Use both whenever possible
There's really no difference between the paywall for a book and the paywall for a site.
Whenever I get the chance I cite both the book and online: (PHB p. 245).
Barriers to entry
To someone that doesn't have a book, (DMG p. 270) is exactly as inaccessible as https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/dmg/dungeon-masters-...
First, the tweets we often reference to, Crawford, Mike Mearls, etc. are used to support our answer. Usually it goes in a way like this:
A designer has clarified how this certain situation should be handled
A designer has clarified how a thing should work, and my answer is built upon the consequence of the clarification
A designer has clarified how ...
This is gonna be long. You've asked some very important, very complex questions and I'll try to do them justice--but you don't have to take my word for it. As we get deeper into the material I'll be offering links to references, histories, and further explanations of various themes and topics. I highly recommend using those links as jumping-off points for ...
Stack Exchange is a rigorous Q&A community with a mission to build up a reliable knowledge base for future readers. It's sort of like Wikipedia in that regard. To accomplish this mission we need our answers to be clearly backed up so visitors can verify our answers for themselves. Without any citation we are just random people on the internet and our ...
I understand, I really do. I wish popularity contests didn’t break out occasionally and stir up trouble, and I wish voters would leave them to die down faster after a close.
By and large, the activity does drop off though. And it doesn’t really encourage asking that kind of question on purpose. Answering it might be encouraged a bit, but those who don’t ...
Support why they are correct
Add the full rule context and explain the rule to the best of your ability. Usually these kind of questions come from a misunderstanding or lack of comprehension of the rules. You should try to clear up their confusion as well as directly answer the question.
If possible draw parallels to other rules from the system that use ...
If you want to do something about it,
Post another answer or place a bounty
Obviously if you have a better answer than what's already there, post it. If you don't, then a bounty is the tool for the job: it'll give the question new visibility and convey the fact that you think the question is poorly answered. It may even attract new and better answers.
It's fine for answers to use them as support, but generally they shouldn't rely on Crawford tweets alone
Jeremy Crawford explains the change here on Twitter:
It looks like the Invoke Tweet of Jeremy Crawford feature has been nerfed. Official rulings are now found in the Compendium only, with this account merely providing a "preview" of possible future ...
Yes they are.
It's OK for a question to be unanswerable at the time it is posted as long as it meets all of the general requirements the site has for question quality. This happens most often for questions with the [designer-reasons] tag, which is generally included when a question asks why a system does things in a particular way. The only people who can ...
Write a better answer!
If you feel that answers to old questions aren't satisfactory, then add a new answer. If want to downvote, you of course can, but I tend to err on the side of 'not editing others work massively'. Others are perfectly fine with that and both methods seem acceptable here (and if it isn't, usually OP reverts.)
In the case of non-active ...
The answer you linked contains this explanation of the problem with the FAQ:
The D&D 3.5 FAQ inherited the reputation of its predecessor, the “Sage Advice” column in Dragon magazine. [...] The common problem with the Q&A articles, both “Sage Advice” and the FAQ, is that they were written by second parties with no better judgment than a good DM or ...
Instead trying to accommodate non-English texts in general, I suggest a user of a non-English edition Comment how the desired information can't be located in that non-English edition and request from the querent or respondent more context.
That's because, while I think it's a great idea to accommodate non-English speakers, asking folks to use a text's ...
This answer won't discuss the policy or why we do it, that's well covered elsewhere. It will take the Good Subjective/Bad Subjective policy as gospel and explain how to give Good Subjective answers and Back It Up! specifically.
First, per How do we ask and answer subjective questions?:
Answering Subjective Questions
The blog post Good Subjective, ...
Use either for convenience, but prefer the physical book if available at hand
My reasoning is that books have a permanence that digital media (in the format of D&DBeyond) lack. Most of the online material for 3rd and 4th edition is either gone, or requires a trip to the Wayback Machine, resulting in many broken or re-directed links. D&DBeyond or ...
Some Suggestions for Users
I don't have strong opinions on how, if at all, things should be changed on the Moderation side of things, so I'm not going to opine on that.
Instead, I'm going to make some suggestions for what we, as engaged members of the community, can do.
More Aggressive Downvoting
I can't necessarily speak for other users, but speaking ...
Yes it is fine to cite the D&D 5e SRD; some caveats may be needed
For the most part, the rules texts match.
The issue is that in some cases, the SRD rules don't perfectly align with the rule books, but in other cases the official errata got folded into the SRD before the rules errata are published.
A classic case was the rules text for Polymorph ...
The more general question, about whether we allow asking about developer statements which may or may not exist, appears to be yes. That's based on precedents and on it not transgressing any rules.
I think it's also fine to leave it as “yes” after meta discussion, since I don't believe it causes any structural problems that the site isn't equipped for.
This question is complicated, because there's a lot of different things going on here.
In general, "Why is question X treated different from question Y?" isn't a real good question. Well, they're nearly three years apart, different people participated in each, maybe a mod hadn't drunk coffee that day, etc. Proof by "but but another question did it" is ...
Edits that improve the post are encouraged
As a general answer, the official guidance on editing says the following:
When should I edit posts?
Any time you see a post that needs improvement and are inclined to suggest an edit, you are welcome to do so. [...]
Edits are expected to be substantial and to leave the post better than you found it. ...
I generally use a link followed by a blockquote, if the quoted text is central to the answer, or just a link if it's a less central example.
So, to steal from your answer, I would say:
That action can be used only to take the Attack (one weapon attack only), Dash, Disengage, Hide, or Use an Object action.
(This is identical to what's in ...
Answers: Downvotes and constructive comments
Sources are the responsibility of the cite-writer, not the responsibility of policy.
The way to handle this then is business as usual: downvote answers that have errors, and optionally help them correct such errors with constructive comments.
Questions: Solve the problem in answers
Business as usual here too. (...
Add Links To Things You Are Actually Citing
Referencing (PHB p.123) or linking to a SRD or whatever for content in your answer is good.
Adding Links To Everything Referenced Is Of Questionable Value
Every single spell etc. mentioned in a question or answer don't need links.
So let's ask, why add links? There's one good and two not so good reasons.
Speaking for the citation expectations meta I wrote, something seems to have gotten lost in communication. That's on me, I should've made it clearer. Specifically in the second paragraph I say this:
You do not need to cite every sentence, but citation of various statements and positions may be expected and requested by your fellow community members.
Nothing should be done
Answers can use whatever sources or means of support they think is best for their answer. Voters then decide how good the answer is based off of everything in the answer.
Crawford's tweets being demoted from "official" really has no bearing on the ability for someone to cite them. They were never binding rules to begin with and now ...
What you can do to save subjective questions
First of all - I think most people here understand our Good Subjective requirements, why we have them, and why they're good. See What are the citation expectations of answers on RPG Stack Exchange? for more on that, I'm not going to debate "whether that's right" (it is, for the record), this is about what to do ...
I'll assume you intend to quote directly from the WotC document and not through a website's transcription. If you give the page number that helps, but if you want to link directly to a specific page in the SRD you can add a hash #page=num to your link.
For example if I want to reference the Grappler feat that is included in the SRD I could write my link ...
In general, this question is "too broad..." because there's a lot of games and communities of gamers outside the D&D domain and you're asking about the problem of normative textual sourcing in general. But here's the deal somewhat specifically to this situation with some more general philosophy mixed in.
It comes down to the community of play around ...
How would you like it if you asked "Can I mount my electrical outlet upside down?" And my answer was
Yes, if and only if you comply with NEC 216.15 Note 3.
And then you're like "WTH, why should I have to spend $125 on a copy of the Electrical Code?"
And we say "Because it's an essential resource for anyone doing electrical work."...
I believe the answer is yes.
While I do not personally like the particular questioning of the RAW in combination with requiring a developer citation, it is a valid line if inquiry. The highest voted response is informative, and clarifying errata may arise in the future.
Additionally, digging through archived and cached copies of Crawford, Mearls, or Gygax ...
If we're optimizing for expert answers, I can understanding needing some way to prevent sloppy, subjective answers from being submitted when the question sort of "baits" them out. I don't think that's what happened here - I think the question is fine, but the community should be more diligent about downvoting answers that don't meet GS/BS.