05-26-2009, 12:34 AM | #11 |
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Madison, WI
|
Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
The [canon] tag also suggests its opposite, a [heresy] or [house rules] tag: in my campaign, the "heresies" that don't fall under an existing tag might include (1) the existence of Gray Celestials and (2) the "333 = Ethereal Intervention" rule. Do miscellaneous variations like that deserve their own category, in your opinion?
__________________
Ingeborg S. Nordén |
05-26-2009, 06:33 AM | #12 |
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Birthplace of the Worst Pizza on the Planet
|
Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
On things like Is Norden, I would suggest 'variants' as a tag instead of hereasies. While cute, it might confuse those who aren't familiar with her phraseology, particularly in a religious game.
|
05-26-2009, 07:42 AM | #13 | ||
Petitioner: Word of IN Filk
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Longmont, CO
|
Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
Quote:
Quote:
And while I know there's a tendency to have too many stickies, perhaps the "tags list" should become a permanent one, so that newcomers can easily see it and understand the terms we're using. (IMO, it can replace the outdated sticky for the Asmodeus playtest.)
__________________
“It's not railroading if you offer the PCs tickets and they stampede to the box office, waving their money. Metaphorically speaking” --Elizabeth McCoy, In Nomine Line Editor Author: "What Doesn't Kill Me Makes Me Stronger" |
||
05-26-2009, 08:29 AM | #14 |
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bellflower, CA
|
Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
If I have to choose one, I would go with Adventure.
Plots are assumed to eventually become adventures and, thinking about it now, I am not sure I would want to be that specific. I don't think we need to be. Just to keep things simple, I would go with Adventure |
05-26-2009, 06:41 PM | #15 | |
Untitled
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: between keyboard and chair
|
Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
Quote:
Compiling the suggestions:
Anything else? Edit: Something for Play-by-Post and other methods of playing at a distance, perhaps... but what? I'm drawing a blank on an appropriate term (assuming it's even something useful).
__________________
Rob Kelk “Every man has a right to his own opinion, but no man has a right to be wrong in his facts.” – Bernard Baruch, Deming (New Mexico) Headlight, 6 January 1950 No longer reading these forums regularly. |
|
05-26-2009, 06:48 PM | #16 | |
Petitioner: Word of IN Filk
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Longmont, CO
|
Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
Quote:
And while our valiant Archangel doesn't descend to give rulings as often as the Mighty Kromm, it might be helpful to have a tag that indicates the rare "official pronouncement." May I suggest "real mccoy"? :)
__________________
“It's not railroading if you offer the PCs tickets and they stampede to the box office, waving their money. Metaphorically speaking” --Elizabeth McCoy, In Nomine Line Editor Author: "What Doesn't Kill Me Makes Me Stronger" |
|
05-27-2009, 08:38 AM | #17 |
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Freiburg i. Brsg., Germany
|
Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
I think that there are systematic problems at the moment concerning the resources-tag, since at the moment there are other tags proposed which are, essentially, subsets of it (like artifacts or roles).
You could, of course, eliminate the subsets and have everything that is counted as a "resource" in the Core Rulebook (like Relics, Artifacts, Servants, Skills etc.) fall under said tag. It would avoid having too many tags around, though it might be confusing, especially to newcomers. And it could mean too much generalization. The other way would be to eliminate the resources-tag and add every Resource individually, although this meant that you'd have a whole bunch of tags essentially referring to the same "main theme". I'd go with the first option since I don't mind the generalization too much and think that the "newbies" will get comfortable with it soon. And what about capitalizing those tags that are capitalized notions in the system (like Resources, CDaU, Superiors etc.)? M.
__________________
"In matters of grave importance, style, not sincerity, is the vital thing." (Oscar Wilde, "The Importance of Being Earnest" , act 3) Last edited by Methariel; 05-27-2009 at 08:49 AM. Reason: Making a better post out of it. :) |
05-27-2009, 08:46 AM | #18 | |
Petitioner: Word of IN Filk
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Longmont, CO
|
Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
Quote:
As far as the other, I see your point, but I must respectfully disagree. "Resources" is an extremely broad category to use for a tag-search; if I'm searching for a thread on Songs, I don't want to have to wade through a bunch of discussions on skills, vessels, and artifacts to get there. Still, I may be wrong. I'm sure there may be situations I haven't thought of where a broad tag may be useful.
__________________
“It's not railroading if you offer the PCs tickets and they stampede to the box office, waving their money. Metaphorically speaking” --Elizabeth McCoy, In Nomine Line Editor Author: "What Doesn't Kill Me Makes Me Stronger" Last edited by Rocket Man; 05-27-2009 at 08:52 AM. |
|
05-27-2009, 09:00 AM | #19 |
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Freiburg i. Brsg., Germany
|
Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
I agree upon it being useful to know at first sight what a thread is about (although they sometimes tend to deviate heavily here ;) ), so maybe the broad "resources" isn't so good an idea as I thought first.
But then you should be consistent and have tags for all different kinds of resources so that none is left out; I believe we all can cope with the number of it. A broad "resources"-tag might have its uses if you want to discuss something that affected every resource equally, but the only example I have for this would be the spending of character points on resources or the general character point cost of them. But since this is something that is more concerned with game-mechanics than with the in-game effects of whatever resource, I think it should be labeled with the appropriate tag for game mechanics. (By the way, is there one?) M.
__________________
"In matters of grave importance, style, not sincerity, is the vital thing." (Oscar Wilde, "The Importance of Being Earnest" , act 3) |
05-27-2009, 09:02 AM | #20 |
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bellflower, CA
|
Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
How about double tagging it in that case? Resources so that we know it's the general category, and the specific type of resource for easier search?
such as... [Resources-Songs] [Resources-Relics] |
Tags |
meta, tags |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|