11
\$\begingroup\$

A recent question asks:

Was there [a specific statement] made by [a designer with special ruling privileges in the game] or other official sources?

I am only looking for this quote, I am not interested in logic/quotes from the books since I know they do not explicitly answer this.

This borders on designer intent (but is probably not) and is similar to a Shopping question (but also not quite). How should we handle questions like this?

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I had the same concerns about that question... It's not a "designer intent" question, but seems to have the same issues as designer-intent questions do. \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast
    Commented Aug 8, 2018 at 0:53

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
11
\$\begingroup\$

That looks like it’s trying to solve the same problem to me, making it a duplicate.

“Is X true about Y?” has a problem to solve: what is the rule about X and Y. Asking a second question about whether a designer had said so is trying to solve the same problem: what is the rule about X and Y.

Generally, a question that amounts to “Is the answer to that other question actually right?” is going to be a duplicate, no matter what new angle it’s trying to bring in.

There’s an additional issue in that we’re not an Internet sleuth service, and it’s asking us to hunt down a thing. That’s often iffy. But to me, looking like a duplicate is a bigger issue.

\$\endgroup\$
3
  • \$\begingroup\$ Someone asked "Was Julius Caesar a left-hander?" Another person asks "Were all romans left-handers?" Is it a duplicate? It does not look like "is the answer to that other question actually right" for me. \$\endgroup\$
    – enkryptor
    Commented Aug 8, 2018 at 4:27
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ @enkryptor If Crawford has tweeted about the rule, someone will eventually answer the first question using that tweet. Asking, “could someone find his tweet that answers the other question” is just asking for a certain kind of answer to the other question. If it’s an answer, it’ll be written. It’s unnecessary to ask twice. \$\endgroup\$
    – SevenSidedDie
    Commented Aug 8, 2018 at 5:51
  • \$\begingroup\$ @thedarkwanderer I think you’re misreading the answer. What you’re talking about is normal healthy site use. You’re not at all talking about two questions that match, with the second different only by asking us to confirm the first. You’re talking about posting a new question that’s spun out from a detail of another Q and its answers. \$\endgroup\$
    – SevenSidedDie
    Commented Aug 9, 2018 at 16:10
10
\$\begingroup\$

Close it

As you said, it is just too similar to :

  • It is not a problem to solve. The actual problem (if class features are optional or not) doesn't need designer's quote for an answer.
  • It is hard to prove a negative, especially when the answer saying "He didn't say it because the rules are not like that" is not accepted by the asker. You simply can't prove Crawford never said anything about Fireball not being Cold damage as well.

While, usually, these reasons would only be reasons for down voting (at least IMO), the similarity with designer-reasons leads me to believe that if this kind of question becomes popular, then we will have the same (usually moderation) problems again.

\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .