TRPG General Chat

12:17 AM

@doppelgreener I don't see the point in adding a warning. I see the entire effort as picking at scabs for no value added. But I think the intent was positive; I tried to lay out a method for game rec question vetting. Got no response in workshopping, and mostly "thanks but bug off" as a response.

I tried to sincerely help with a RAW data analysis and from both sides got "thanks, up yours" as the response (though it was phrased more gently than that)

I tried to be helpful in the "what is wrong" but that was just a bucket of fail, with good intention on my part.

The model of a flesh based algorithm can be taken too far, and I think it is being taken too far. Meat space is the more valuable place. No value added in picking at this scab. It's fine to try and perfect actual code. Code Is Not a human being.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. What problem is being solved? Nothing.

No more from me tonight, those are some of the thoughts kicking around as I ponder the value in engagement.

Good night, best wishes, and happy gaming.

I am on the other side of the globe, so I guess it's "good morning" for you?

WrongOnTheInternet

Those thoughts may need a bit more time in the hopper. I'm having a hard time understanding what you're getting at.

BESW

12:35 AM

I'm a big fan of "what's the problem we're trying to solve?" but also of assuming that if people are suggesting solutions then they do see a problem worth solving.

WrongOnTheInternet

@BESW I'm looking at this statistics meta question and thinking "Most of these fit the metric, and the ones that don't are just a sign of people being imperfect"

BESW

I guess what I'm saying is, if people are suggesting solutions and I don't see the problem they're trying to solve, I should ask for help seeing the problem instead of telling them there isn't one.

WrongOnTheInternet

Makes sense. That's currently the stage I'm at, basically.

BESW

That way we're all talking about the same thing, at least, even if we don't agree it's a problem.

Personally I know that the RAW tag has significant beneficial applications to the site's goals and praxis, but if often feels like the only reason we aren't using some other set of tools for the same purpose is that if we got rid of the RAW tag it'd just get made again.

WrongOnTheInternet

This seems to be the much more difficult question of "how do we get people to know what our scope is" as opposed to "what is our scope?"

BESW

12:43 AM

Mmm, combined with a term that has extremely variable meanings and implications across a group so diverse it's hard to call it a community.

WrongOnTheInternet

@BESW Ah, the RAW tag argument came up again?

BESW

I suspect the use of that particular phrase throws up extra blockades, but it's so deeply embedded in the lexicon that we're probably stuck with it.

@WrongOnTheInternet This is the context of the above conversation.

WrongOnTheInternet

I think RAW's primary use, as it's actually used, is to indicate a playstyle.

Thanks for the context by the way.

Miniman

@WrongOnTheInternet It's not.

WrongOnTheInternet

@Miniman I know this topic has been beaten to death, but could you link me to why it's not? I don't particularly care to remove it in any case.

BESW

12:48 AM

Generally speaking the community usually comes down on the side of not tagging for playstyles.

20

Q: What, exactly, is the RAW tag for?

As the title says. I'm starting to think that there are a few different views of what "RAW" means here on RPG.SE. I think that it is time to sit down and pinpoint the "correct" way to use the corresponding tag, so we can prevent further confusion. I will list how I see some people using this tag...

Enjoy the many, many diverse opinions.

Miniman

@WrongOnTheInternet One of the first questions I asked on this site. I didn't ask it out of any desire to play by RAW, I just wanted to know what the RAW was.

BESW

I think RAW can be seen as a theory, or lens, as used in critical analysis fields like film crit or lit crit. But I'm not an expert and I have no horse in this race. I'm just an opinionated bystander.

3

Miniman

Note that, despite both tagging it and indicating my desire for rules-only answers in the question, I still received multiple answers that had nothing to do with the rules, they still got upvoted, and SSD still removed the tag when the new policy was formed.

@BESW That sounds about right to me, although I'm also no expert. I certainly won't say I have no horse in this race, though.

BESW

(My answer to the meta linked above, which says basically the same thing but in more detail, has thus far gone largely accepted and unchallenged. Take that as you will.)

WrongOnTheInternet

Ah. So it's not a meta-tag then?

Miniman

12:57 AM

@WrongOnTheInternet Depends (greatly) on who you ask.

WrongOnTheInternet

@Miniman Yeah. I think even if it was, and it was an issue, it would still do less damage to leave it than it would to remove it.

Miniman

@WrongOnTheInternet Do you mean to remove it from the site as a whole, or from individual questions?

Because I don't think anyone's (currently) suggesting it be removed from the site as a whole (although they certainly have in the past).

WrongOnTheInternet

Removing it from the site as a whole. Certain questions shouldn't have it, because they aren't about it.

I'm just wondering how we got here.

Miniman

@WrongOnTheInternet As someone who wasn't around for the whole process, and has a very biased POV about it, I'm definitely the wrong person to ask about that.

WrongOnTheInternet

Well, could we hypothetically ask an on-topic rpg question about RAW alone (in which RAW is the only tag)? Yes, we can ask what it is and how it came to be.

Given that it's linked to a whole mix of lens, playstyle, and subculture.

Miniman

1:03 AM

history-of-gaming

WrongOnTheInternet

Asking "What is RAW" would be a question with that sole tag, though.

Miniman

For sure!

Hmmm... terminology

WrongOnTheInternet

Those tags are also pretty clearly secondary to RAW on those questions though. The question would be just as valid with the one tag.

Anyhow... this statistics meta.

BESW

In theory, all tags should be sufficient as the only tag on a question.

(It's one of the basic checks for whether a tag is useful, though some Stacks make necessary exceptions for specific categories of their topic.)

WrongOnTheInternet

@BESW Yes, that's why I presented it. I wasn't initially convinced that it wasn't a meta-tag, and having an example question where it could be the only tag means that particular criticism is gone.

BESW

1:15 AM

@WrongOnTheInternet Ah, I get it.

BESW

1:31 AM

I have d&d tomorrow which will require me not to think about the Thirteenth Doctor for several hours at a time

Tweeted by NowWeAreAllTom on July 14, 2017 at 8:26 PM

Nice spread. What's game night look like at *your* house? https://twitter.com/d20monkey/status/885958601285742595

Tweeted by EvilHatOfficial on July 14, 2017 at 9:22 PM

@BESW This is the kind of thing that lets me know I've got exactly the right people in my feeds.

daze413

1:58 AM

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

ah, so that's how you don't get his arm to fall off

daze413

5:04 AM

The link here is dead:

6

Q: How can I make sure my character is awesome enough?

This question pulls quite a lot from Brian Ballsun-Stanton's paper on constrained optimisation (i.e. making your character awesome), so that might be a good thing to read. I know that in D&D there is an equation to show the damage per second (DPS) of your striker, which is quite handy for checki...

dnd-4e optimization rpg-theory

Can anyone fix the mendeley link to Dr. Ballsun-Stanton's paper?

BESW

Yes, but it'll take a little while to figure out which link is best for access vs rot.

That seems to be the best I can find right now.

I'll try to ask Brian next time I see him.

daze413

@BESW Thank you :D

Transcript for