# [Merged] D&D forum renaming thread



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## Morrus

*Forum Reorganization .... Woah!*

Just a change of names so far, that’s all. I was worried about awesome D&D articles like the Jim Ward column getting the eyeballs they deserve.

I’ll see how it goes for a week or two while the mandatory reflex reactions settle down.


----------



## jayoungr

*D&D forums have merged?*

This is confusing.  Is there a way to tag the 5e threads automatically so I can filter for them?


----------



## Aridon

Unfortunately, it appears they have merged.  Hopefully this horrible idea will be reversed quickly.


----------



## Retreater

Also Pathfinder/Starfinder has been pulled out to its own forum. 

I wonder if the multiple editions of D&D being under one forum will be confusing? Also, I wonder if we'll see more edition warring? (For example, if I post asking a question about 4E - my preferred edition - will the 5E fans come and harass everyone?)


----------



## Dausuul

Aridon said:


> Unfortunately, it appears they have merged.  Hopefully this horrible idea will be reversed quickly.




I agree, this is a real pain. I just suggested awarding Inspiration to somebody playing 3.5.

I wouldn't mind having the non-edition-specific threads in common, but I don't want to see threads specific to previous editions when I'm here to talk 5E. And I dare say the folks playing those editions would rather not be spammed with 5E topics, either.


----------



## GlassJaw

Yeah it's terrible. Solution looking for a problem.


----------



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## jayoungr

lowkey13 said:


> Yeah, I had already posted something in meta-forum.




Oops, I didn't realize there was a meta-forum.  But I see the thread has been moved, so it's all good.  (Plus, anyone else in the D&D forum who's confused can see the placeholder and go to the right place.)


----------



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## LordEntrails

Make sure to tag your posts with the correct edition. Only thing we can do for now. Besides making fun of anyone who doesn't tag something that is edition specific.


----------



## Morrus

*Forum Reorganization .... Woah!*



lowkey13 said:


> I'm guessing .... not good.




I’m used to it. I could make it so every time you posted you got sent $10 and there would be a loud vocal faction who hate everything about it. I’ve learned not to worry about initial reaction to any change, and wait for things to settle. 



> Maybe just cross-post it to there? Is that possible?




Nope, not possible. It’s part of how articles interact with the forums.


----------



## Deset Gled

One problem I see is that there's a lot of older 3.x stuff currently in the "Pathfinder" section.  Stuff from relatively recently, as well as *years* of history in the old 3e Rules forums.  If you look at post statistics, it looks like this site is a Pathfinder site that recently jumped ship to D&D.

Would it be possible to only take [PF] tagged threads for the new Pathfinder forum, and take everything else to D&D where it belongs?  I don't think that gives proper separation between the Old School and New School stuff, but it would be a big step in the right direction.


----------



## Azzy

Yeah, I'm not digging this change either.


----------



## ParanoydStyle

...+1


----------



## shadowoflameth

Worst idea in the history of bad.


----------



## Morrus

shadowoflameth said:


> Worst idea in the history of bad.




Probably not, is it?


----------



## 77IM

Can you make the "Prefix" required when posting new threads?


----------



## Myrhdraak

Why are all the D&D 4e threads under Pathfinder/Starfinder? Will they be moved over to the D&D section or has Paizo bought the rights for 4th edition from WotC? (That would have been an interesting news item …)


----------



## Morrus

I haven’t moved all the threads yet. So far it’s just a name change.


----------



## CleverNickName

I don't want my peas mixed with my carrots (D&D mixed with Starfinder, for example).
But I don't mind having all my peas in one pod, either (all D&D forums combined into one).


----------



## Mort

Ok, I'm not crazy!

I clicked on the 5e tab in the app. Saw the ice storm thread, and everyone talking about how the spell has no save vs. Fireball, which does.

This made me very confused as Ice storm certainly has a save - in 5e.

In short, very confusing change, but I can adjust.


----------



## Yunru

This was a really poorly implemented move.
With the lack of tags on the majority of threads, we have to go on context to work out edition.
Honestly, that's a lot of reading I've just not got time for.

And even if tags are fully implemented, what then? People who want 5e filter by the 5e tag and we might as well of had the forums remain separate.
And don't even get me _started_ on the homebrew. Do we now have to choose between tagging it as a homebrew and stating what edition it's for?

EDIT: Not to mention the amount of traffic it's added. I'm seeing even popular threads getting pushed off the front page, less popular things (like Homebrew) just doesn't stand a chance.


----------



## DND_Reborn

Morrus said:


> I haven’t moved all the threads yet. So far it’s just a name change.




Can you give us a reason for this change? If you can, we might be able to more understand why it is happening. Thanks!


----------



## trancejeremy

I think it can be a bit confusing because just what is D&D? All editions is one things, but what about D&D based games that aren't D&D? The host of 3e spinoffs or the dozens of OSR games that don't have anything to do with D&D? (Though none of those really get much talk here, so kinda a moot point)


----------



## Zardnaar

Should probably have 3 sections. 5E, Paizo, Previou Editions. Shrugs.


----------



## oreofox

I agree with Zardnaar. Having to sift through old edition threads for 5th edition isn't all that intuitive. If you do want all D&D in one, make "subforums" within the D&D portion of the forum. Make the main 5th edition (or the current edition), then one subforum for 4th, one for 3rd, and one for AD&D. Having everything mixed together is just a pain.


----------



## Morrus

Side note -- you can sort threads by tag.


----------



## Aridon

Morrus said:


> I haven’t moved all the threads yet. So far it’s just a name change.




Why, Oh why, did you do this?  Makes the forum difficult to use.  Please reverse the merger!
Thanks


----------



## lkj

I don't know. Clicking the 5E filter (or whatever) doesn't feel like that much of a burden to me. But that's just my opinion.

Question though: Is it possible to get tags added to existing threads that don't have them? At least fairly current ones? (Like, for example, The Ghost of Saltmarsh Maps thread).  Not a big deal, and a temporary problem. But just noticed that when I clicked the filter I lost a few threads I had been keeping an eye out for. 

Edit to add: Oh, and is it possible to give a thread multiple tags? That would be cool. Totally understand if not.

AD


----------



## Yunru

Morrus said:


> Side note -- you can sort threads by tag.






lkj said:


> I don't know. Clicking the 5E filter (or whatever) doesn't feel like that much of a burden to me. But that's just my opinion.




But at that point you might as well have had a subforum. It has the same effect, except now it's less newbie friendly (and relies on people actually tagging their post).


----------



## ParanoydStyle

What existing problems was this change meant to fix?



Zardnaar said:


> Should probably have 3 sections. 5E, Paizo, Previou Editions. Shrugs.




That sounds like a better organizational scheme.


----------



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------



## pukunui

lowkey13 said:


> It doesn't solve the "Jim Ward" problem (luminary who deserves more traffic), but it seems that we are creating a huge problem by solving something that doesn't pop up very often.



Allowing us to filter by tag doesn’t help with this “problem” either, since the Jim Ward post isn’t tagged, so anyone who’s just viewing the filtered forum still won’t see it.


----------



## Deset Gled

Could I suggest moving the "General" Forum to the top of the forum list, and the "Dungeons & Dragons" forum second?  I think having a forum for all D&D combined is going to cause more general discussion to happen there.  Having the General forum on top might help encourage people to use it for non-game-specific discussion.


----------



## pukunui

ParanoydStyle said:


> What existing problems was this change meant to fix?



From the man himself:



Morrus said:


> I was worried about awesome D&D articles like the Jim Ward column getting the eyeballs they deserve.


----------



## Azzy

Morrus said:


> I was worried about awesome D&D articles like the Jim Ward column getting the eyeballs they deserve.




Is there a way to have such threads be tagged to show up in multiple subforums?


----------



## Ludd_G

Unless tagging is obligatory (and really should be retroactively implemented) it's going to make using the forums a less user friendly experience, and I imagine I'll be using it much less (yes, I know, low post count, but a long time reader). FWIW I'm exclusively interested in 5e content, for which this site has been my go to resource.

Please consider undoing the changes.

Cheers, Ludd


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Did anyone else have a bunch of subscribed threads become unsubscribed when this reorganization happened?


----------



## Morrus

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Did anyone else have a bunch of subscribed threads become unsubscribed when this reorganization happened?




Since all I did was change the name of two forums, there’s no way it could have unsubscribed you from anything.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion

Morrus said:


> Since all I did was change the name of two forums, there’s no way it could have unsubscribed you from anything.




Then some other glitch happened at about the same time. I only keep subscriptions to threads I have commented on, and I go through every few months and unsubscribe to the oldest stuff that has gone inactive or that I no longer have interest in. So I probably had between 5 and 10 subscribed threads since the last time I did that. But when I realized I was only getting email notifications for one thread, even though there should have been others, I checked my list and there was only that one thread subscribed. I went ahead and unsubscribed from that one, since I was not reading it anymore, but I have no idea what happened to the rest that should have still been on my list.

Edit: and I just went now to look and make sure this thread was showing as subscribed, and there are 24 other threads showing now that were not when I made my other post. Some of the ones showing again are ones I was sure I had manually unsubscribed to, so something weird is going on.


----------



## CapnZapp

I don't get it.

If the only thing changed is name changes, that sounds like a shruggable edit.

If, OTOH, now 3E, 4E and 5E threads are jumbled together that's a huge change, and a very unfortunate one.


----------



## jayoungr

I've given it some time, but I'm still not a fan.  I agree that Jim Ward's column is wonderful, but I don't think it was worth the confusion the merge has created.


----------



## Yunru

I know I said it early, but I just want to restate it to confirm that it's not a knee-jerk reaction:
Unless edition tagging is mandatory (and somehow retroactively applied), it's just unusable ATM. 
Filter by 5e? Miss out on the untagged 5e threads.
Use no filter? Wade through everything else and hope that the interesting untagged thread is about 5e.


----------



## Tormyr

Morrus said:


> I’m used to it. I could make it so every time you posted you got sent $10 and there would be a loud vocal faction who hate everything about it. I’ve learned not to worry about initial reaction to any change, and wait for things to settle.




I am willing to beta test this feature.


----------



## pogre

I don't mind it. I would throw pathfinder in there too and move starfinder to general.


----------



## 77IM

[MENTION=6780961]Yunru[/MENTION] is right. I care about two kinds of posts:
 - relevant to 5E
 - relevant to all editions of D&D

However, there's currently no filter that shows me what I want. I need to either open the forum twice, or "filter with my eyeballs." I'd love it if tags were mandatory, and there were a viewing mode that showed both threads tagged with 5E _and_ threads tagged with "All Editions." The best UI would be to make the filter selection check-boxes and I can include the editions I want. But now I'm just dreaming.


----------



## CapnZapp

Forums have subforums for a reason.


----------



## Lanefan

So far I don't mind this change.

The problem with forced tagging is that sometimes questions asked* or discussions raised regarding one D&D edition either already have an answer in another or are applicable to more than just that one edition even if the OP doesn't realize it and-or only cares about one.

* - with the exception of specific rules questions; "rules" maybe should have its own sub-forum inside D&D with tagging mandatory in that sub-forum only.


----------



## Myrhdraak

pukunui said:


> From the man himself:




Well I am worried that a lot of really awesome D&D articles on older D&D articles will be buried under pathfinder/starfinder as they are not moved over to the D&D forum. I do no think that more than 20-30% of the 1.4 million posts in there is really about pathfinder or starfinder.
Would have  made more sense to have those sorted out and moved to a new forum and then renamed the remaining to "Older D&D editions".


----------



## Myrhdraak

Deset Gled said:


> One problem I see is that there's a lot of older 3.x stuff currently in the "Pathfinder" section.  Stuff from relatively recently, as well as *years* of history in the old 3e Rules forums.  If you look at post statistics, it looks like this site is a Pathfinder site that recently jumped ship to D&D.
> 
> Would it be possible to only take [PF] tagged threads for the new Pathfinder forum, and take everything else to D&D where it belongs?  I don't think that gives proper separation between the Old School and New School stuff, but it would be a big step in the right direction.




If there is no intent to do this sorting from the administrator side (which I am not sure there is or not as we still have not recieved an answer to that question yet in these forums), please provide the means for thread owners to at least change them themselves. If the later is somehow is possible, please provide instructions on how it is done, because I have not figured it out yet


----------



## Eltab

Morrus said:


> I was worried about awesome D&D articles like the Jim Ward column getting the eyeballs they deserve.



 Sticky-ing a really excellent article sounds like less work than reorganizing the whole forum board.


----------



## CapnZapp

Morrus said:


> Just a change of names so far, that’s all.



I somehow don't think it's just a name change.


----------



## CapnZapp

Morrus said:


> I’ve learned not to worry about initial reaction to any change, and wait for things to settle.



Does this mean it's pointless to ask to change it back?

When do "initial reaction" turn into legitimate concern?


----------



## CapnZapp

Maybe merge this thread with other forum reorg thread? This way you don't have to respond in both, [MENTION=27229]MoR[/MENTION]rus.


----------



## CapnZapp

When can we expect a response on this?


----------



## Garthanos

*4e is not Pathfinder*

This in response to the structure and naming of the forum.

/just saying


----------



## Jester David

Looks like some forum shuffling is in the works here, with more subforums and tagging going on. The old threads not yet being moved over yet.


----------



## Yunru

Yes well, add it to the list of "things wrong/unpopular about the new layout that feel like they're being ignored."


----------



## Morrus

The forum names have been changed, but no threads have been moved yet as that's a much bigger job.

Bu because you showed so much concern about correct forum placement, I moved your thread to the correct form. You are very welcome.


----------



## Garthanos

Hoping it presages improved organization.


----------



## Yunru

Captain's Log. Day 19 of this "week or two" exploration. Still lost. Things appear in the wrong places, I can't find any points of reference, and all the things I'm looking for a hidden behind piles of detritus. Running out of in


----------



## Tony Vargas

I like the idea of organizing the D&D-ish forums that way.  A D&D forum, with the editions as sub-forums, nice & neat.  Definitely better than rolling older editions in with PF.  (I could see rolling OSR, 13A, and other D&D-derivatives in with PF, giving them their own sub-forums, too.)

But, all the older-edition posts, at least the ones explicitly tagged with an ed, really need to be moved from the PF/SF forum, to their respective D&D sub-forums.  

Once that's sorted, it'll be more intuitive.


----------



## jayoungr

I ask this respectfully, but could we please get a decision as soon as possible?  And if you've decided to keep all the D&D together, could you make an official announcement about it so people know they absolutely need to start tagging threads?  Because people still aren't, which makes the filter function basically not helpful.


----------



## Yunru

jayoungr said:


> Because people still aren't, which makes the filter function basically not helpful.




Yeah, I've seen a few threads like that.


----------



## GlassJaw

Any status on when this failed experiment is going to be reverted?


----------



## jayoungr

I just realized something else that's an issue if the forums stay merged.  You can only put one tag on a thread, so if you tag it with an edition, you can't also tag it "Homebrew" or "DDAL" or one of the others.  (Though DDAL implies 5E, I guess, since that term wasn't used in earlier editions.)


----------



## Tony Vargas

jayoungr said:


> I just realized something else that's an issue if the forums stay merged.  You can only put one tag on a thread, so if you tag it with an edition, you can't also tag it "Homebrew" or "DDAL" or one of the others.  (Though DDAL implies 5E, I guess, since that term wasn't used in earlier editions.)




I hadn't thought of that.
Actual sub-forums would be better, rather than counting on tags.


----------



## CapnZapp

Tony Vargas said:


> Actual sub-forums would be better



...


----------



## Yunru

Day 25 people! Another 6 and we'll definitely have been at it for at least one month, no matter which you pick!
I'm sure this experiment will have collected data by then, right?


----------



## Morrus

Somehow this thread keeps getting shorter.


----------



## CapnZapp

I hope and trust that doesn't mean you're putting forumists that ask you to reconsider on your Ignore list.


----------



## Yunru

Don't worry, next we'll be removing the ability to format posts, for science!


----------



## Yunru

CapnZapp said:


> I hope and trust that doesn't mean you're putting forumists that ask you to reconsider on your Ignore list.




Well, I mean...
My comments regarding the sneak previews of the next Touch of Class needing 5e tags were just straight up removed, so...

The new layout works fine because people can search by tags, despite the majority not using tags, including the ruler of the board, and comments regarding the usage of tags are being deleted.

Seige Heil?


----------



## CapnZapp

I completely disapprove of this heinous comparison and want nothing to do with it.


----------



## Yunru

CapnZapp said:


> I completely disapprove of this heinous comparison and want nothing to do with it.




I'm sorry, should I have picked a different totalitarian regime to draw comparison to?
I mean, I would, but none have a recognisable short statement to my knowledge.


----------



## Morrus

Yunru said:


> Well, I mean...
> My comments regarding the sneak previews of the next Touch of Class needing 5e tags were just straight up removed, so...
> 
> The new layout works fine because people can search by tags, despite the majority not using tags, including the ruler of the board, and comments regarding the usage of tags are being deleted.
> 
> Seige Heil?






Yunru said:


> I'm sorry, should I have picked a different totalitarian regime to draw comparison to?
> I mean, I would, but none have a recognisable short statement to my knowledge.




Completely unacceptable.

I want to make it clear that there is a zero tolerance policy towards abusive language, especially language as offensive as this, directed at me or any staff here.

Yunru, you are no longer welcome at this site.

Everybody, you need to remember that you are guests, and if you treat your hosts badly you will be asked to leave. Coming into my house and making it unpleasant for me means only one of us is staying.


----------



## DectectiveCharizard

What will happen to    [MENTION=6780961]Yunru[/MENTION]'s post? I oft use their Monk guide, for instance? On discord, they talk of delete?

OT: How to get rid of the accidental extra c in my name?

To be topical, now I have account might not be so hard, but recent change made manually keeping up with posts hard.


----------



## jayoungr

Bump to note that it's now been a month, and we're still in limbo...


----------



## Myrhdraak

Still waiting to have all my 4th edititon threads moved to the new structure, as they are now hidden under Pathfinder.
I have not seen a single thread being moved into the new structure. If the ambition level at least was to move one a day, or better 100 per week, it would at least indicate some ambition level


----------



## oknazevad

Yeah, it's really inappropriate (for lack of a better word) for 4e threads to be under the Pathfinder forum. 

Tagging isn't sufficient, either. I think a tree structure of subfora under the general D&D forum for past editions makes the best sense. Maybe also have a separate subforum for 5e rules questions and homebrew. That way the general news discussion and higher-level discussions or such wouldn't be swamped by too much theory crafting of minutia.


----------



## Tony Vargas

Myrhdraak said:


> Still waiting to have all my 4th edititon threads moved to the new structure, as they are now hidden under Pathfinder.
> I have not seen a single thread being moved into the new structure. If the ambition level at least was to move one a day, or better 100 per week, it would at least indicate some ambition level



 Would bumping them with the note "Please move to the D&D forum" help?

Is there any way to add a tag to an old thread you, yourself, started?


----------



## Morrus

That would not help, no.

Folks, right now we have a nasty bug which means moving threads is a problem. It’s being worked on.


----------



## Garthanos

Morrus said:


> That would not help, no.
> 
> Folks, right now we have a nasty bug which means moving threads is a problem. It’s being worked on.




Thanks for the info


----------



## Garthanos

Thanks for getting the thread moving working!!!!!!


----------



## Tony Vargas

Wow, that is so much better.  

Thanks Morrus!


----------



## Myrhdraak

Thanks. Now all the 4th edition stuff is in the right forum. Great work!
/Myrhdraak


----------

