Roll20 uses cookies to improve your experience on our site. Cookies enable you to enjoy certain features, social sharing functionality, and tailor message and display ads to your interests on our site and others. They also help us understand how our site is being used. By continuing to use our site, you consent to our use of cookies. Update your cookie preferences .
×
Advertisement Create a free account
This post has been closed. You can still view previous posts, but you can't post any new replies.

[Tag issue] World of Darkness

1430326702
To the person who just updated the tags, first off... thank you for at least looking at them. Secondly, No. "World of Darkness (Vampire, Werewolf, Mage, etc)" does not cover something fundermentally different with each thing. Each WoD game is different. Not only is Forsaken NOTHING like Apocalypse(sp); Requirem is nothing like Masquerade(sp). New World of Darkness cannot ever be mushed up with Old World of Darkness; if you had to condense tags... please keep it simple "NWOD" + "CWOD/OWOD" would do it, at a push. But you've just made it harder for LFG listings to find the correct players... as we now have to shift through vampire games when we want Werewolf or new games from old - so please - as a technical issue, look at this for us. Thank you.
1430331568

Edited 1430333006
Nolan T. J.
Roll20 Team
The thanks goes to Steve (and it truly is a thanks), with a little help from Adam. Here's the changes made: For those not familiar, our goal with the tags ties into Looking for Group-- we want each tag to have enough games that when you look at it, there's available games (because if folks look at an area and see NO games, you're quite likely to never check again). We also use the information to populate our Industry Report . This is never going to be perfect-- I believe Adam said something very true along the lines of "humans are very bad at categories," but it can help alleviate some of the pain in gathering differing communities throughout the site. One of the biggest problems I see right now is that "Other Games" is huge... but I'm not sure if that's something we'll ever be able to solve, simply because so many people play very niche or radically homebrewed systems. Anywho, this is the sort of thing we are always looking at (there's no other site feature that we compile into a quarterly report), so it is never long forgotten. When there is a larger population of one element of "World of Darkness" game to the point it needs its own category, we'll do that (just as we've maintained a separate "Dungeon World" tag as opposed to the rest of the "Powered by the Apocalypse" engine).
1430333081
Whilst I can honestly see the reason for combining tags, you mistake something... NWoD and CWoD are as different as they are the same... like with all D&D editions. I hope that is something Adam considers next time he's messing with tags.
1430333326
Nolan T. J.
Roll20 Team
Just to clarify, it was Steve who took the lead here-- Adam just with some additional input-- but we're all behind it for the current populations. Warhammer is getting an equally difficult combination of unrelated systems, but we view it as the best solution for now.
I agree with Gary here, this is a complete mistake. All the WoD games are way too different for them to be grouped together, specially old and new WoD, and this applies to w40k and all others. If you want to alleviate this problem with people not seeing any games, how about you make a second sub category. So let's say I select WoD in the main category, none in the second one, I'll see everything that's WoD. If I select WoD then let's say Vampire: The Masquerade, then I'll see the VtM games only. Same example with w40k, let's say I pick w40k then Dark Heresy as the subtype. As it is now, it will confuse people, frustrate them and will make it more difficult to find what they're looking for. There's no point in people having to click every single campaign to check what the campaign is actually about.
1430716749
I concur with the others here... This was a mistake... While you said: " For those not familiar, our goal with the tags ties into Looking for Group-- we want each tag to have enough games that when you look at it, there's available games (because if folks look at an area and see NO games, you're quite likely to never check again). " I'd also like to counter that, if we go into the LfG and find a listing that shows available games, but indeed those games are not available, then we are also less likely to check it again because it proved to be incorrect and, like it or not, it feels like it was deceptive... Which is kind of exactly what you are seeming to say it is... You want it to look like there are games there when, in this case, there clearly aren't.