Why is my question "Too Story Based"

The key difference between Story based and World based is Will vs Can respectively.

For example.

Will Joe Marine climb this mountain? <character and mountain specs>

That depends

• Is he lazy?
• Why is he there?
• What motives does he have for vs against?
• How's his life insurance?

If you can easily negate any answer by adding story details that can completely alter the dynamics of the situation, It's probably too story based.

VS

Can Joe Marine climb this mountain? <character and mountain specs>

Yes

<insert reference of ex-marine climbing a mountain without tools>

This answer is very hard to invalidate. Given a fitness level, and climbing difficulty, we can project how probable it is for Joe to achieve this task. You can add him getting shot at by snipers and mortars, but the answer is still he can. (That would make it much harder, but it is still possible)

A good rule of thumb test is try your best to answer your own question based on what you know. Now read the question again, but replace your world with another, completely different one, at the same tech level with the same restrictions (ex, Change Star Trek setting to Star Wars setting). Is your answer significantly weaker/stronger/invalidated now? If the answer is yes, it's too story bound.

How do I get it reopened

As you can see in the above examples, A Story vs World based question can be very subtle. One word was the difference between a fact-check question, and a highly controversial opinionated question. (That was intentional to draw attention to how blurry the line can be) So here are some guidelines to refining your story question into a world question.

Remove story details as much as possible. Focus on the restrictions the world places on the situation

You can also think of this as a "world transference rating". If you want to create a new world where this question could be applied, how hard would it be to apply the same answer to the new world/setting? Ideally, the same logic should apply to all worlds. So unless the new world has a mechanic that would complicate the answer, the same question/answer should work. (The affect of the new mechanic would be a new question, as you've changed the applicable world restrictions. Ex. continuous storm vs storm island. If the storm can't move, that changes the restrictions on how plausible the storm is.)

You can also read this as "remove as much information as you can without changing the actual question" Details beyond that are usually story fluff, and distract from the main question. This is why a lot of questions include "in this genre/world type" It establishes your worldly limitations without binding it to a specific story.

Facts are always better than opinions

Look to obtain verifiable, measurable information. While the usefulness of a C-4 boomerang is arguable, you can verify that it is (A) possible to make and (B) can do things normal grenades can't. In general, the more immutable the statements of an answer can be, the better the answer. So the question should ask for those kinds of answers.

It is common for questions to follow the form "Given these restrictions, what kind of outcome could I expect it to have?" or "What restrictions/events could cause this end state?"