Hot answers tagged

35

Let experts make expert decisions. This is the whole point of Stack Exchange. The entire model is people who know what they're talking about answering questions. People come here to ask questions because they expect someone here is equipped to solve their problem. As linksassin admitted: Sure, in 99% of cases we may be right. Then we should let our experts ...


33

Nothing 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 ...


30

It’s a “fork” of D&D 5e: based on similar fundamentals, but having split from the main branch of 5e development and thereafter developed independently of 5e. In a sense, it is not all that different from Pathfinder’s relationship to 3.5e (though, of course, the history in Pathfinder’s case is a little more involved). A fork is its own thing, whatever ...


27

I think we should be OK interpreting “5e” as “D&D 5e” when the question is also talking about D&D-isms. (If they're talking about things that don't sound like D&D 5e, like talking about hackers, we should not guess.) There are other games with a 5e, but their players tend to be acutely aware they're not the only RPG and not the only 5th edition ...


26

The dnd-beyond 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 ...


25

Well, of course upvotes are at anyone's discretion, they can upvote because they like your clever use of headers. However, you are making a false dichotomy between "format" and "content." If someone posts a question or answer that is not readable, then it's not good content, regardless of the research the poster put into it. Let's look at your Qs and As. ...


24

No Here's the deal. Everyone (most people at least) know they can do whatever they want in their games. But they are asking a question not because they need someone to tell them "sure you can! make it up! let your freak flag fly!" but because they want to know what the game rules actually say, if only as a starting point. Therefore if the question is "...


22

It's fine for answers to use them as support, but generally answers shouldn't rely on Crawford tweets alone Jeremy Crawford explained the change in a tweet on January 30, 2019: 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&...


21

Self-answering is hard to do well It's hard to write a good question when you're planning on self-answering, and a few of our 5e questions suffer from this. It's even harder to write a good answer to such a question. If the problem as-written boils down to "X in 5e is different from [other edition], help help", whatever other virtues the question might have ...


21

Given context, it's better to have information than not. With the probable exception of rules-as-written questions, I see no reason to tell people not to mention if a developer has expressed an opinion or shared an insight about a rule. A good answer would of course compare and contrast the dev's comments with the published game materials to whatever extent ...


21

Get clarification first / promote better engagement with new users One of the advantages of asking the question "What game/system/edition are you playing?" and waiting to get that answer is that we treat whomever asks the question as a person (which IMO is important for the new user experience) and engage with them in discourse in the process of helping ...


20

The designers made it clear that rules questions answered by Jeremy Crawford is the official stance of WotC, and many of his answers are turned into errata later on. Granted, that if a ruling isn't in the book yet, it doesn't exist to some strict RAW players. But generally Crawford's posts are what the rules already says, or on rare occasion what they will ...


18

No, doing so causes actual harm to our site First I will state the obvious reasons that have been mostly stated by others: Multiple systems have a 5th edition D&D is not the only game to have reached a 5th edition. It isn't even the only game that is currently on 5th edition. Guessing wrong is worse than waiting Sure, in 99% of cases we may be right. But ...


17

Yes. Pragmatically, the system known in wide circles as 5e is D&D 5e It is correct that there are many different systems that have a fifth edition. However, D&D is the most widely known TTRPG and in recent times has gained wide exposure through the netflix series stranger things as well as youtube/twitch streaming (critical role and many others). ...


17

Per a previous answer: only if 5e doesn't occur in a vacuum If there are sufficient contextual clues to determine "5e of what?" such that a player of the game and that edition can clearly recognize them - then "5e" has communicated what it needs to (and adding the tag becomes helpful). If 5e is referred to and no contextual clues are ...


16

I consider what you've said a pretty fair assessment of some of our 5e questions, and that "please read the rules to me" is a pretty fair description of some of them. As we receive D&D 5e questions, we should keep an eye out for those and close them. I think some of us may have noticed things that could be new and/or confusing, and in our excitement ...


16

Designers' tweets (or any other source of designers' words) are simply what the designers have said. We have no special site rules about how official they are or whether their words = game rules. Nor should we. If someone is using designers' words in an answer to a question, whether about the rules of a game or something else, it's up to that answer-writer ...


15

I think we could do with distinctly tagging some of the D&D Next Playtest questions. There are lots of questions which still apply to D&D 5e, and the idea is/was just to correct them with the finalised 5e rules, which seems to have been a pretty good idea for most of our playtest questions. For example: How does bull rushing work in D&D Next? ...


15

As usual, first present your problem, not your solution Usually, homebrewing something is about creating a new thing that does some particular stuff that you want, but is inexistent in the original published content, or to solve something you think it is a problem. For example, this question is about rebalancing winged races, which OP sees as problematic/...


14

TL;DR: 5E is still new, this might be an anomaly, lets watch it for now before we do anything. It may be too early to judge 5E is not a terribly old game right now, so while we may have a wealth of similar, but not identical questions, it may simply be the newness of the system compared to the 45 year history of gaming that predates this site. We are a ...


14

As a matter of principle — in terms of what the site is for, how it's been designed, and how it works in practice — we cannot legislate how people answer questions. The minimum and only standard that an answer has to meet is that it be on-topic. We have different (and complex) standards for questions, but these don't and can't apply to answers. The idea is ...


14

List your goals or requirements for the build Always be as specific as you can about what you're trying to do. It would be difficult for you to be too detailed in outlining these details; the points below are a minimum. Please also be clear about what is a requirement (must-have) and a preference (optional but preferable). What goal are you seeking to ...


14

Sure, add the tags. Tags are free and useful. If we have three questions about Ultramodern, that’s two more than are needed to justify that tag. We have plenty of tags that started out their existence on just one question, and never gained more than a handful. There’s no harm in creating esper-genesis, and it might or might not grow, like any new tag.


13

I do not think we should make this change. I mulled it over and I do not feel it solves any problem we have, nor do I feel we have any compelling reason to have a generic tag like this. The current tag unearthed-arcana is calling a spade a spade. As you may be aware, the "call a spade a spade" idiom means to speak plainly and straightforwardly. ...


13

Our fixing of old Next questions has not been working that well. With some hindsight, I'm going to propose something that may be conceptually unpopular, but may be very effective: Let natural duplicates happen as they're asked, and close the old question as duplicates of the new questions. There have been several old Next questions that later 5e questions ...


13

Do not duplicate. Go post new answers, those question will rise to the front page, and good new answers will be upvoted. Ideally the OPs will be around to accept new answers, but if not, the highest voted vs accepted is a well understood distinction. Propose edits to the existing answer if the changes are pro forma or minor. Add a comment if the existing ...


13

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 ...


13

There are two issues in your question, so I'm going to untangle them a step at a time. You're asking about questions that get closed, and you're asking about how the amount of research in a question is distinguished. These are actually separate for reasons you'll see in a moment. I'll untangle the close issue first, since that makes the research-amount issue ...


12

First and foremost, 2 of the questions on your list aren't terrible, and the other two are only marginally bad. However, I think there's probably a relatively easy answer here. Most of us haven't played a real 5e game or two yet. (sure, many of us have run playtest sessions, and that's good, but probably most of the questions that came up during those ...


12

This isn’t a question for meta, not really. The only context where “official rule source” matters is for discussions of RAW, and for those cases, it isn’t for meta to decide that, nor can it be decidable in general. Official rule sources are those things the publisher labels as such. This is going to vary by publisher, and by edition; D&D 3.5 did not ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible