is never to guess system tags, regardless of context. I just want to be clear on whether you are disagreeing with current policy, or perhaps this was not worded as well as it could be? \$\endgroup\$
    – user-781943
    Commented Jun 9, 2020 at 3:00
  • 6
    \$\begingroup\$ @gszavae Yeah, that's more just me struggling to sound like I support a policy that I fundamentally disagree with, but I'm not trying to challenge the policy here, I just can't quite bring myself to say it. I wouldn't read into that too much... \$\endgroup\$
    – NathanS
    Commented Jun 9, 2020 at 6:23
  • \$\begingroup\$ I know that Stack Exchange has some fair amount of text detailing the problems with “sub-tags” like this, though I am not especially familiar with precisely what those problems are (I read it a long time ago). If you are proposing treating this as a sub-tag, which SE strongly suggests shouldn’t exist, you should research what those issues are and address them here. \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Commented Jun 9, 2020 at 12:00
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ I am not proposing a "sub tag", I'm only proposing what my title says, that it should be treated as being equivalent of stating the system; as far as I'm concerned, talking about D&DBeyond is the same as stating "I'm playing D&D 5e". \$\endgroup\$
    – NathanS
    Commented Jun 9, 2020 at 12:29
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ @gszavae It's more accurately put as: don't guess the game system the person is using. This isn't about tags per se—focusing on them would be a red herring—it's about the content of what they've told us, and people using that to inform their answers. This takes into account question title, body, tags, comments, sometimes even chat messages; this list is not exhaustive. If we know the game because of what they've told us then there's no guessing involved when we make edits or post answers. (We also apply tags to indicate appropriately.) Necessarily context is important to take into account. \$\endgroup\$
    – doppelgreener
    Commented Jun 9, 2020 at 13:09
  • \$\begingroup\$ @NathanS This would effectively make dnd-beyond a subtag of dnd-5e, since if they say they’re playing in D&D Beyond, we presumably want both of those tags on there. Again, I don’t know the particulars of why this is problematic, but it’s worth digging into for any proposal to change policy. \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Commented Jun 9, 2020 at 22:12
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KRyan: Well, if them using DDB is relevant to the question, then yes, I think we'd want both tags on there - e.g. if it's about a discrepancy in DDB's character sheet. (If the fact that it's D&D 5e is somehow irrelevant to the Q&A, but the site of D&D Beyond is relevant, then I suppose a case could be made for using [dnd-beyond] but not [dnd-5e].) If it's just that the question cites D&D Beyond but it's an aspect of DDB that mirrors the rules in the physical books or whatever, then the [dnd-beyond] tag probably isn't relevant or necessary. It's a good point to bring up, though! \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast
    Commented Jun 9, 2020 at 22:53
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @doppelgreener That's fine because you have a diamond, but in practice, for normal users, the policy is “Never guess the game system”, "It's not appropriate to edit based on a guess.", "Don't guess", "We shouldn't guess the system", "We should not guess the system". If this was not your understanding of the policy, then I think that makes rediscussion a necessity. The idea that "We should allow some leeway when a question is extremely obviously related to a specific system" is fairly controversial and unsupported by the community. \$\endgroup\$
    – user-781943
    Commented Jun 10, 2020 at 1:21
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @gszavae: As doppelgreener said: It's not a guess if the querent has explicitly indicated the game system the question is about (whether they do so in tags, the title or body text, comments, or elsewhere). That's true even if you're not a diamond mod. I'm not sure how you interpreted "If we know the game because of what they've told us then there's no guessing involved" as "We should allow some leeway when a question is extremely obviously related to a specific system"... Doppelgreener's just pointing out that tags aren't the only place that the RPG system/edition could be explicitly stated. \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast
    Commented Jun 10, 2020 at 3:51
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @V2Blast Ah ok, I took doppelgreener's comment as saying that if there is evidence that they are using a particular system then that's enough to make it not a guess (eg "I am playing a wizard in 5e and my DM said we can pick a level 1 spell for free and I'm tossing up between Chromatic Orb and Color Spray"). My mistake. \$\endgroup\$
    – user-781943
    Commented Jun 10, 2020 at 4:54
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @V2B Technically, we do have one such question (tagged with dnd-beyond but not dnd-5e) and though I'm not entirely sure whether it should gain the dnd-5e tag, it really does seem to be about the site and not the system itself \$\endgroup\$
    – Exempt-Medic
    Commented Jun 10, 2020 at 5:31
-6
votes
\$\begingroup\$

These questions mostly don't need the 5e tag at all

If the OP didn't choose to include it, it's really not necessary. The questions are about that site, not about 5e in general (most of the time)

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ For the 2nd and 4th questions linked in this Q&A, at least, this answer's claim is definitely not true; both are effectively asking if DDB is accurately reflecting the D&D 5e rules. Those questions would be impossible to answer without referencing the D&D 5e rules. \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast
    Commented Jun 12, 2020 at 1:44
  • \$\begingroup\$ @V2Blast Yeah, but the tag belongs a lot more on questions 1 &3. I don't really think it belongs on the other two, though I can see why the authors might have thought it might. \$\endgroup\$
    – Please stop being evil
    Commented Jun 12, 2020 at 1:53
-7
votes
\$\begingroup\$

Why stop at ?

What about ? ? (ok, admittedly this one is an obvious outlier)? ? ? And the list goes on.

These are all tags that can only be for one specific edition of an RPG. Would it be acceptable to add a system tag if it were missing from questions with any one of these tags?

What about tags with excerpts/wikis that specifically state that they're for a specific edition?

"an expansion book for D&D 3.5e "? "[an] adventure included in the D&D 5e Starter Set"? "a D&D 5e adventure"? "a modified ruleset for D&D 3.5e"? "the Pathfinder Unchained content series"? And again the list goes on.

And there's slightly more ambiguous tag.

"run as part of Adventurer's League's season 7"? "[a] mechanic in D&D 4e" but has been used for other editions?...

I guess the point I'm trying to make is:

Where do we draw the line?

Personally, I'm a strong believer in our 'don't guess the system' policy and as I describe in my answer to What to do when encountering a non-system tag that describes a system? it's problematic to assume non-system tags that describe a system are indicative of a specific RPG system.

In general it shouldn't be acceptable to add a system tag when a non-system tag appears to indicate the system and it pretty much comes back to the 'don't guess' policy. However, if we decide that there are instances (like this) where it is acceptable then we need to make it 100% clear what tags are acceptable to edit a system tag into, otherwise it will likely end up in a big mess.

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ I'm not keen on the slippery slope argument here. There's an implied “if we allow this, we'll be doing all kinds of crazy things and throw all judgement out the window!” but of course we won't. We'll make case-by-case assessments to determine what is and isn't workable. This meta is part of that process of working out the very same line you're asking about. The super-strict no-allowance methodology is something many including myself do not find constructive. It should go without saying that of course the ambiguous tags aren't on this side of the line—we can all agree they're ambiguous. \$\endgroup\$
    – doppelgreener
    Commented Jun 11, 2020 at 9:40
  • 7
    \$\begingroup\$ So basically like: those things you're asking if they're okay? I dunno, let's talk about them in other meta Qs. This Q is just about one tag and we should keep these focused. We can examine these other tags case-by-case and maybe we'll continue negotiating the boundary of these rules that way. Personally I think some are clearly not unambiguous tags like dnd-beyond (pathfinder-society: which pathfinder?) while some are (D&D Insider was the 4e toolset, just like D&D Beyond is the 5e toolset, but that's in the past now anyway). But that's open for discussion in another Q. \$\endgroup\$
    – doppelgreener
    Commented Jun 11, 2020 at 10:14

You must log in to answer this question.

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