43

Yes, these questions are fine. No, actually, they are more than fine—they are literally exactly the sort of thing that makes RPG SE have value. We are supposed to be a community of experts who can tackle difficult questions with strong, authoritative answers that are backed up by considerable experience working on these sorts of questions. It’s totally ...


36

I don't agree that "anybody asking the first is definitely wondering about the second." But I do agree that anyone asking the first would likely benefit from seeing an answer to the second. That's why I hope you post the second question separately and slap a "related question:..." link onto each of them. The benefit I see to splitting them is that someone ...


29

A hard and fast "follow this to the letter" rule is unnecessary and counterproductive. Instead we apply principles of site design which we've learnt through years of experience are the best way to curate the quality of the Stack. I suggest you read Optimizing for Pearls, Not Sand to understand why we're tougher on questions than on answers. I found it ...


16

Yes Questions can be clarified, but new questions aren't clarifications and should be posted as separate, new questions. The correct course of action is to revert to the last version that wasn't a different question. (Further edits may be appropriate to clean up, clarify, or whatever that revision still needs that didn't happen because of the new-question ...


16

The biggest benefits here have little to do with questions. It's about the answers. 1) When I post an answer to a 'question' that's actually a bunch of related questions, I have to address them all (at least, if I want to be a good site member); that's more work for me, not always possible to format smoothly, particularly if your 'related' questions turn ...


12

It's well established SE-wide best practice to ask one question per post. You can read this post and its linked posts on meta.SE for all kinds of why. When to ask multiple questions in a single post ? (Revisited) Therefore, we tend to vote multi-question questions as too broad to prevent all kinds of other work later when it turns into a mess of answers ...


11

Piggybacking makes it easier to accidentally stumble across questions we didn't know to ask, but makes it harder to find questions we're deliberately searching for. However, that doesn't mean we miss out on stumbling across related questions. When two questions are intimately connected such that each can't be wholly answered without addressing the other, ...


11

I think that the scope of the question is fine, and is adequately defined. If the asker is interested in any word used in any setting, that defines a standard against which answers can be assessed. It is in no way opinion based-- words mean what the asker wants, or they don't. What causes some trouble for the question is is whether or not it is on-topic for ...


11

This doesn’t have a firm, rules-based answer. I think it can’t have one. The question I ask is: Did this edit improve the question, or did it change the question? The answer to both can be yes, notably. Most of the time one will be no and the other yes, which I think tells us whether an edit is a problem to undo or a good thing to move forward with. When ...


10

Your edit to make it system-agnostic substantially changes the scope of the question. When a Question Changes Completely, Should it be a New Question? says this should be a new question, not an edit. Accordingly I've rolled that question back to revision 16, the version that was about D&D 5e. Originally you ask: It seems the game developers consider ...


8

This particular question should be considered constrained to the list it offers up to early 2017. We should update its title to specify “up to March 2017” or “up to Tales of the Yawning Portal”. The question text should otherwise be left alone; the list of adventures makes its scope clear. Then, if we want an up-to-date list, it should be asked separately. ...


7

When a question changes, any answers that do not answer the new version of the question should be changed as well. There's a very simple reason for this: The purpose of this site is to provide useful answers to questions. If an answer does not fully address the question as it is posed at the top of the page, that answer is not a useful answer to that ...


6

Well-scoped, but room for improvement I think the question is fairly clear, although more specifics are always helpful in narrowing down to potential answers that best fit the bill. Honestly, this seems a bit more like a general language question as-asked and not necessarily a RPG question. Narrowing the scope to asking about words that work within a ...


6

(Reposted by request from Why'd my second question get removed when surely people would be thinking about both?) The biggest benefits here have little to do with questions. It's about the answers. 1) When I post an answer to a 'question' that's actually a bunch of related questions, I have to address them all (at least, if I want to be a good site ...


5

There's no should. We can do it either way, edit or close. It's a pretty good course of action to edit questions like this, though, or at least not a bad one. We could just close the question and ask the author to pick a question and post the others separately, and often do. Sometimes however if we're clearly going to go down that route, it speeds up the ...


3

There are two cases here. There are two questions, but one is handled well another place There are either more than two questions or the second question is not handled well on site. In the first case, it's absolutely correct to edit out the second question and point them to the other post. In the second case, it should be closed and the OP needs to ...


2

The question as written is appropriate for RPG.SE, and doesn't require any change. Although the question could be directed to other Stacks, it is acceptable given our current guidance. Currently it's unknown what exactly is motivating the question, which leads to differing perspectives on how to fix it. Full disclosure: I am one of the users who answered ...


2

Nothing for right now This question is currently over 6 years old and we haven't had an issue with either the question, the answers, or a new question creating an issue. Because of that, we should just let it be. If it becomes an issue, we can deal with it, but there are lots of older Q&As that are still around because things were different. No need to ...


2

I would start by asking the OP to update his own question. In this particular case, it's my question, and having been alerted to this, I'll update it over the weekend. If the OP gives no answer but his intent is clear (i.e., OP wrote something like "the current X" or "at the time of this writing, X", then OP is covering all existing X at ...


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