High Programmer > Alan De Smet > Rants > A Link to a Discussion is Neither an Answer Nor a Discussion

A Link to a Discussion is Neither an Answer Nor a Discussion

Someone on a forum will ask a question. Someone else will respond with a list of other discussions to go read. To contrive an example for a fantasy role-playing game like Dungeons & Dragons:

Bob
The spell animal form says the caster can turn into "any animal." What sorts of animals are included? Manticores? Aren't humans arguably animals? What about dragons?


Hank
Read these discussions:
www.example.com/300-page-discussion-on-every-spell-in-the-game
example.net/marginally-related-discussion
www.example.org/long-discussion-using-site-local-jargon
www.example.org/discussion-that-is-mostly-links-to-even-more-discussions

Stop it. It's not helpful.

You're implying that this new discussion should not occur because something similar has happened before. That's not how discussions happen.

You are, intentionally or not, discouraging people from joining your community. They asked a question and in response received a curt response. Worse, that response carries the implication that to participate in the community there is required reading. And it's not short required reading. In a recent example, someone was pointed to 86 posts and comments. At one point I was directed to a half-dozen forum threads, each of which had hundreds of comments, and most of which began with, "Before continuing, be sure you've read these other half-dozen forum threads," creating a reading list of literally thousands of posts.

You were asked a question, the appropriate response is an answer. A discussion is not an answer.

So, please, just stop it.

Now, links to discussions aren't always bad! The keys are: 1. Provide context for why you think the discussion is worth reading. 2. Highlight noteworthy parts in the discussion. 3. Link to provide optional context, not required reading. 4. Actually discuss things and have opinions!

Here's a much better reply:

Bob
The spell animal form says the caster can turn into "any animal." What sorts of animals are included? Aren't humans arguably animals? What about dragons?


Hank

I limit the spell to "natural" animals, basically stuff that really exists on Earth. Anything more is too powerful for game balance. The fantasy monsters just have powers that are too much. A kraken can "destroy any ship as a free action." Can you picture the havok that would cause in a sea-faring game? I found this discussion on www.example.com/300-page-discussion-on-every-spell-in-the-game helpful for forming this view; the discussion on animal form starts on page 73.

This is technically a heretical view, the authors intended it to be limited to non-intelligent animals, but to include fantastic creatures. The argument is hinged on the ability of the GM to pick which of a creature's power the caster can use. I'm not a fan because it seems pretty weaksauce to say, "Sure you can be a kraken, but you can't do the kraken's signature move." (example.net/marginally-related-discussion#comment-31841 , look for the 2012-12-17 post by Alice.)

There is an interesting argument for absolutely anything, and why it's not a big deal for game balance. It covers a lot of territory including arguments about why turning into specific people or even beings of pure energy isn't a big deal. www.example.org/long-discussion-using-site-local-jargon

The above links and more came from www.example.org/discussion-that-is-mostly-links-to-even-more-discussions which is really a clearinghouse of discussions about animal form. If you've got hours of time to read darn near everything ever said on the matter, that's where I'd start.

Pretty much any of those first three paragraphs would stand well on their own, as well.

If you absolutely must just dump some links, phrase your introduction to minimize the implication that they somehow constitute required reading.

Bob
The spell animal form says the caster can turn into "any animal." What sorts of animals are included? Aren't humans arguably animals? What about dragons?


Hank

If you're interested in some earlier discussions, check these out:
www.example.com/300-page-discussion-on-every-spell-in-the-game
example.net/marginally-related-discussion#comment-31841 (look for the 2012-12-17 post by Alice, the game's designer)
www.example.org/long-discussion-using-site-local-jargon
www.example.org/discussion-that-is-mostly-links-to-even-more-discussions

Contact webmaster - Copyright © 2013 Alan De Smet (2013-09-29)