A frame challenge is where an author answers a question in a wholly different way the querent never asked for, or potentially expressly forbade, but in a way the author feels will actually solve the problem. (Or otherwise improve the querent's life quality or prevent them from making some terrible mistake.) This is as opposed to answers which answer the ...
We say “emphasis mine” alongside a quoted passage where some part of the original text has been bolded/italicised, in order to indicate that the emphasis is not found in the original, but was in fact added by us. It's shorthand for “I added the emphasis here myself”.
We do this because emphasis in different places can change the meaning of writing, so it's ...
For clarity, you should use the terms the way the game does. There is negative value in changing, for example, AC to A.C.
In some cases people don't know and happen to mis-edit, then just like with the AmEnglish vs BrEnglish follies, everyone should just be calm, the OP should revert to their intent and the editor should take it in good grace.
It's a common English writing convention. “Emphasis mine” means that the emphasis was added by the person using the quotation. This is as opposed to “emphasis original”, which is used to indicate that the emphasis is part of the original quote, not added by the later quote-user.
Like bracketing changes, inserting ellipses, and using sic, indicating who is ...
DM, or "Dungeon Master," is a term used only by D&D players.
GM, or "Game Master," is a generic term used by players of many of the other 10,000 RPGs out there.
Therefore people with wider game experience tend to just say "GM" (many other games have goofy proprietary names for the GM as well, which are hard to remember). People who mostly have only ...
Yeah, much as it's useful jargon to discuss how the site operates, I've noticed it being used in answer content lately and I don't think that's a helpful trend. I think it actually makes frame challenges less effective, because they're not really fully explaining and supporting the choice to challenge!
Although some phrases to use instead might be useful, I ...
Habit or ease. It's like how I could say "Volkswagen" or I could just say "car".
At this point, DM is just a fancy trademarked proprietary way of saying GM in the context of D&D. They're still the same thing otherwise.
While I personally have never heard "Rules As Interpreted" for RAI, and always knew it as "Intended" - ironically, people generally substitute their own opinion for "intended" anyway. Unless the question is asking for developer citations and is tagged designer-reasons, "RAI" is a signpost saying to me "look at this question and see if it needs to ...
One does not have to ask the author to analyze their intent
If that were the case, studying Shakespeare would be pointless (or more pointless if you are of a scientific rather than humanities bent :-))
There are some ways of thinking of this that may (or may not) bring clarity:
If the rules are to be considered as a literary work then ...
My personal opinion would be that, when discussing a specific game, it's usually better to stick to the terminology and spelling conventions used by the official sources, however idiosyncratic they may be, as long as doing so doesn't get in the way of clear communication.
On the other hand, the point where something gets in the way of communication, or ...
Is there a more ordinary colloquial English phrase we could use to describe this stuff we call frame challenges?
I would most naturally say one would question the premise of something. However, since the subject is itself a question, the construct "question the premise of the question" is a bit awkward. I'd instead use challenge the premise of the ...
So, I see the issue you raise. The terminology tag says we shouldn't be asking about in-game terminology, and there's an available tag that appears to cover that territory.
That said though... I have absolutely no idea why the terminology tag description says this. The last sentence was added by @V2Blast relatively recently in March 2019, and I cannot find ...
Being an abbreviation isn’t relevant: the measure we care about is whether the words used make the post clear. It’s especially important in questions: clarity is so major a measure that not enough clarity is a standard hold reason.
“D&D” is clear. No-one will argue that it’s too obscure for our audience. No problem there.*
“LTH” doesn’t strike me as ...
For D&D 5E, the term is defined in Sage Advice Compendium. RAI means Rules As Intended by the game developers:
RAI Some of you are especially interested in knowing
the intent behind a rule. That’s where RAI comes in: “rules
as intended.” This approach is all about what the designers
meant when they wrote something. In a perfect world, RAW
For common abbreviations, like "D&D", everyone knows what you're talking about. However other, lesser known ones can lead to confusion.
Sometimes you can take it from context, but the best option is to lead with the full phrase, followed by the abbreviation, to clarify.
Leomund's Tiny Hut (LTH)
This way it is clear what you're referring to.
"Dungeon Master" is actually owned by Wizards of the Coast, who produce D&D, legally other game systems (even if they are fantasy based dungeon crawls) are not allowed to use the term. Therefore the generic term Game Master is used by most other companies, except for certain games that come up with special names for their system, like the Zero Meister in ...
You get to define your terms when you ask a question.
It doesn't really matter what the stack-at-large thinks it means for a character build to be viable. Instead of using the word viable, just present a well defined problem to solve. "Is this character build viable" is not a well defined problem to solve, but it's fine as a question title, as long ...
Two principles spring to mind: clarity and discoverability.
First off, in writing a post you're trying to communicate to an audience. Or to audiences. As a question writer your audience is "the universe of people who might see this and give me a helpful answer." As an answer writer your audience is "the querent." But it's also ...
Don't worry about it
"Frame challenge" is not jargon because the meaning of the phrase flows naturally from the meaning of the simple words that make it up. In context, anyone with a basic grasp of English should be able to divine that the poster means to "challenge" the "framing" of the OP's question.
Putting words together in novel ways is how language ...
Nomothetic - relates to rules systems/social contracts/play that believe written rules act as absolute boundaries in defining what is and isn't possible within a game. They are hard and fast, and anything that isn't defined by them isn't allowed.
Idiographic - relates to rules systems/social contracts/play that believe written rules are only guidelines, ...
The issue I would take with Standard English is that it changes over time. To use an Oxford comma or not, is it you and me or you and I, do I put periods after each letter in an acronym or not (what if I'm trying to reinforce that I'm an evil corporation?). In short, Standard English is anything but standard.
Personally, I do land development and many ...
Viable is dependent on lots of factors.
For example, a viable l5r character, werewolf-the-apocalypse or the-dark-eye-4e character is something entirely different from a viable dnd-5e character.
Questions of viability need to define what viable is for the group and game:
Is it a game that requires only combat skills?
Is it a game that has considerable ...
I do not know about any accepted definition, but I would say both of those definitions are flawed, and a 3rd one is better
Problems with "Unlikely to die":
Some GMs are very lenient, I have seen a frontliner with a Constitution of 6 (DnD-5e, negative modifier) to be spared, even when it was very complicated for the GM
Even when the back row is ...
Rather than seeking a new term, or new jargon, use available tools
Consider instead proposing guidance about the use of the frame challenges in an answer to include the link to the very helpful definition that you provided in this answer, and which you include in your question.
While you feel that the issue is that the term is the problem, I disagree and ...
First of all, you should read Dr. Ballsun-Staton's definition, from his paper, if you haven't already:
2.3 Nomothetic versus Ideographic
Guba and Lincoln (1994) articulate the nomothetic debate in
social sciences where they note that general theories may not fit
specific cases well: “This problem is sometimes described as the
I think your use of "DM" is completely acceptable, as is "GM". In my playgroup we also use "GM" to refer to the act of houseruling or arbitrating.
For example, "I wonder if Bill will GM my non-RAW usage of [blank] valid?"
"He GMed that monster into existence."
Refering to a previous discussion: "We'll have to let Bill GM that when we play this weekend."