I'm making a new thread because I'm tired of people just responding to the old thread's title, when I've already moved on.
We might make a new forum, but we won't do it today. We have a lot of forums, and adding another needs to be carefully considered. For one thing, I don't even know what we'd call that forum. Is it going to be called "5th edition"? Magic 8-Ball says "I dunno, check back later."
For now, think of the 4e forum as the "current state of Dungeons & Dragons" forum.
I know! I'm the one who complained about having to scroll through so many to get to the ones that matter. If careful consideration is called for, then I will be happy to have a dialogue on the philosophy of categorization.
To some extent, categories are always arbitrary. There is always some other type of scheme that could have been used to distinguish between types of things, and always some other level of granularity that could have been applied.
Let me make that concrete. You're deciding where to put the manual for your new ACME Widgizmo in your filing cabinet. Does it go under ACME, ACME - Widgizmo, gizmos, gizmos - ACME, widgets, widgets - ACME, or Widgizmo? And do you really have to do everything the same way, or could it depend on how willing you are to shuffle through folders and how many things would end up in each folder?
Of course, that's just you. In multi-user categories, it seems to me that different schema prioritize between four perspectives: the data itself, the one who puts it there, the one who maintains it, and the ones who look for it.
In the case of the Paizo fora, the data is the posts themselves, and a good scheme from their perspective is one that produces an elegantly logical arrangement. The people who place the data are posters, and well-chosen fora from their perspective are ones that make it clear where to put posts. The maintainers are the mods, and I expect some sense of responsibility to their employer, making sure that the scheme is good for Paizo. For lookers, a good set of categories is one that makes it easy to find posts that they would want to read.
So. Let me throw out some possibilities and consider them from each perspective.
One is to simply add a 5e forum under the 4e one. It has the advantages of being logically consistent with the precedent of a 4e forum, being clear to posters, and lookers can easily find 4e or 5e posts without having to scan through a jumble of irrelevant stuff. However, it would facilitate pre-release excitement over a competitor's easily-idealized product that can't disappoint, because it doesn't exist yet.
Another is to turn the 4e forum into a 4e-and-later forum. It has the advantages of being clear to posters, not adding to the number of fora, and making it more difficult to have a coherent dialogue about a competitor's products. However, it would be increasingly useless for lookers over time.
Another is create a forum for Future RPGs (including major edition changes). It has the advantages of elegance in requiring only the one new forum *total* to contain all such discussion, including possible Pathfinder edition changes; it would eventually become clear to posters; and due to being future-oriented, it would always remain useful to lookers wanting to read about the soon-to-be latest thing. However, it would merely postpone the choice of where to put discussion of the new RPG (or edition thereof) when it comes out.
Writing this all out has given me an idea that I did not have before. (That is one of the uses of philosophy.) Using option #3, to be followed by option #1 once the future RPG is released, would maximize the positives and minimize the negatives of both. I mean, make a Future RPGs forum for all in-discussion-yet-unreleased RPGs and major edition changes; and when 5e becomes an actual released product that you can purchase, read, play, and be disappointed by, then it gets its own forum right under 4e. Bam! All upside, no down.
Anyway. You get the idea. There are lots of different ways to do it. It isn't even just a question of how you want to prioritize the perspectives; sometimes you can find creative win/win solutions like I did.
I agree. (although I stopped reading after the title, I'm afraid).
Chief Technical Officer
|
I mean, make a Future RPGs forum for all in-discussion-yet-unreleased RPGs and major edition changes; and when 5e becomes an actual released product that you can purchase, read, play, and be disappointed by, then it gets its own forum right under 4e. Bam! All upside, no down.
Except for the person who has to go in to the future RPGs forum after every future RPG is released to figure out which threads need to be moved.
I mean, make a Future RPGs forum for all in-discussion-yet-unreleased RPGs and major edition changes; and when 5e becomes an actual released product that you can purchase, read, play, and be disappointed by, then it gets its own forum right under 4e. Bam! All upside, no down.Except for the person who has to go in to the future RPGs forum after every future RPG is released to figure out which threads need to be moved.
There is also the confusion from when I come to the forum looking for a discussion of a variety of science fiction RPGs.
I mean, make a Future RPGs forum for all in-discussion-yet-unreleased RPGs and major edition changes; and when 5e becomes an actual released product that you can purchase, read, play, and be disappointed by, then it gets its own forum right under 4e. Bam! All upside, no down.Except for the person who has to go in to the future RPGs forum after every future RPG is released to figure out which threads need to be moved.
Easy peasy! None of them. I've been the fan typing furiously in thread after thread of an unreleased (usually computer) gaming product, and the speculation generally doesn't quite match up to the reality. And where beta experiences are useful after release, there's a beta tester handy to share her insight.
There is also the confusion from when I come to the forum looking for a discussion of a variety of science fiction RPGs.
Well it's not like I expect "uh okay Fredrik whatever you say". I'm just one guy. The total creative capacity of this community is overwhelming, and I'd love to hear suggestions for a better title. But a snarky drive-by? Kind of useless.
@deinol: I apologize. I know for a fact that your post was useful, because I eventually used it. How's this:
It's clear what it is; and to me, it's clear that no threads will be moved when their topic is released, since they're all about when it was unreleased. (I wouldn't even see the point in a disclaimer at the top, since people generally expect their threads to stay where they put them -- believe it or not.)
So. All of the benefits that I outlined in my OP, with no ambiguity and no extra work for anyone. 8)
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
To me, "Future RPGs" and "Unreleased RPGs" are functionally equivalent, and have the same problem, which is that stuff three won't always be in the future or unreleased... and people *will* post in thread in that forum long after they're released, which means that people who are looking for discussion on that topic will miss it.
In short, I don't think it solves the problem.
Thing is, I can't picture who would *mind* about pre-release threads being left where they were put (and occasionally necro'd). It looks to me like we're talking crosswise as a result, so I'll just chalk it up to a failure of imagination on my part and let it drop. <rueful grin>
Thank you for engaging in the dialogue. It's something that I never expect and always appreciate. :)