D&D Wiki - User contributions [en]

User talk:Green Dragon

2010-11-05T12:58:22Z

TK-Squared: /* My User Page */ loltk

{{:User:Green Dragon/Top Template}}
{{Messages of Interest|messages=
{{MoI-Row
|page=Category_talk:Candidates_for_Deletion
|section=Idea_for_half-completed_pages
|notifier=Jazzman831
|date_time=21:09, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=LA_7_Races&oldid=397215
|section=
|notifier=Green Dragon
|date_time=22:09, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Green_Dragon
|section=Taking Author Information off Pages
|notifier=Jwguy
|date_time=01:40, 6 November 2009 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Detect_Disease_(3.5e_Spell)
|section=Author Template
|notifier=Daniel Draco
|date_time=13:55, 6 October 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Detect_Disease_(3.5e_Spell)
|section=Author Template
|notifier=Daniel Draco
|date_time=03:15, 4 October 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:SRD3e:System_Reference_Document
|section=Basic Character Classes
|notifier=Hooper
|date_time=16:45, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Hooper/Banned_Material
|section=Hugh?
|notifier=Lord Dhazriel
|date_time=17:57, 18 September 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Jason_Bagby
|section=Deletion Template on User Page
|notifier=Hooper
|date_time=17:05, 5 September 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Admin
|section=Transcribed Wizards of the Coast Online Archives
|notifier=TheWarforgedArtificer
|date_time=16:15, 5 September 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Admin
|section=Transcribed Wizards of the Coast Online Archives
|notifier=TheWarforgedArtificer
|date_time=16:01, 5 September 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Deviant_(3.5e_Class)
|section=Author Template
|notifier=Sulacu
|date_time=13:58, 28 August 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Knightwarrior_(3.5e_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Lord Dhazriel
|date_time=21:57, 27 August 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Calidore_Chase
|section=No longer an Admin?
|notifier=Calidore Chase
|date_time=12:51, 15 August 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:Spell
|section=
|notifier=TheWarforgedArtificer
|date_time=00:12, 8 August 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:Spell
|section=
|notifier=TheWarforgedArtificer
|date_time=23:58, 7 August 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Half-Troll_(4e_Race)
|section=Formatting
|notifier=Sepsis
|date_time=14:57, 3 August 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:4e_Power
|section=Strangeness
|notifier=Taritus
|date_time=13:40, 22 July 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:4e_Power
|section=Strangeness
|notifier=Taritus
|date_time=13:39, 22 July 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Ironbound_(3.5e_Prestige_Class)
|section=locked
|notifier=GaaaaaH
|date_time=04:59, 12 July 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Dungeons_and_Dragons
|section=DPL?
|notifier=Daniel Draco
|date_time=22:13, 24 June 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:4e_Artifact_Part_1
|section=
|notifier=Sabreheim
|date_time=21:34, 11 June 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Rod_of_Orcus_(4e_Artifact)
|section=Template Issues
|notifier=Sepsis
|date_time=16:08, 11 June 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Green_Dragon
|section=Harassment
|notifier=Sepsis
|date_time=07:45, 31 May 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Giant_(4e_Race)
|section=Response
|notifier=Sepsis
|date_time=07:37, 31 May 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Category_talk:Martial_Adept
|section=
|notifier=Daniel Draco
|date_time=19:57, 28 May 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Nature_Bound_(DnD_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Sabreheim
|date_time=15:26, 28 May 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Daunting_Assailant_(DnD_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Daniel Draco
|date_time=15:46, 8 April 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Regiment_(3.5e_Template)
|section=Can't Access the Page Anymore
|notifier=Aarnott
|date_time=15:27, 6 April 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:Weapon_Desc
|section=
|notifier=Sabre070
|date_time=21:52, 7 November 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Main_Page
|section=Moving to new MediaWiki version
|notifier=Blue Dragon
|date_time=13:36, 28 October 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Bodily_Relics
|section=Talk:Bodily Relics?
|notifier=Rithaniel
|date_time=10:28, 16 October 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:DnD_Abyssal_Heritor_Feats
|section=DPL
|notifier=Aarnott
|date_time=11:08, 28 July 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Soul-Mate_(DnD_Feat)
|section=
|notifier=Xdeletedx
|date_time=23:03, 19 July 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Snake-Sword_(DnD_Equipment)
|section=
|notifier=Eiji
|date_time=02:07, 30 June 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Main_Page
|section=WYSIWYG extension
|notifier=Aarnott
|date_time=10:35, 20 June 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Snow_Silver_(3.5e_Equipment)
|section=
|notifier=Ice Paul the III
|date_time=13:21, 6 June 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Myrmidon_(DnD_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Kisame93
|date_time=08:16, 26 May 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=UA_talk:Variant_Rules
|section=Two Complete Chapters
|notifier=OptimizationFanatic
|date_time=15:15, 11 May 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Expanded_Religions_(DnD_Variant_Rule)
|section=Featured Article Nomination
|notifier=Hawk
|date_time=07:23, 28 March 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Regiment_(DnD_Template)
|section=Call out for help!
|notifier=Aarnott
|date_time=16:58, 17 March 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:Main_Page_FA
|section=
|notifier=Sam Kay
|date_time=13:21, 16 March 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Publishers_of_d20_and_D&D_Products
|section=
|notifier=Ramses IV
|date_time=11:15, 16 March 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Mesoamerican_Gods_and_Goddessess_(DnD_Pantheon)
|section=
|notifier=Ramses IV
|date_time=09:59, 16 March 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Marksman_(DnD_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Eiji
|date_time=02:30, 15 March 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Form_talk:DnD_Equipment/Preload
|section=Problems
|notifier=Hawk
|date_time=22:03, 29 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:DnD_Equipment
|section=Cost and Weight
|notifier=Hawk
|date_time=20:06, 29 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Form_talk:DnD_Equipment
|section=Date
|notifier=Hawk
|date_time=19:42, 29 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Catgirl/Nekomusume/Nekomimi_(DnD_Race)
|section=Dogs
|notifier=Xdeletedx
|date_time=16:28, 26 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Brawling_(DnD_Variant_Rule)
|section=Sooo tired...
|notifier=Eiji
|date_time=00:04, 26 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Marksman_(DnD_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Eiji
|date_time=13:11, 24 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:User_Base_Classes
|section=
|notifier=Sledged
|date_time=14:27, 19 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Vest_of_the_Bold_(DnD_Equipment)
|section=
|notifier=Cronocke
|date_time=05:17, 18 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Pedistal_of_Truth_(DnD_Equipment)
|section=Format Format
|notifier=Green Dragon
|date_time=09:40, 16 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Performer_(DnD_Prestige_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Cerin616
|date_time=18:22, 11 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Main_Page
|section=
|notifier=Sam Kay
|date_time=07:20, 5 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Paladin_Mount_from_first_level_(DnD_Variant_Rule)
|section=
|notifier=Sam Kay
|date_time=09:35, 4 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Myrmidon_(DnD_Class)
|section=all of it
|notifier=Tetsurga
|date_time=17:54, 31 January 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:DnD_Maps
|section=Maybe this should be in environments after all?
|notifier=EldritchNumen
|date_time=12:32, 3 January 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Chromatic_Dwarf_(DnD_Creature)
|section=Race
|notifier=Green Dragon
|date_time=23:45, 1 June 2007 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Combat_School_(3.5e_Variant_Rule)
|section=
|notifier=Green Dragon
|date_time=23:57, 21 May 2007 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=MediaWiki:Sharedupload
|section=
|notifier=Green Dragon
|date_time=23:01, 14 May 2007 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=dndmedia:D&D_Wiki_Media_talk:Copyrights
|section=Image documentation
|notifier=Cuthalion
|date_time=14:11, 11 May 2007 (MDT)
}}
}}

{{Archives
|label1= Archive 1 (Discussions 1 – 30)
|label2= Archive 2 (Discussions 31 – 60)
|label3= Archive 3 (Discussions 61 – 90)
|label4= Archive 4 (Discussions 91 – 120)
|label5= Archive 5 (Discussions 121 – 150)
|label6= Archive 6 (Discussions 151 – 180)
|label7= Archive 7 (Discussions 181 – 210)
|label8= Archive 8 (Discussions 211 – 240)
|label9= Archive 9 (Discussions 241 – 270)
|label10= Archive 10 (Discussions 271 – 300)
|label11= Archive 11 (Discussions 301 – 330)
|label12= Archive 12 (Discussions 331 – 360)
|label13= Archive 13 (Discussions 361 – 390)
|label14= Archive 14 (Discussions 391 – 420)
|label15= Archive 15 (Discussions 421 – 450)
|label16= Archive 16 (Discussions 451 – 480)
|label17= Archive 17 (Discussions 481 – 510)
}}

== A different sort of game ==

I have a roleplaying game known as World Tree which uses skill advancement instead of class advancement. A character in the game is given a number of skill points at creation with no restrictions as to where they may go. I was thinking of doing a variant of this and even eliminating such things as abilities (there would instead be a lift and carry skill, for instance). I'm not sure this is the right place to discuss such a different system but I was hoping to work with others on it. Can you make any suggestions? My e-mail is brenner.mike at gmail.com

Thank you for your time, -Michael Brenner. {{Unsigned|204.210.188.32|10:23, 12 December 2009 (MST)}}

:Well a few options exist. How different is it from D&D? One option is to make a "radical" variant rule out of it; keeping the structure on D&D Wiki in general. Another option is to make a self-contained wiki (like WikiRPS); hosting could be discussed if that is the desired option. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:01, 12 December 2009 (MST)

== Aura Guardian ==

Hey Green, I was wondering if you would mind looking over the Aura guardian and see if anything so far could be abused? Also let me know what direction I should focus in, Defense of adding some offensive choices. Ive considered a VERY restrictive spell list, like maybe only the healing domain up to 4 and protection up to 4. Not sure. Also I could use some help with the flavor for anyone else reading this! Thank you in advance. --[[User:Starcry|Starcry]] 12:30, 19 December 2009 (MST)

:I took a look at it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:03, 19 December 2009 (MST)

== Brawler, fair fight ==

heya, i've been using this web site for ages and it's awesome, a player notified me of the Brawler class.
At 7th level i think, he gets a special ability called fair fight, i was just looking at it and thought it was... well a little overpowered/little... silly (sorry if that offends btw.)

The feat basicly entails that people make a save or drop there weapons because it would be unfair otherwise... this gives a huge advantage to the brawler, as well as seeming silly as people who want him dead wouldn't think that they should kill him fairly (mostly) and those who would can normally be persuaded/ goaded into it. The skill might be relevant if the brawler had any actual arcane/divine powers but other then that he does not.

Anyway, asides from that it is an awesome class, a monk without the code of laws and from what I've seen of it a very balanced class except that.

Constructive criticisms ahoy! (Btw, i let my player have a feat rather then the ability)

== Talk page is really long/Review too ==

Your talk page is really long. Might be time to archive. Hehe. Peace. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 14:50, 20 December 2009 (MST)

:GD, can you do me a big favor when you get a chance. I read your review of the Aura Guardian 3.5e Class. It was a flawless review. I was hoping you could give the Freerunner 3.5e Class a similar review. Currently the class is rated 20/20 and could really benefit from your perspective in particular. Thanks a million. (Just if you get a free moment.) --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 15:09, 20 December 2009 (MST)

== 3.5e Creatures, Leader of the Hunt ==

:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:Leader of the Hunt (3.5e Creature)#Review]].'' --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:07, 21 October 2010 (MDT)

== 4e Deities, Foamy the Squirrel ==

:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:Foamy the Squirrel (4e Deity)#Categorization]].'' --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:28, 21 October 2010 (MDT)

== MediaWiki Upgrade ==

Just noticed the new Media Wiki version! Awesome! Just having some issues, not sure if they are new or what but there is no more autoconfirmation group. So whenever I edit a page it is asking for a key code. Is this intentional? -[[User:Sleaker|Sleaker]] 06:04, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

:[[Special:ListGroupRights]] and [[User talk:Green Dragon#Spam and ReCaptcha]] should answer your questions. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:47, 21 October 2010 (MDT)

== MSRD cleanup ==

Hey Green Dragon: I think [[user:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] is the "official" go-to guy for the MSRD, but I think he's (semi)retired, so here I am. I use the MSRD all the time, and think it could benefit from some changes, namely wikilinks to other MSRD articles, especially the skills and feats. I wouldn't mind working on this project, but obviously all of the pages are locked. Where do you think I should go to start/discuss this project? [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 19:24, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

:Is there anyone left who's in control of the d20 Modern side of things anymore? I posted [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=MSRD_Talk:Treat_Injury_%28Skill%29&oldid=455659 this] almost a week ago, but I don't think anyone noticed. There are some things that need cleaned up, and I would love to help out but 95% of it is locked. I see no reason why we shouldn't be able to turn [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User:Jazzman831/workspace&oldid=451096 this] into [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User:Jazzman831/workspace&oldid=451102 this]. Or at a minimum, clear out all the typos. If there's anything I can do to help, or if there's someone else I should talk to, let me know. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:54, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

::Well that would need to be discussed before changing with someone who knows D20 Modern better. Or if you would not mind explaining it a bit more (since both the links you supplied are from a subpage of your username - or do you mean just adding links to the article?). Do you see what I mean?
::And, if you want to go through and add a few things throughout the MSRD and clean things up I would be more then willing to give you temporary admin rights for you to work a bit on that. Let me know please. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 06:29, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

:::First of all, thanks for fixing those other links.
:::Second, sorry about the confusion. I'm not trying to change wording or anything, just clean up some typos and make the pages more navigable. That page in my subspace is just a random page from the MSRD that I copy/pasted there to give you an example of what I want to do. If you look at the [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User%3AJazzman831%2Fworkspace&diff=451102&oldid=451096 diffs], you can see that the only thing I did was add wikilinks. (I had to do it in my userspace because I couldn't actually edit the article in question). As it is now, none of the pages have interwiki links, so if you are reading, for example, a class description and it references a feat, you have to go back up to the main MSRD page then navigate to the feat page then find your feat. I would just like to make the feat a link so all you'd have to do is just click it.
:::If you're comfortable giving me temporary admin rights then I'm more than willing to help out. It might take a while, though, since there are a lot of pages![[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 13:48, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

== Pooka Race ==

Sir, the rituals available for Wild Soul have always been listed there:
"You can use any of the following rituals as if they were at-will powers, with no component requirements and without a ritual book: Animal Friendship, Animal Messenger, Commune with Nature, or Speak with Nature."

==Access==

Hi there, for some reason my username doesn't want to co-operate with me. I try putting in my password and I get a message saying that it's invalid. I try to get a new one sent and nothing ever shows up in my inbox. I want to get on here and post some more stuff and because of this, I can't. Can you help me out? -- Mythos Specialist

:Actually, never mind. I didn't have anthing fully finished anyway, so I made a new account. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 04:28, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

::Oh don't. As long as your email is correct it is not a problem. I just have to wait a few days to do it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:35, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

:::I already posted a full core class to the new profile. But, if you can get my old account running, it'd make it a lot easier to do the transfer. Besides, I like the new name... -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 13:58, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

== 3.5e Classes, Thrillseeker ==

:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:Thrillseeker (3.5e Class)#Categorization]].'' --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:07, 26 October 2010 (MDT)

== Been away for a while ==

Hi Green Dragon. Ive been gone for a while - one of those who left during the 'great admin dispute' - I have come back though and was just curious what happened to the tavern. Thanks --[[User:Sabreheim|Sabreheim]] 10:21, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

:You'll find that after the 'great admin dispute,' as you call it, [[User talk:Green Dragon/Archive 17#Recent Tavern Changes|the general consensus among those who were active before said incident seemed to be that the Tavern was superfluous and unproductive]], although I believe cost-engineering may be playing some part in its continued absence (inferred from the section above). -- [[User:Jota|Jota]] 12:22, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

::First of all - that's what it was 'a huge dispute amongst the admins' that seemed to threaten the well being of the wiki (why i left) - but bygones be bygones
::Personally I think that the tavern was a good thing - it allowed for more person to person feedback on content. --[[User:Sabreheim|Sabreheim]] 16:33, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

:::I wasn't disagreeing with your phrasing (though I have my own thoughts on said incident and subsequent changes), I was just using the same terminology to affirm that we were referring to the same event(s). --[[User:Jota|Jota]] 17:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

::::See also [[Discussion:The Tavern: use, expansion, and availability.]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:13, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

== Repeatedly adding a stat to ac. ==

One of my friends in my D&D group has been planning to add wisdom at least 3 times to his ac by taking various classes that allow wisdom to be added to ac. Is doing something like this allowed?
BTW, the campaign we are doing is a gestalt, if that makes a difference.
--[[User:Cyte|Cyte]]

NO. It doesn't stack. Period. -- Mythos

Thanks much.
--[[User:Cyte|Cyte]]

Also there is an argument going on in my group about bloodline levels. Some of my group is saying that bloodline levels raise class abilities such as sneak attack and other things that are simply made more powerful at regular intervals. The regular interval thing is the key to their argument since they say that means it is calculated by class level. I don't believe them. But do bloodline levels do what they say?
--[[User:Cyte|Cyte]]

------

Hello I am with the above user. Do you have anywhere in any book where it specifically says that Mythos?

Thanks for the reply.

--[[User:Zachrb|Zachrb]] 21:22, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Mythos here...
I'm pretty sure in the SRD (I don't have time to look it up) when it comes to modifiers, that you can only apply ability score modifiers once, like for instance bonuses to AC from a high DEX or WIS score. I think untyped bonuses do stack, however. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 04:13, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Furthermore, as for gestalt (which I categorically despise), even under that, you can only, for instance, use one class' hit die at a time, in this case the higher. Ability modifiers work in much the same way. As for bloodlines, features such as spell save DCs, maximum skill ranks, caster level, those things are calculated using bloodline levels. Sneak Attack and such are only raised by actually having levels in said classes. Sorry to burst their power-gaming bubble. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 04:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply Mythos, only 1 of the classes actually have a type for the AC bonus thus the stat can be added 3 times. Also thanks for the reply regarding bloodlines!
--[[User:Zachrb|Zachrb]] 06:13, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Hold up. Which classes allow this to stack? Ability modifiers, as I've said, do not stack. By "untyped bonus" I mean bonuses granted by the class, or certain other factors, not including ability bonuses. This is done so as not to totally unbalance the game with class dips. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 08:01, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Many of the classes the player has allows you to add wisdom to AC. One of them is a deflection bonus, the other are just wisdom bonus to AC without any type. So what does this mean for the player? Can he add his wisdom once, or once as a deflection bonus and another as a regular bonus? --[[User:Zachrb|Zachrb]] 16:05, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I would think once as untyped and once as deflection, but which class is it that adds it as a deflection?
--[[User:Cyte|Cyte]]

I'm pretty sure you can add your ability modifier only ONCE. It doesn't matter what the type is. As for adding ability modifiers from different ability scores, I know you can, 'cos the Duelist does it. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 17:17, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

:While your interpretation is logical from a balance perspective, I'm pretty sure the reigning methodology is that while other types do not, untyped bonuses stack. -- [[User:Jota|Jota]] 17:25, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree that untyped bonuses stack, but not with themselves. eg adding wisdom twice to ac as an untyped modifier.
--[[User:Cyte|Cyte]]

That's what I'm trying to explain here. Otherwise with a few clever prestige class dips, or worse, misusing gestalt rules, whilst doing same, you have a build that becomes utterly broken. Any bonus derived from ability score bonuses can only be applied once, right? -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 20:27, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Logically yes, but I can't seem to find a rule that states this. --[[User:Zachrb|Zachrb]] 22:54, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

It's out there, but I don't know where. I know I saw it, and it clearly said stacking the bonus for the same ability score doesn't happen. Here's a thought, though. In lieu of finding the rule, why not err on the side of common sense and not allow the bonus to stack? I mean, it works that way with magic spells that have the same effect as each other, so I'd be willing to bet ability modifiers don't stack either. It's just more logical. Otherwise, as I've said before, you can end up with something that completely wrecks the system. Also, has this player considered taking these 3 classes for the assumed triple-stacked Wisdom modifier as being incredibly munchkined? Because this kind of approach to a build is almost always about "Oooh, pluses!!" more than "Oooh, compelling character.." -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 03:49, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

== My new class ==

For anybody that pays attention to new material going up, I present to you the [[Battlemage (3.5e Class)|Battlemage]]. Enjoy. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 08:43, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

== Mirror mephit ==

Hello I have a question about : [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Talk:Pun-Pun_(3.5e_Optimized_Character_Build)]
'''Alternate first level trick'''

Aristocrat 1 (race independent) Feat 1: Magical training (player's guide to faerun) Feat 2: Precocious Apprentice: Summon Mirror Mephit (Expedition to the Demonweb Pits) Starting gold goes into purchasing a single vial of liquid pain.

Rounds 1->a Attempt to cast Summon Mirror Mephit until you can make the check. Optimization could allow this to autosucceed the first round, but it isn't needed Round b: toss your mirror mephit a vial of liquid pain, and have him use it with his spell-like Simulacrum ability As per the monster manual (which supercedes the SRD), a spell-like ability defaults to a standard action. With the vial, we have CL 9, sufficient to duplicate a 18 HD advanced efreeti (simulacrum is allowed to duplicate specific creatures). Divide the level by two, and we have a 9HD copy. Which is just as many hit dice as a normal efreet. Order the mirror mephit to order the efreeti to obey you completely before he vanishes.

You now have three free wishes. Start from step 4 of the above streategy.

The mirror mephit has 8th level for the caster level for simulacrum.

Did the liquid pain use as optional material component to improve the caster level by + 2 ?
But simulacrum is a spell like ability, not a spell. Or use an other rule ? If yes, what page from book of evil darkness, please ?

The normal efreet has 10 HD, not 9. So, the caster level required is 10th level, no ?

Why do you choose aristocrast as class ? For the skills ? The starting money to buy liquid pain ?

Thanks for your future anwser.

:Once again, I fail to see the point in all this. Someone's misusing the rules for sure. Why not just be Pun-pun? -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 19:20, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

::Oh wait, this IS Pun-pun. Listen, feedback loops are not supposed to work. Maybe as a glitch in video games, but in D&D, no. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 19:23, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

== Necromancer editing and advancement ==

Mr. Green Dragon:

Thank you for taking a look at my "necromancer" 4e base class. I developed it in conjunction with a colleague with whom I am playing a long-form campaign.

I seek your advice in improving the necromancer with two primary goals: I wish to, over time, produce a class whose quality ranks it among the best 4e homebrew classes on the site; and I want to make sure that the necromancer conforms ''in extremis'' to the D&D Wiki formatting standards.

As it stands now, I do not possess the proper knowledge to achieve those goals. So, to solve a few formatting problems immediately, I wish to clarify:

*Which powers listed on the necromancer main page need to be moved to another page? If any, which other page?
*Which necromancer powers listed elsewhere need to be moved to another page? Which other page?
*Which creatures are listed on the necromancer main page that need to be moved to another page? If any, which other page?
*Given that worship of a specific deity confers a class feature power or bonus upon the necromancer character, why does the list of deities and their related class feature benefit need to be moved up to the "Overview: Religion" section?
*Given that you can see clearly which information is currently in tables which use HTML instead of the wikimedia editing format ("Phantom level/damage", "Phantom potential actions", "deity/benefit"; I assume that the "level/maximum Phantoms" table is satisfactory already), how can I change those tables into wikimedia format within those power and creature templates? The reason I used an unorthodox "HTML splice" technique to insert those tables is because I could not use the wikimedia format to add the tables within the templates (as it was apparently beyond my coding abilities).
*How can I cause the "Contents" list to show separate sections within the Necromancer Class Features section? I believe that that section has become long enough to merit separate sections within the Contents.

I think that with your help and the assistance of the other users we should be able to clear up these formatting issues relatively quickly.

--[[User:Ofidian|Ofidian]] 21:20, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Furthermore, I have discovered an issue with the "Add or edit" radio button under "Add New 4e Power". When you replace "MyPower" in the text box with the name of your new power (for example, "Frigid Cyclone") and click the radio button, you are not directed to a text form to write the wikitext of the power. Instead, you are directed to a page that says "Add Form:4e Power: Frigid Cyclone (4e Power)" (again, "Frigid Cyclone" is the example power to be created) with a preexisting power box already below it, called "Blast of the Ancestors" (a "'vorgal' racial power"). If a user truly wants to create a new power, they must first click the "Show preview" radio button, which redirects to the appropriate text field.

What is the method by which we can alter the form so that it works properly? The origin of the "Blast of the Ancestors" power is the [[Vorgal (4e Race)]] page, where a link to the "Blast of the Ancestors" racial power is found under '''Racial Traits'''. (If you click on ''that'' link, which oddly says "1", you come to a page called "Form:Form:4e Power" which ''again'' shows the "Blast of the Ancestors" power box.) I don't know what happened, and until I get your input I don't want to touch it because I don't know the proper method for fixing the system (blank the form? Delete the form and recreate?). I ''suspect'' that the creator of the "vorgal" race somehow accidentally altered the very power creation form itself, instead of creating a new power.

I'm going to use the workaround for now.

--[[User:Ofidian|Ofidian]] 02:00, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

== New Class ==

Hey Green Dragon. I'm creating a new class for my D&d campaign and thought you might want to add it to your site and perhaps help me refine it as well. I call it the Summoner Class. Apparently, you already deleted an entry for it because it wasn't done too well. I can assure you, I put a lot of work into it so far, and will continue to do so till perfected.

Anyway, this normally wouldn't concern you except that I'm not too good at HTML code and was hoping that you could help make the page for me? I can email you the Word File that I've been working on so far. I have everything I think I need for the first page and I have all the way to level 7 powers (for now).

== Creative Commons ==

I was trying to add some content in the D&D Wiki Media and the only CC license there was the Attribution-Share Alike. The content I'm trying to add is under Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative license. Can that be added to the licenses? Thanks in advance. --[[User:ElfsMaster|ElfsMaster]] 16:05, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

:Of course. In the license template just add it. For example <nowiki>{{license|Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative}}</nowiki>. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

::Ok, did it. However, when I added the image I forgot to put some characters and the link ended kinda weird. Now, when I try to edit it, the following messenge shows up:
::out of captcha images; this shouldn't happen
::I guess that that shouldn't happen (great insightful conclusion, I know...)--[[User:ElfsMaster|ElfsMaster]] 00:00, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

== archanist class ==

I was looking at your article on the archanist pretige class. I am curious as to why a class who's description refers to magic being deschooled and organized into one group, requires the player to give up nearly half of the available spells he can cast. This seems like a contradiction in the very nature of the prestige class.

you can contact me at kingdork5ooo@hotmail.com

== Ganteka RfA ==

I understand where you were coming from when you deleted my post, and I'd like to take a second to explain to you how I saw what happened: I posted a reminder to keep things courteous, as in the heat of the discussion everyone was beginning to get snippy (as you well know, from the number of warnings you gave out). You edited your post to make it seem less offensive, then deleted mine. My first reaction, I'm sorry to say, was "That jerk, he's deleting my comments and covering his own ass" (forgive my language, I'm being honest here, and this is, as far as I know, private. We're grown up, we have seen these words before). So you can see why I was upset, you made no mention that you were going to delete my post because the discussion was over. However, I have now understood what happened, and that's fine. I'm over it. I don't care that you edited your post so it seems better to you. I don't even care that you closed any and all discussion of the matter early. Whatever, I can live with that too. I don't care that you feel what you wrote was a "suggestion" or a "suggestion-like command", and not a breach of etiquette rules. Just, in the future, when you feel it necessary to delete one of my posts, I'd like to hear about it. That's why talk pages exist. Even if you didn't want to drop me a note on my talk page, you could have written in the summary of the page something to the effect of "Discussion has ended, edit has been deleted". I think as a fellow editor of this wiki, you owe me (and everyone else) that same courtesy. However, like I said, I'm moving on. I'm fine if we don't discuss this matter any further. Ganteka turned in his letter of resignation; I don't fully understand why we even went through this charade. Some semblance of cloture, I suppose. Thanks for your time, [[User:Badger|Badger]] 05:51, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

:The RfA is not over (when the RfA is it will be) just that discussion part was just so off-topic that it was over (it did not relate to Ganteka's2 RfA at all). Why was your comment after I stated "''This discussion is over from my post out.''" deleted? That is your answer. It was just too off-topic. Is that a breach of civility - recommending him to see a psychiatrist (which you asked to be addressed)? One, the correct place to discuss that is on [[Talk:Warning Policy]]. Two, I don't think so, I was just worried that that user was not thinking clearly (not meaning of less intellect - defiantly intelligent since he or she was able to respond completely). To me it is an honest worry since this user seemed to be contradicting him or herself and not noticing it. Although I could see of some which think that psychiatrists are not helpful to all in all regards (or I do not understand) who find it uncivil. I don't know, Your thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:23, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

::If you were genuinely concerned with someone's mental state, it'd be best to confront them privately about it, not on a random webpage. That's more tactless than uncivil I suppose, though. And if you truly believe that everyone is equal in all ways, there shouldn't be any admins at all. I understand that you want to have people assigned to take care of certain things (making sure pages are formatted, redirecting things, fixing errors and the like), but this is creating distinctions between people on the wiki. Furthermore, things like "Maybe you like begging? Who knows. Irrelevant." and "This site is not "risky" for me, I don't need to step around on tiptoes. I don't care. I own the damn thing." do come off as hostile, even if that isn't your intent. Continuing, "having a blatant bias" sounds like something everyone on this wiki is guilty of. Do you suppose we can get a psychiatrist on a group rate? Continuing on, you are also guilty of that last bit. Take, for example, this quote "I suggest you take a look at Requests for Adminship/Aarnott2. These people only contributed to about 7% of the activity of D&D Wiki. That's not "prime" and "perfection" that's 7%. Please, once again, do research before presenting things." You wrote that on Ganteka's RfA. If you took the time to look back you might come across one of my posts. You were simply denying my math. I know what you want to say. You wanted to say that those 9 people accounted for 7% of the total wiki edits. That is correct. However, that was not the point of the argument. The point was that 10% of the wiki's registered users account for 90% of the wiki's edits. So take those 9 names, add in you and Hooper, and about 390 other top editors and you'll see that their total contributions will total about 90% of the edits. I am not going to make that any clearer, I don't think. That is a prime example of you ignoring facts and "having a blatant bias". And as for your systematic warning policy that "govern[s] all", it doesn't. No one would dare warn you. You are above that law, it would seem. You know darn well that if Surgo had posted a comment telling someone to see a psychiatrist that you would have warned him. "Discussions are not deleted on D&D Wiki." That's another gem of a quote of yours from the Ganteka RfA page of yours. Or how about " Have I ever sworn on D&D Wiki? Yes, like 2938 times. No, not once. Yes, in a revision history and in a few edit summaries (User Talk: Eiji#Farmer revisions, and see edit contributions for edit summaries - "damn" was used, although not derogatory). Which are you going to trust?" I suppose you mean you swore on the farmer page. You also swore about the wiki 3 lines down. Does that count as proof? Taking a second to check out the farmer page (A really fun class, if I say so myself) you began the page with "Actually you can't move your things on D&D Wiki their - it's illegal. It's the CC and the GNU FDL v1.2. --Green Dragon 23:17, 11 November 2009 (MST)" and ended the page with "AND FOR THE LAST TIME ANYONE CAN REPUBLISH ANYTHING AS LONG AS IT IS UNDER THE GNU FDL v1.2 I HAVE SAID THAT ABOUT A MILLION TIMES AND SOURCED THE GNU FDL v1.2 IN THOSE PARTS AS WELL SO STOP REPEATING THAT WHICH I NEVER EVEN HINTED AT! --Green Dragon 14:26, 14 November 2009 (MST)". Just another example of contradictory statements that we all hate so much.One final note, check out the votes for RfA of people you stripped of admin rights. None passed. Not a single one. What's the point of having an election if we all already know the outcome? Feel free to say they could have been approved and kept their admin rights, but we both know that was never a possibility. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 01:19, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

:::Badger, when I read this I was forced to ask: where are you getting your stats that those 7% of users account for 90% of the contributions on the wiki? Or am I misunderstanding what you are saying. I know GD has 50k+ edits, I've got slightly over 10k, and a couple of those that left had 8k or more. But for the most part they only had a couple hundred (if that) edits. I'd really like to understand where you're getting your figures from.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 01:30, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

::::I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. Those 11 users account for less than 10% of the users(something like .2%, in truth). A collection of the true 10% would be like 400 users. I've not actually found the top 400 contributors to the wiki. However, considering 11 have something along the lines of 30% of the edits, I assumed we could find another 390 that would get an approximation of 90% of the total edits. Not to sound rude, but I've got better things to do than to track down the top 400 contributors of the wiki (I'm sure most of us do). It's certainly possible that I'm wrong, but given the data I did collect, I'm pretty confident that the 90/10 theory applies to this wiki about as well as it applies to most every other wiki. However, feel free to ignore that tangent if you feel it is incorrect. Honestly, I've not done enough research to really defend that point. Like I said, I think it works but you're more than welcome to prove me wrong. I'll accept any data you're willing to provide.--[[User:Badger|Badger]] 02:06, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::Proof is needed; a theory does not suffice. Another theory is that the entire world is only that which ''you'' can look around and see, touch, and in other ways influence. The rest does not exist. I don't exist. This wiki does not exist. Nothing exists except when ''you'' will it to. Is that then the case? Maybe, right?
:::::Therefore 90% is not the case - proof is needed. Those edits accounted for under 7% (less now) of the activity. That's under 7%.
:::::Your right about the tactlessness, sorry about that. Could we get a physicist at a group rate? Who knows, right.
:::::"''No one would dare warn you. You are above that law, it would seem. You know darn well that if Surgo had posted a comment telling someone to see a psychiatrist that you would have warned him.''" you could be right, I do not know. It's very hard sometimes to analyze oneself the exact same - one's own biases and ideas make it much more complicated, I find. In any case I did not mean it in any way to make him feel belittled, I said it out of (although tactless) concern.
:::::"''Have I ever sworn on D&D Wiki?''" right, but damn is not a "gross profanity" word and it's not used referring to someone. I think (I could be wrong - let me know if I am please) that damn, in the English language, has a number of uses and word types and therefore it is permitted in some uses and instances.
:::::About [[User Talk:Eiji#Farmer]] those are ''different'' licenses. That is not contradictory in the least.
:::::''Users are equal'' does not mean that ''users should be treated the same''. Admins are granted those abilities by users by way of a nomination but that does not mean they should be treated the same.
:::::And the systematic [[Warning Policy|warning policy]] ''should'' govern all. Am I above it? No... Do I want to be? Irrelevant. All conspicuous areas should be posted to [[Talk:Warning Policy]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:31, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::"Users are equal does not mean that users should be treated the same" What does that mean? They are equal, but should be treated differently? How are they equal then? If you're treating something differently, it's not equal! --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 03:38, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::"''Users are equal'' does not mean that ''users should be treated the same''" means a few things. One is that if one commits an act against a policy, policies being systematic in nature (e.g. the [[Warning Policy]], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_policy], etc etc, one just has to look at bit) they are not necessarily treated the same. For example one cannot vote on nominations. One cannot edit the wiki, etc.
:::::::Or, since admins are elected by users they are not "''treated the same''" although they are still users they can now also delete things, do things users cannot, etc, and as such held in different a different light. Do you understand what I mean kinda? I can explain more if you want. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::I think I'm done with this discussion. It's clearly going nowhere, and it doesn't even seem you're taking it seriously. You're making less and less sense, and I fear it's only a matter of time before one of us tries to ban the other (and I already know how that would turn out). So I'm going to leave you with this tip: Fix the description of the Warning Policy page. "When one does not edit with civility and etiquette one becomes a warning for each time" --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 04:41, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::I do not understand. What do you mean exactly? The wording seems fine to me and all this is implied. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 05:13, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::As far as the wording, GD...It should be "when one does not edit with civility and etiquette one '''gets''' a warning for each time," they don't become a warning. --[[User:Harry Mason|Harry Mason]] 12:24, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::: He also swore [[User talk:Surgo#Wikia]], which, I'm assured, is much worse than the word 'damn', according to certain civil servants. Just thought I'd chime in for you guys. --[[User:TK-Squared|TK-Squared]] 15:21, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

== GNU FDL ==

After watching the discussions over the past few months I have done extensive research into the GNU FDL. Any page without an updated author box is in void of the licence and no-longer licensed under the GNU FDL according to section 4B:

4. MODIFICATIONS
You may copy and distribute a Modified Version of the Document under
the conditions of sections 2 and 3 above, provided that you release
the Modified Version under precisely this License, with the Modified
Version filling the role of the Document, thus licensing distribution
and modification of the Modified Version to whoever possesses a copy
of it. In addition, you must do these things in the Modified Version:

B. List on the '''Title''' Page, as authors, one or more persons or entities
responsible for authorship of the modifications in the Modified
Version, together with at least five of the principal authors of the
Document (all of its principal authors, if it has fewer than five),
unless they release you from this requirement.

Before you say it is able to be in the history page:

For works in formats which do not have any title page as such, "Title Page" means
the text near the most prominent appearance of the work's title,
preceding the beginning of the body of the text.

And termination note:

9. TERMINATION
You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Document except
as expressly provided for under this License. Any other attempt to
copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Document is void, and will
automatically terminate your rights under this License. However,
parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under this
License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such
parties remain in full compliance.

In conclusion: Any authors will have to post their own authorship at the top of the page labeling the top 5 contributers (with each of their permission, as you are re-applying a licence) and also their name as publisher of the page. This means that any pages that do not currently meet these requirements (or any of the other requirements) can be removed by the author, as the licence requires permission from the copyright holder (the initial creator). If this licence is "re-applied" without the copyright holder's permission it is in breach of copyright laws and legal action may be taken.

I hope you understand fully and notify users correctly. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 13:09, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

:The bad thing about the license is it has never been upheld in a court of law, so really, no matter how much people may disagree, '''it really doesn't matter'''. Find a lawyer and sue, or shut up about it. If you win, then you'll be making a precedence that other sites can follow.
:Finally, go over to wikipedia - the largest website in existence using the license. Do you see any author spots on the pages? '''NO'''. Now, does that mean all of wikipedia and the lawyers they hired to look into the subject are wrong and you few are oh-so-smarter? '''No again'''. It means that it has been deemed that in a wiki format, as long as each edit is cataloged in the history, then attribution has been made. If you guys think we're doing it wrong, then you must also by the same logic think that Wikipedia is doing it wrong. Please, go tell them, I'd love to see the responses you get for a such a brazen statement.
:The following is a great quote to keep in mind: ''"...are (1) the five principal author listing (all the authors must be listed in 1.1; this is clearly not problem with Wikipedia as the history pages list all the authors of a particular GFDL work) and..."''. Additionally, ''"...The GFDL requires that the names of authors are preserved, and we keep a full record of exactly who wrote what in the history of each article...."''. It have even been said ''"...Editors are collaborators, not authors, and therefore have no rights (except for the right granted to them to reuse their contributions elsewhere). The rights are held by the individual projects, as publishers, and the foundation can act on their behalf....". Now, I'm not a lawyer, but I believe that last one would also need to be upheld in court before we could say it is 100% true.
:The best quote to keep in mind is a simple one: ''"..The "authors" are explicitly mentioned in the history log of every article. :I think you need to show evidence of why the history log is invalid as a record of authorship...."''.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 14:34, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

::Wikipedia ''did'' use the GNU FDL. They changed recently. If, theoretically, you are right what do you say about "''List on the Title Page, as authors, one or more persons or entities responsible for authorship of the modifications in the Modified Version''"? Therefore, why are my edits not displayed alongside (for example)? This conundrum in your logic (which makes it not work) has been discussed at length on [[Talk:Detect Disease (3.5e Spell)#Author Template]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:04, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

:::Under the license the fact that you edited must be shown, as you are an author. Also, you cannot compare wikipedia to this wiki, wikipedia is sourcing facts while this wiki are users creations. Also in that case wikipedia is the entity itself that holds the copyright for the information on the site, not the individual editors. Plus, the fact that they removed the GFDL is a sign that they came to a problem and had to remove it. Also, under the GNU FDL you cannot prevent someone from reverting your edits and history is not on the title page, it is a separate page. Also Hooper, if the licence "doesn't matter" and has never been upheld in a court of law does that mean we shouldn't follow it? We shouldn't give users their rights? --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 00:42, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::::No, I think Wikipedia just wanted to use a newer license. I could be wrong though. And you are incorrect. Wikipedia licenses everything therefore the same things do (well, did) apply.
::::"''Also, under the GNU FDL you cannot prevent someone from reverting your edits and history is not on the title page, it is a separate page.''" No. Anyone can revert anyones edits. That's silly to say. It's all part of the modified version. And, as I was saying, I think the "Title Page" is actually the line with the tabs on it (fulfills all the requirements) or maybe all the surrounding MW information. Why? The publisher, D&D Wiki, does need to be specific somewhere as well (maybe that is the logo - since it does not direct to an image). For example "''For works in formats which do not have any title page as such, "Title Page" means the text near the most prominent appearance of the work's title, preceding the beginning of the body of the text.''"
::::Let me know if this answers your copyright questions.
::::{{quote|
D. Preserve all the copyright notices of the Document.

E. Add an appropriate copyright notice for your modifications adjacent to the other copyright notices.
|orig=[[GNU Free Documentation License 1.2]]
}}
::::--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:14, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::Yes, we can compare this wiki to wikipedia and we are. If you are saying we are doing it wrong, then you are also claiming that wikipedia was doing it wrong during their time using this license. I suggest you seek legal counsel if you truly feel that way. We have the GNU FDL for many reasons, and I will not devolve into a straw man argument. If you do not agree, then do not hit submit - ever. Simple as that. In the meantime, either call your bluff of legal action or drop the issue.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 01:24, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::"If you do not agree, then do not hit submit - ever." So how am I supposed to take away the "hitting submit" that I have already done, how is anyone that thought there was going to be the author template meant to? "Anyone can revert anyones edits." So why can users not have the author template if they chose? And why would you refuse to change [[Detect Disease (3.5e Spell)]] back to the way Daniel Draco requested? Also, "Actually I think Template:Author is forbidden under this license." That's silly to say. It would be part of the document, having no effect on the licence itself. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 01:49, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::Because that template is being removed... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 02:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::Sabre, why don't we agree to disagree on how the license is properly applied in a wiki format. You go get a lawyer to prove your point, and that would sway my thoughts.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 02:45, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::Ignoring fulfilling the licence (lets assume that history does cover it) is there any reason why people can't say "I made this"? Most articles on this wiki aren't a collaborative effort. Also, I don't need to get a lawyer, I don't care about your liabilities though I thought I would warn you seeing I was doing the research anyway (this wiki seemed as good as any for a practical example). --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 02:53, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::When you first brought the subject back up it just came across as if you were threatening to seek legal action. That is why I said that. I know sometimes with type it is hard to come across appropriately, so I am sorry if I misunderstood. The simple fact is, if wikipedia did it - we can do it. And yes it is a valid example. Wikipedia's contributors are writing in their own words using a system or information already available. Our contributors are creating content using a system and rules already available. If wikipedia says that history is fine, then history is fine. The mere fact that the largest supporter of GNU FDL in a wiki format does that would be a huge point in any legal defense of the action ''(I don't remember the legal term they have for that, but basically it is when something is unsure at first but then through practice becomes reality)''.
::::::::::All that being said, I never cared for the author template. It's best feature to me was actually the "status" field where you can let a user know if something is still being figured out. I made a quick Article Status template and have used it instead for a bit. That is really all the information the average surfer needs. If someone wants to know who is the author, they can simply go to the history or any messages on the talk page about the article. It doesn't hurt anyone, and helps the average surfer have the content right up front. I really don't understand all the fuss. If someone ever added something to this wiki thinking that it would either be published and they could revert to sole ownership or that it would never change and be altered ''(which requires ignoring the warning every edit)'' then that was foolish.
::::::::::Additionally, I know that you said you have researched it. So have I, and I believe TK back before he was banned. What I discovered since was simple. Since it hasn't been brought to legal court, you can basically research it and take with it what you want. If you want it to come across a certain way, you read it that way. In short: it's vague.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 03:05, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::::I prefer that someone may take ownership, as the primary creator then people may go onto the history page to see who has contributed. On an open contribution site there should still be a way for the user to keep their own work as it is, even if it is under the GNU FDL. It can still be copied and edited on another website (with the history) though on this website would be their final creation. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 03:13, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}

:You may indeed prefer that, but that goes against the very nature of a '''collaborative''' site. Short of vandalism or spam, and that means that you wish to retroactively not have to accept the warning that has been in place for every edit since the site began, which reads: ''If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here''. This isn't a personal database for any of us to "dump" or "store" our ideas. It is a collaborative and dynamic site.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 03:18, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::I understand that, though each creation needs a form of leadership. Collaboration is only good if you have a goal, in creativity each persons goals may be different and you will get members editing the pages to their liking. A author box provides the creator (presumably the primary contributor) to lead the project, taking in others ideas (as it has previously done through giving ideas on talk pages. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 03:27, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

:::See, now I like what you're saying. Let me say that in our case, an Author template could theoretically never be correct. Yes, it may just be by happenchance that a user puts up an article and other than formatting or spelling no one else changes it. But for some of the big articles, we may have 50 users and IP and at least one chuck norris vandal over years of it being online and at that point the author template would either be huge and obstructive or it wouldn't be able to give everyone due - invalidating it. I made a quick Article Status template that I personally like because it allows someone to say where they are in their own process on an article and gives other users an idea to work with. Because we are different in our content in that degree than say, my above example of wikipedia, I do believe that we could utilize some sort of Article Status/Goal template. This would allow people to assist each other and improve articles, without getting into the author debate. But maybe that is another talk for another day.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 03:31, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::::Am I misunderstanding what is happening here? Hooper and Green Dragon seem to be arguing against having an Author template on a page. I don't see any problem with Author Templates. I think DnD Wiki is collaborative on the whole, meaning while each page has a unique author (or team of authors), the entire site's content is free for all and collaboratively edited. If I write a class (and I have), I want it to be my own. While I'm not going to pretend to understand the legal mumbo-jumbo, I would expect to be the next to last word on all edits (final word being an admin can choose to delete it if it is offensive or something and doesn't comply with policy, but that's it). If I've written a class I want my name on it; partly for credit, partly as a way for people to contact me, and partly because it makes me proud. We're going to take my name off my page because some random IP thinks I should get Power Attack as a bonus feat at level 2, and suddenly he becomes the author? No, that's just foolish.--[[User:Badger|Badger]] 07:50, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::Not Exactly Badger. This discussion mostly is about the legal mumbo jumbo. The GNU FDL is vague in regards to it's implementations of author and title in a wiki format. Reading it one way, the Author Template would never ever be enough to give all the proper credit. Reading it the other way ''(the way wikipedia does)'', the Author Template is invalid and should be removed but history can never be deleted.
:::::As far as "final word", we all have to keep in mind that there has always been a warning (which I quoted above) that once we submit content, it can be edited mercilessly.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 13:55, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

== Am I violating copyright? ==

Hello, GreenDragon, and thank you for your time. I am currently working on a page (Drevanius campaign setting) and I am wondering if including statistics of creatures (nothing else) from another DND source is violating copyright. The section is Creatures of Drevanius.

:What is the source? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:01, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

== Hello ==

You seem like a Very Knowledgable person, im currently working on designing an Epic level 3.5 Campaign, ive been designing NPCs Main chars and what not, and one of the main chars ive built diesnt have a name, as ironic as it is, it is a 15th Age Cat. Advanced Paragon White Great Wyrm of Legends, Leader of the Dragon council, and by far the strongest dragon among them, he is very unique and i just dont know what to call him, if you have the chance i would really appriciate it if you could shoot come good names at me, im just drawing a blank

Thanks - [[User:Envoyof aGod|Envoyof_aGod]] 19:22, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

==Something interesting...==

I noticed that your RfA was mysteriously and unexplainably deleted, Greeny. I was just curious what that meant for your re-nomination of adminship. --[[User:Bunnie|Bunnie]] 03:48, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:Read the subscript on [[RfA]] and this post will be removed. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:09, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::You mean the part where you belatedly added that you and Blue were exceptions to the RfA policy? Why yes, I did happen to read that. And the part where you said (and then removed) that if you were voted against, you'd demote yourself. Why taunt people with stuff you'll never do? --[[User:Bunnie|Bunnie]] 04:31, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::I changed my mind, and the policy as such, relating to adminship about [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]]'s and my admin status. It wasn't a "taunt". --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:35, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::'Changing your mind' about something while a process is already being implemented (especially in regards to yourself when you're about to 'lose' because of the policy) is just low. Why the change of heart anyways? If you think you might 'change your mind' anyways, why bother having policies in the first place? Just 'change your mind' about anything you don't like, even if other people like it. Sure, sounds fair, reasonable and perfectly acceptable. Right. --[[User:Bunnie|Bunnie]] 04:42, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::Not really fair huh. Oh well. D&D Wiki ''is'' also a physical thing (takes bytes, bandwidth, etc). Those physical aspects make it so the people relating to hosting and upkeep are not going to lose adminship (or bureaucratship; transparent in the case of [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]]). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::Incidentally since it was mentioned, , whatever happened to Blue Dragon? He vanished from everywhere a few months before the big smash-up, and I've not seen hide nor hair of him since. Would be great to get in contact with him again (contacting him on the Wiki has been all but impossible, so, I suppose I'd need some alternate method.). -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 04:53, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::He's been around. He came around me during the winter holidays. He actually was the one who updated MW and the extensions, although he is not done. You want to contact him? I'll tell him to add back the "hosted by" part and when he does you can click it and contact him. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 05:05, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::Well hosting has been changed. But he checks his user talk page. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:31, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

== Admin Resignation ==

This is a notice to say that I will not be coming back to this wiki again. The issues you obviously have with control has caused me to lose faith in you and lose interest in the wiki. You have changed so much since I became admin, in more than one way. I would also like to point out that even though you own the physical server doesn't mean you have to be an admin here, you are only the host. Your attitude towards policies (and your need for power) were proven in you deleting your nomination for admin, when it was first posted you had began to fill it out and comply with the existing policy, then when the votes turned against you the policy was changed and the page deleted. You should go back and think about your actions, think about them from another point of view and see why those members left. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 10:31, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:I will RfA you in a bit (with resignation as the reason or somesuch). I, as [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] (with bureaucratship), are not going to host something for people who got banned, and get annoyed as result, and then came back with just the intent to remove the person who banned them, based off their wrong actions, from adminship. Do you really not see how that is petty? One: This is not a democracy, although it has democratic influences. I don't care about all the democratic ways which things can be. It's not fair. Fairness, to me, is more important. On a different note they would no longer even edit, they may have just found it humorous to remove adminship from one who banned them for wrong actions. Look at it like this: Some people go to prison for committing crimes, they serve their time, they get out. After they are out they go to the town hall and try to impeach the mayor. Although in democracy that ''does'' work, I don't care. This is not going to be like that. Do you understand where I am coming from? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:33, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::When you say "Fairness, to me, is more important" do you mean "In my opinion, fairness is more important" or "It's more important for everyone to be fair to me, Green Dragon"?
::''EDIT'': He means the first one.
::Let me try and work through your analogy now:
::*Some people go to prison for committing crimes
::**Sabre070 <s>violated policy and was banned</s> was banned permanently <s>because of an inappropriate username</s> <s>without reason</s> with the implied reason that [[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] was banned, without reason (see his edits during the time), and was worried something was going on.
::**<s>Later others disregard policies and get banned as a result (spamming the FA, unwarranted deletion, etc etc).</s> While true, it's irrelevant. We're talking about Sabre070 right now. If he did that we can include that in his "crimes". Otherwise, let's try to focus on the important issues.
::*They serve their time, they get out.
::**Then Sabre070's ban <s>expired</s> was undone 2 days later and he was allowed back into our open hearts once again, born anew, like a mighty Phoenix
::*After they are out they go to the town hall and try to impeach the mayor.
::**Sabre070 doesn't like how you lead, and tried to change that, by removing you from office (with an RfA).
::*Although in democracy that ''does'' work, I don't care.
::** I don't care about what you think is fair, my word is <s>unimpeachable law</s> open to discussion, as long as we use logic. I, as Green Dragon, will delete that RfA, make new laws prohibiting future RfAs, and <s>pretend nothing happened</s> those are the results of the happenece. The deleted RfA's date and the revision history of [[RfA]] can be seen as evidence. This is my wiki, I own the damned thing.
::--[[User:Badger|Badger]] 22:14, 16 February 2010 (UTC), with Green Dragon contributing.

:::I don't think [[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] was banned though (save the small time right after I was banned). See also [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3ASabre070].
:::Only the first way works, and not fully at that. I mean that fairness, as the idea relating to ownership and hosting with regards to inherent userrights is an important concept for me and how this site it run.
:::"''my word is unimpeachable law''" - no. Things are discussed. Logic is used. I do not always get my way. It's just the idea relating to ownership and hosting with regards to inherent userrights. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:21, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::Allow me to amend my previous comment to reflect this new information. Until you reveal the true reason he was banned I'm leaving it as "without reason" because we both know there is nothing wrong with the username he'd been editing as since March of 2008.--[[User:Badger|Badger]] 22:41, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::I amended it as well, if you do not mind. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:55, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::Oh, '''''"...I, as [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] (with bureaucratship), are not going to host something for people who got banned, and get annoyed as result, and then came back with just the intent to remove the person who banned them, based off their wrong actions, from adminship...."'''''. Best cliffnotes ever.
::::::Related note: Should it be required that a person RfAing and the person being RfA's be '''X''' amount active on the wiki? I.e. so many edits, meeting a certain edit-per-month count, etc. etc.? I've always thought so. I also don't believe that votes from new or IPs should be counted in RfAs (Wikipedia doesn't count them - arguing that they may very well be single-purpose accounts).  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 22:59, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::I don't mind at all, facts are important! I think we are approaching the best approximation of the actual events. Can you fact check as to whether or not Sabre070 was involved in the goings on? I don't recall if he was, but he was unblocked 2 days later, so I assume he wasn't involved.
:::::::Hooper, to address your question I always thought IPs were allowed to comment and such, but you had to be a registered user to actually vote (newly made voters subject inspection for meat puppetry).--[[User:Badger|Badger]] 23:14, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::That is a great question [[User:Hooper|Hooper]]. It needs to be discussed on [[Talk:Requests for Adminship]] though; this is not the place.
::::::::Was [[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] involved? Who knows. If you look at [[Requests for Adminship/Aarnott2]] you can see a list of this so-called "RC Committee" - but not everyone on their was banned. E.g. [[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]]. People were banned for doing actions against policy and/or violating their positions of authority. Bans are not given out for any other reason. The policy comes from Wikipedia. This committee was never implemented since it was illogical compared to alternatives, which are now in place. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:19, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::The so called "RC Committee"? If you had've looked I am not mentioned on that page once. Also, the reason for my blocking was that Aarnott had blocked Green Dragon for 3 days for "Intimidating behaviour/harassment: You are acting out of line right now. Perhaps you should clear your head and come back to this later... Otherwise, this site will lose a lot of its users." and he explains other reasons on his RfA. If I am looking at the block list correctly, you are saying that you are free to intimidate and harass anyone, though others aren't? Also, I like how you always say "we use logic here" (Green Dragon Logic) and also say that it is a wiki and not a dictatorship, yet also say that it is your wiki and you cannot get banned, un-nominated, or treated like any other user.
:::::::::Also, I was not involved, the only edits I have done can be seen here: [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?limit=50&tagfilter=&title=Special:Contributions&contribs=user&target=Sabre070&namespace=&year=2009&month=8 Contributions]. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 01:53, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::I don't know where you guys all grew up or worked, but the person footing the bills makes the rules. You are free to disagree, but in the end it comes down to the owner makes the calls. It is obvious from months of the transientwiki crowd and it's fallout's attempts that you will get nowhere, so just save yourself the trouble and leave. The owner has the final say, whether we agree with it or not. To think otherwise is insane.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 03:25, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::::Ya, you can trust [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] fully, or you can look at my edit contributions during those days. Normal. A policy, which was not agreed upon, was implemented. As such it was removed. Next?
:::::::::::The rest of what you said is not true. Well, I guess that means all of it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 05:09, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

== Hi Green Dragon ==

It appears that a recent edit of the 3.5e Open Game Content page appears to be taken whole or in part from my site (http://grandwiki.wikidot.com/publication-list).
The reason I suspect this is because

Steve Russell Presents…

appears on your page. Steve Russell owns Rite Publishing and personally sent me that material to upload on the Grand OGL Wiki. So I think one of your users may have
copy/paste that material.

If the DnDWiki intends to replicate the Open Game Content from my site on this site can you make sure that the section 15 for that material appears in your sites open game license.

If you wish to contact me about this matter feel free to email me at gedakm@gmail.com. I can put you in contact with Steve Russell if you like as well.

- Mark Gedak
DM Sketchpad/Grand OGL Wiki

:On closer inspection of the similarities of our page, [[3.5e_Open_Game_Content]], and theirs, linked above - it seems like we have most of the bigger names where they go a bit more in depth, and that the random Steve Russell Presents is the only shared link that shows a common history of edit. However, I am really confused as to the request to alter our Section 15 of the OGL. In that same sense, we could argue that the entire website Grand OGL Wiki should change theirs as we existed before them. I just don't understand the real problem here. An OGC game is listed on an OGC page, and that is absolutely fine imho.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 01:53, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

::See also [[Talk:Open Game License v1.0a#Attribution in Copyright Notice]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:58, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

== My Campaign Settings ==

I know that I havent made a great edit in quite a long while, but, I feel that my campaigns should be left up for people to edit. My addition, the Fallout setting has come under an attack of sorts and I feel that more can be done with it, just because one user starts something doesnt mean others can help pitch in, I have helped edit a few pages, even added some weapons. So please, if possible, help me keep my Fallout setting from getting deleted, I put a lot of time into adding the building blocks for it. The Mighty Boosh.

PS - I forgot how to add my name at the bottom, the one with the time posted and all, sincere apologies.

:Wow it's not an attack, I just added at delete tag to start a discussion. There's no content and the two or three pages that are there are not very good. If you're going to fix it then that's fine, but there's no real way for anyone else to add it since only you know what's in your head. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:05, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

The only thing that I need to have done is basic stats for weapons, vehicles, creatures, etc. I will, slowly but surely, put up descriptions of weapons, creatures and vehicles. And I will also do my best to come up with detailed backgrounds of environments and adventures, all I need is some help coming up with stats then the Fallout setting should get rolling along. [[User:The Mighty Boosh|The Mighty Boosh]] 04:26, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

== SEARCHING ==

When I am trying to search by keywords, sometimes the search engine is not coming back with any results.

For example I am searching for HAWK for 3.5. There are no search results.

== Error while searching. ==

Hello all,

Congrats on the great job on the D&D wiki.

I was searching with keyword: ''Samurai'' and ''samurai'' and the result I got was:
''Query failed: connection to localhost:3312 failed (errno=111, msg=Connection refused). ''

I know there were pages resulting from this same search since I have been browsing them the past week.

Hope it helps.

Dervell.

:I had problems with this yesterday as well. But then it mysteriously started working again so I figured you were working on the problem while I was online. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 19:59, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

== Move Errors ==

Hey Green. It appears that since the server issue some of us are experiencing problems when we try to move pages. It doesn't happen every single time, but seems to be at least 3/4ths. The page will stay in a loading status for quite some time and then it'll pop up a database error. Just FYI.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 14:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

:So you don't have to, this is a quote of the error I'm getting: ''"A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was:

(SQL query hidden)

from within function "Title::deleteTitleProtection". MySQL returned error "2006: MySQL server has gone away (internal-db.s89449.gridserver.com)".''"  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 17:57, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

:I know. [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] said he has time to look at it tomorrow so that should be the case. Same with the sword, delete. Do you know of more things? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:03, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

::Not so far. Jazz above mentions some search problem but I haven't been able to duplicate that.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 03:20, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

:::It's hit or miss. I tried it just now and got the error again. Along with the error message, the "search in namespaces" list is misformatted. But then other times it will just work, so it seems to be an intermittent problem. The only other thing I noticed was yesterday every now and then after editing a page it would give me an error that made it look like my edit wasn't saved, but when I went back to check, it was saved. Again, it's nothing repeatable, it just happens off and on. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 05:08, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
:::I seemed to have found a pattern to the searching error: If you type in an exact page name (SRD:Fighter) into the search box then hit "go" (or hit enter), it works fine. If you type in a page name that doesn't exist ("test") you get the error. Also, if you type in a name that does exist but hit "search" instead of "go", you also get the error, so I'm guessing that something went wrong with the search function itself, and not the search box. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 16:39, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

::::Hopefully this weekend all the problems should be dealt with. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:42, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

== Featured Article ==

GD, I would like to recommend an article of mine for a featured article. [[Black Lion (4e Optimized Character Build)]]. I created an entire 4e Class, all of its Class Powers, an entire 4e Paragon Path, and built this Optimized Build just for it. Not only does it include all the prerequisites of a good article, it includes User-generated Tables by Tier, Class Summaries every 10 levels, explanations of unique items and their strategies for use, and an expanded information section which expounds upon the Classes Role in general. I even included a designers guidelines for enemy and character progression by level and a Compare/Contrast section with this builds biggest competing build. Everything you need all in one spot. Tell me what you think? --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 09:26, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

:I am curious as to what you say to the following. When ones makes their own content and then makes a Optimized Character Build from that content it normally is not an "optimization" but rather a "specific 'hole-in-the-game' optimization" specifically created by themselves to optimize an already exploited idea. E.g. natural weapons and natural fighting in this case.
:Of course this may not be the case, I have not throughly looked. I'm just asking for your opinion. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:36, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

::I noticed you used the words "Hole" and "Exploited". Words that rhyme with "Loop-hole", "Broken", and "Cheating". If that is what you mean, then no. This is not that kind of optimization.
::This is a what some people refer to as a "Build". A specific construction of levels, items, and powers that accomplishes a pre-defined purpose. That purpose being: "Maximizing Damage-per-Round during Combat". This also fulfills the Striker Role within 4th Edition as well. See.., the Black Lion Class is currently a working Striker Class within 4e, and this optimization is a fulfillment of it's ultimate potential. However, the Black Lion Class was not created with this specific optimization in mind. The class came ''before'' the optimization and not the other way around.
::I hope that helps. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 07:14, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

:::Feel free to nominate for FA status, of course. Anyone can nominate any article for FA status. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:54, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

== Another post-server fail error ==

Looks like over on the Media Repository, any time I try to see anyones (even my own) contributions there it pulls up an error. Minor, but just fyi.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 05:00, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

:Seems to be working for me now in any case. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:53, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

== Media Fail ==

Everytime I try to log in to upload a pic, I get this.

<pre>A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was:
(SQL query hidden)
from within function "User::idFromName". MySQL returned error "1142: SELECT command denied to user 'db89449'@'205.186.184.15' for table 'wdd_user' (internal-db.s89449.gridserver.com)".</pre>

--[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 18:04, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

:Uploading is working now. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:37, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

== Formatting Help ==

i would like to know how to reformat my submitted setting. i am pretty new to this whole thing...

P.S.~ sorry about completely over-riding your touch-ups, i meant to only make minor corrections, but you see i was in th emiddle of adding a lot of information on the playable races at the time, and i was getting very frustrated at the fact that every time i had an editing conlict, i had to pretty much write everything again. leastways the equivalent amount of work on it, what with taking out the dashes and spaces, and putting in the HTML... {{Unsigned|ChieftainTwilight|15:06, 28 February 2010 (MST)}}

:First if you press the back button it will retrieve the information you had been typing. Just Copy+Paste into the new version (with some minor editing if needed) and continue posting. Edit conflicts are not really a problem as such except for minor formatting or minor changes which deal with the other user's changes. What do I think of [[Mysteries of Andor (3.5e Campaign Setting)|Mysteries of Andor]]? I find that nothing is really fluffed out. I recommend that you make the deities and then link to them from that page. Although you say many names, what I mean is, what are they? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:41, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

== Mediawiki is unavailable? ==

I'm sure you've already been alerted, but just in case, the Mediawiki pictures are not showing up, and Mediawiki comes up saying there is an "Exception caught in Exception Handler". It's not working at all. [[User:Jwguy|Jwguy]] 05:41, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

== Captcha ==

Would it be possible to have only IP and non-autoconfirmed users have to fill out the captcha when inserting external links? There are a butt-ton of d20 Modern stubs, but since the "edit this page" is treated as an external link, I have to fill out a captcha for every stub template. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 02:24, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

== More post-crash problems ==

I'm sure you're aware, but I'm just letting you know of some other problems I'm finding since the server crash. First of all, the site is sllllloooooooowww. Sometimes it will be zippy, sometimes you will wait 10 seconds and get a "something went wrong" message, but other times, like right now, it will take literally minutes (sometimes up to 5) to open up a page. Which is just an eternity when you are trying to add a class.

Secondly, no pictures from mediawiki are being loaded correctly. They all just give the name of the image with a link, instead of actually showing the image.

Keep up the good work! [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 02:53, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

:I know. I have been told that the current MW install has many problems with it and lead to slowing down the site sometimes. Media will be dealt with. Another thing too, to make this even better (time wise), is that I just heard that MW has serious security flaws and needs to be upgraded. Maybe upgrading will fix many of the problems which are slowing it down sometimes too. And then if it keeps being slow sometimes then I will think of something else. Hopefully wednesday things will get better (this weekend did not happpen). Sometime though, I can promise. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:06, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

::Ah, that sucks. At least you've got a culprit and a likely fix, though. The worst thing about misbehaving technology is when you don't know what's going wrong. Maybe having a slow wiki will give me time to catch up on some of the things I'm ignoring while I'm spending too much time here ''':)''' [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 05:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

:::That's not what I said, but sure. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 05:17, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

== problems ==

the site takes forever to load. and i cant search.

== Spam ==

I think I might know why the spam problem has exploded lately: the Captcha doesn't seem to be working. When you add external links there's no captcha prompt at all. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:38, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

:That's because, as was said above, ReCaptcha's were showing up for stub, etc templates for users and external links for users. With MW one cannot just say "IP's have them" anymore, it is now for edit types or somesuch for all but users but those in the admin group. In any case they have been removed as such. Maybe if it continues to be a problem. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:20, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

::Gotcha. It's too bad they don't have more useful options. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 05:24, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

== Number of Admins ==

I can't help but notice the large drop in admins, as of late, for whatever reasons be it. And though I hardly have any standing, nor say in the matter, I suggest some sort of action should be taken to renew the community on this wiki, before its community dies down too much to have any hope of revival. And still, I have little idea as to how to do so, I've seen many great communities fall and shrivel. So I'm convinced that unless someone gets out there and attracts some people into the community, not just general traffic into the site, the community will break down, maintenence and upkeep will fall, and I fear this great wiki could fall into a bad state.

Well, just my thoughts, I thought you should know. I could be terribly wrong and there's a constant amount of community and I'm totally paranoid and pessimistic. But this is how I see it, seeing the constant destruction of admins with no new ones does worry me. --[[User:SgtLion|SgtLion]] 21:19, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

:What are admins? Do they help? Although I have done no research into the subject I almost feel that ones editing decreases once attaining adminship. Do we need more admins? Yes. Of the top of my head I can maybe think of two or more people who need to be RfA'ed. Know someone? Ask them and then, depending on the result, RfA them please. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:20, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

::Makes sense. I don't know anyone, but your point is very much valid. --[[User:SgtLion|SgtLion]] 06:13, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

== Errata ==

Hey Peter Gabert,

I just had a discussion on the WotC board about all the absence of errata for a lot of the previous editions books. For most of these unofficial errata were collected by players.

My thoughts were that a wiki would be a good place to maintain such unofficial errata, given the transient nature of the WotC boards (most of the older errata threads have been purged). Your DnD wiki seems the most natural place to start such an endeavour.

Is this something you would be willing to accommodate, as I'm not sure it fits entirely with your current content?

I don't think I've ever contributed to your wiki, but I'm a regular at several other wiki's and would try to gather as many unofficial errata as possible if you'd give a green light to such an undertaking.

I will try to check back at this page for an answer every now and then, other options like e-mail, I can post if you want to.

Cheers.

Adriaan Renting.

:Yes, it would work. Is errata for OGC OGC? I would imagine so. In any case, a good place to start, (especially if it is unofficial errata) is to just make the page and link to it from the publication. Start by taking a look at [[Publication List]] and finding the book (or adding it if it is not added) and then placing a link on the page. For example [[Exemplars of Evil/Unofficial Errata]]. Does that make sense? Do you think that would work? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:29, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

== Title ==

Heh, sorry about that. For some reason I'm very set in the habit of not creating titles for the first post on a talk page. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 23:04, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

:It's the correct way to do it. No worries, of course, though. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:09, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

== MediaWiki Problems ==

Hey, I didn't see any 'Contact us' options, and I noticed that you were the owner, so I decided to stop by and ask a quick question ''':)'''. Recently this site has been experiencing more and more problems (i.e. not being able to load properly or going down for short periods of time). I just thought I would point this out and wonder if anything could be done?

Oh, and I just want to add, I love this site! Be proud! Thanks! --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 05:33, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

:First we need to clean up this site. For example, at this moment, [[3.5e Sorcerer/Wizard Spells]] spells is not able to load. Why is this? The code is not properly done (SMW and so), I think. In any case it returns a database error and eats up a lot of the server. Once all the code problems have been ironed out then we can see if this is still a problem.
:This should happen slowly. Soon D&D Wiki's MW will be upgraded (the current version has a few security problems) and that should make a difference. Then other areas need to be worked on. I hope this helps answer your question, and I look forward to seeing some of your content. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:39, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

::Well D&D Wiki has been upgraded to MW 1.15.2. Pages like [[3.5e Sorcerer/Wizard Spells]] work now. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:38, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

:::Things are improving. Only a few problems, for example forms and images, are problems now. They should be fixed soon though. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:32, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

== MoI (of sorts) ==

Hi GD, I've got a couple of things to tell you about:

#First of all, I've finished adding PL categories to all the d20 Modern homebrew equipment, so Phase 1 is complete!
#[http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User:Jazzman831/workspace&oldid=461878 Here] is my current progress on Phase 2. Let me know what you think before I continue creating the rest of the pages.
#Three items ([[Flashbang (D20 Modern Equipment)|Flashbang]], [[Phosphorus Grenade (D20 Modern Equipment)|Phosphorus Grenade]] and [[Smoke Bomb (D20 Modern Equipment)|Smoke Bomb]]) are created for D&D 4e, not d20 Modern, so I don't know what to do with them. See my opinion on the matter [[Talk:Flashbang (D20 Modern Equipment)|here]].
#MoI: [[Talk:Grenades (D20 Modern Equipment)]]
#MoI: [[Talk:Halo (D20 Modern Campaign Setting)#Rating_2]]
#What do you think of [[User:Jazzman831/preloads#Ranged Weapon Preload|this]] preload/template as a way to standardize ranged weapons? It's the format used in Weapons Locker, and the most useful format I've seen.
#MoI: [[Category talk:Rifle]] (Note also that [[:Category:Longarm]] actually exists; possibly my next project should be standardizing the categorization of the Modern side of things? Where should such discussion take place?)

Sorry about the long list, but I think that should get us caught up to date. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 17:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

:I copy-pasted your prototype page for [[D20 Modern Equipment]] onto that page. I changed a few things. Do you think the changes make sense? I modernized the subpages. Once all the subpages are created (so called Phase 2) then [[D20 Modern Equipment]] can be cleaned up. I will deal with the rest of your comment above soon... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:17, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

::The changes make sense, though in a perfect world the last two categories (not categorized by age or type) should always be empty, correct? Perhaps this is a good way to make sure that everything gets labeled. For the "all" category (I thought about something similar myself), do you want to create a separate page with every PL X item, or just link to the PL X category, which is effectively the same thing? While we're on the subject of the "all" category, I notice some of the totals (PL 2 and 5) don't add up right. I'll try to figure out what's happened; probably something isn't categorized correctly.

::The only things I really don't like are adding "equipment" to all the pages, because it gets wordy, and removing the PL number from each line of the table. The former isn't really a huge deal, since users probably won't ever type that anyway, but the second is bigger. All of the books (as well as the MSRD) refer to PL primarily by number, not by name, so I think it's better to have the number actually there instead of counting up or down.

::I hope to get to adding the subpages sometime soon. It'll be a function of how much my carpal tunnel is flaring up and how bored I get... [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 00:37, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

:::Alright, subpages are finished, though as I said before, I'm not sure what to do with some of the pages.
:::Have any comments on the rest of my points yet?
:::Also, I think a database has crashed. Every time I try to move a page or use the search I get the following error: <code>145: Table './ddwikidb/wdd_searchindex' is marked as crashed and should be repaired (localhost)</code> [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 19:08, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

::::That database problem is no longer a problem.
::::[[D20 Modern Equipment]] looks good. I only wonder about maybe making the all page split by way of the improving, reviewing, or removing templates. I guess we should discuss that there though.
::::I still have not made up my mind about what should happen to the edition-specific items which were moved to another edition. The others things I responded to, and see below.
::::With regard to the preloads please feel free to add them, something is better is nothing. They can always be improved throughout time of course. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:28, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

:::::Cool. I've actually been creating preloads as I see they've been missing. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 01:58, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

::::::With [[D&D 4.0 Future (4e Sourcebook)|4e Future]] and [[User:Vrail|Vrail's]] comment that
{{quote|4e is a rule set, not a time period.
|orig=--[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 16:50, 16 June 2010 (UTC)}}
::::::I have decided that no time period should be mandated. I think I moved all those back, if there are any others please let me know. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:44, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

== Protect Page ==

I'd like to request a Protection from IP's be placed on my [[White Guard (3.5e Class)]] article. Thanks GD. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 04:26, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

:You actually don't have to request this, just find a page that has it and look at the source code. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 05:26, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

::Oh, good idea. Hehe. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 06:02, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

:::There isn't a source code for protection, it's an additional tab that only certain users (on this wiki, I imagine only admins) have access to. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 17:06, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

::::I protected it from IP edits. And yes, only admins have access to the tab. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:58, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

::::: Ummm..... GD, I don't know whats going on, I may be mistaken as to what you were asking, however I just tried getting it from the source code of another page for IP protection and it worked... [[Orion (3.5e Campaign Setting)]]--[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 22:52, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

:::::: I'm pretty sure that's just a template to let IPs know they are unable to edit the page. They still can edit it, unless an admin has actually protected a page. Think of that source code (the template you copied) as a sign saying "road flooded", but you need an admin to actually add the flood water. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 22:17, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

::::::: Ahhh. Ok, thanks for the clarification. However this can still be useful. If a sign reads 'road flooded 10 km ahead', most cars wouldn't test it. :) --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 22:52, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

== Uploading an Adult Picture ==

I was hoping to place a certain picture on one of the pages that I'm going to design for my camapign setting. However, this picture has nudity in it. It's not pornographic, a female witch is simply naked. I was wondering if I would be allowed to post this? Or should I send it to you first for clearing? --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 05:29, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

:It should be okay. Just make sure to add [[Template:Adult Theme]] to the top of the page. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:27, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

== Kobold buffs? ==

Hey, I was just looking at the negitive level adjustment page, and looked at the discussion page.
And someone said that they didnt think that kobolds were -2 la, cause of the "buffs" they been getting.
You said that the "last few books that wizards published" made them more of a -1 la.

I was wondering what are these buffs/books?

::he probably means Races of Dragon and possible Dragon Magic. RoD actually made kobolds kinda cool--[[User:Name Violation|Name Violation]] 02:56, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

:::Thats what I was thinking after I asked the question, but just wanted to make sure I wasnt missing anything.

::::If I remember correctly it was Races of Dragon, but you could always check the date of the comment and the publication dates. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:15, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

::::: [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060420a Races of Dragon Excerpt]. It gives Kobolds Slight Build (opposite of Half-Giant's Powerful Build), natural weapons and weapon proficiencies. --[[User:TK-Squared|TK-Squared]] 12:00, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

== Couple questions ==

Just a couple things I'd like to ask you about. You mentioned that my class wasn't original and that it's been created before, yet if you search on this web site it's the only one that comes up. Umm? Just wondering about that, cuz I wouldn't know it's unoriginal if nothing else like it is on here. Another question, you mentioned that the Sith aren't all dark users. I took the definition of what a Sith was directly off of the star wars database, so take them up on it if you're really confused about what a Sith is. {{unsigned|Tmblake09}}

:Urm, Green Dragon didn't say any of those things. [[User:Vrail|Vrail]] said it was unoriginal (and unless you are George Lucas, ''any'' Sith class is by definition unoriginal), and he was also the one who suggested there were good and evil Sith. Generally if you have a problem with a specific article, it's best to take it up on that talk page and not a user talk page -- otherwise, people who look at your class later won't see this discussion.

:You are correct, by the way, that there aren't any other Sith classes on the wiki (btw GD, [http://media.dandwiki.com/wiki/Sith this] is another Sith class, but it's posted on MW? I didn't even know that was possible), but there are many, many other Star-Wars related entries. [[Jedi Knight (3.5e Class)]], [[Jedi Healer (DnD Class)]], [[Jedi Guardian (D20 Modern Base Class)]], [[Jedi Dualist (Not Duelist) (DnD Prestige Class)]], [[Jedi Consular (D20 Modern Base Class)]] and [[Jedi Sentinel (D20 Modern Base Class)]] all come up with a quick search. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 16:25, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

== Candidates for Deletion ==

I finished my first-brush pass at candidates for deletion category. All-in-all I deleted or removed the deletion tag from over 200 articles! I skipped the campaign settings for now because they have so many sub pages, but that will be my next project.

One thing I noticed when clearing out all those pages was that a lot of them had talk pages by new users asking why we wanted to delete their page. In many cases, I'm guessing that it turned users away from the wiki, because they are trying to learn all these new things then all of the sudden somebody threatens to take it all away. I don't think the use of the deletion template is fully explained anywhere, so I created [[Template:Delete/why|this]] to help new users understand that we aren't delete-hungry monsters. If you approve, I can add a link to it within the deletion template.

Another thing I saw is pages that had enough information to be completed, they just weren't completed yet. They aren't usable as is, but I don't think it's right to delete them since there's enough there that someone else could finish it with a little gruntwork. I've started a discussion (so far it's just me) about a possible solution [[Category_talk:Candidates_for_Deletion#Idea_for_half-completed_pages|here]]. (While you're there, I had some ideas on the discussion just above it as well.) [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 05:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

== Censorship ==

You've edited a comment I've left on a page. on PokeDM's [[User_talk:PokeDM|Talk]] page. You cropped it down, citing solicitation. I'm forced to say "Not Cool". I went out of my way to not solicit any other websites. I didn't drop a name. I didn't provide a link. Furthermore, I read through the behavioral policy just now and didn't see anything banning solicitation. I was trying to be helpful to a new user, letting him know that other people have tried similar endeavors, and there is help for him if he needs it. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 06:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

:I have never said we do not edit comments. Comments are edited when needed. What you are doing is spam ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_spam Article Spam]), links to D&D resources can be found on [[DnD Links]]; no where else. Partial censorship is something D&D Wiki has — to keep spam and non-relevant things at bay. All the recent spam from IP's (see the barnstars some have received) is not allowed — I think you would understand. It could become a serious problem.
:For example (not notice if you saw it) there was some spam advertising a certain boots company. If I recall correctly they supplied no links. Do you see the problem? It's very simple to understand. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:03, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

::I think he was just confused and dismayed at why you modified his post and never explained why. Poor communication on both sides resulted in a misunderstanding, but I don't think either side was intentionally being aggressive or anything like that. Anyways, no need to start a feud over a misunderstanding. ''':)'''. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 04:17, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

:::Right, but you should also mention that no reason needs to be given in text format (maybe in the edit summary). I see what you mean when you mention this, and for the most part the IP (when violating this) knows though his or her ban. Since this user is not getting banned as a result of his or her solicitation (implicit or explicit), you should notice that just the censorship was hinting at this. Since he or she did not, and actually took this kind gesture the wrong way, now he or she knows is all we can say. As a general rule one should always read the edit summaries, and I hope we can say that if something gets censored with such a reason in the edit summary that is the reason. Seems very simple to understand, but I guess not. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:28, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

::::To be fair Vrail, I was much more aggressive (intentionally) at the end of my comment up there. You just aren't seeing it because it was censored... Anyway, yeah, I was angry because my comment was edited. I don't see how a useful, on-topic, offer of help from an external resource (which was not linked or named) from a registered, contributing user on a fellow user's Talk page should be compared to spam about cheap boots on SRD talk pages. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 04:39, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

:::::Why was it solicitation? Because it did not say something like "I would like to tell you that other resources exist dealing with Pokémon in D&D. A simple Google search should give you some results." --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

::::::I suppose I assumed anyone attempting to make Pokemon monsters for DnD has probably already done a simple Google search. I was trying to provide more specific help with material. Can I leave something akin to "Hey, I noticed you're working on Pokemon for DnD. Leave me a message on my [[User_Talk:Badger|Talk Page]] if you want some help with creation, I know other resources exist that you may find helpful."? --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 20:44, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

:::::::Email would be the correct option. If someone wanted a possibility for such things then there is the possibility they would not mind recieving an email about such things. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

:::::::: The best part of this oppression is that you keep using the verb 'to solicit'. Let us take the most humourous meaning of the word and put it into context; Badger was attempting to bribe PokeDM for sex with name-dropping of! How... dastardly. It's not solicitation, it's advertising. Unless, of course, you think that people finding other sites that have D&D information on is an 'evil action', which wouldn't be too much of a step, to be honest. I mean, Badger doesn't want anything from his actions, except to help, and isn't really persuading the person in anyway nor was he persistent in his name-dropping. Also amusing is how Green Dragon is trying to say that what Badger did is on the same level as spambots. Because what he said had no relevance to the matter at hand for a person called PokeDM! Who'd think he'd want to find pokemon for D&D that other people had made to draw inspiration from. Also, I'll probably be banned for this. After all, I'm some kind of crazy anarchist. SOLICITATION, YES PLZ. --[[User:TK-Squared|TK-Squared]] 11:58, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::No TK, it wasn't the irresistible urge to ''play out fantasies'' with PokeDM that got me caught "soliciting", it's the fact that I mentioned a website exists where PokeDM could find some help. It's not even advertising, in my opinion. It's be like a guy walking around saying "Hey, I see you spilled some mustard on your shirt. Know what could get that out? Soap..." Not the most helpful comment ever, but if you didn't know Soap existed you could certainly get the impression I know a thing or two, and ask me for help on how to find this "Soap".
::::::::: Also, when I said ''play out fantasies'' I meant play a role-playing game with fantasy elements, not have kinky Tome Charizard sex. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 16:57, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::"''Let's take the most humourous meaning of the word and put it into context''" — ya, but I don't mean that usage. That is not how English works. You take the correct usage, the one that works.
::::::::::Etymology: Middle English, to disturb, promote, from Anglo-French solliciter, from Latin sollicitare to disturb.
::::::::::;transitive verb
::::::::::# to make petition to : entreat b : to approach with a request or plea <solicited Congress for funding>
::::::::::# to urge (as one's cause) strongly
::::::::::# to entice or lure especially into evil b : to proposition (someone) especially as or in the character of a prostitute
::::::::::# to try to obtain by usually urgent requests or pleas <solicited donations>
::::::::::;intransitive verb
::::::::::# to make solicitation : importune
::::::::::# of a prostitute : to offer to have sexual relations with someone for money
::::::::::(Merriam Webster)
::::::::::And, yes, it is spam. If he is truly interested in helping PokeDM achieve personal goals then using email to help him find resources is the correct method; please read the discussion before responding. Posting a lasting comment here with soliciting present is not acceptable.
::::::::::And yes, but you should only say "Soap" and if you want to give your preference of a Soap brand then you should only tell him or her, announcing it to everyone is soliciting. And soliciting is not allowed. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:52, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::::{{quote|you should only say "Soap" and if you want to give your preference of a Soap brand then you should only tell him or her, announcing it to everyone is soliciting. And soliciting is not allowed"}}
:::::::::::That is precisely what I did. I told him I knew of soap (a wiki) and if he wanted I could tell him the brand (the wiki's actual name). If you want to go back and read my original comment you'll notice I left it intentionally vague. Unless you think the word "wiki" narrows down the exact website I intended to link. Also, I don't think any of those definitions you posted up there truly apply to what I did. It was one comment on a talk page; hardly urgent, evil, forced, or pleading. It was actually ignored for 2 weeks before you went and edited it. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 22:08, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::::You should of, however, just said it exists. Then the user can find it him/her self. This is correct. If it is such a singularity then an email with specifics would be in order.
::::::::::::By saying things like "wiki" and so you are soliciting, implicitly, and that is not allowed on D&D Wiki. Saying things exist, however, is okay. Why? Then "other things" are not given an even playing field and you are attempting to influence the readers views. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:38, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::::::How was he supposed to know he could e-mail me to ask for specifics if I didn't mention that he could? Furthermore, given all the recent spamming on this website (which you, yourself, acknowledged a few posts up), I don't want to leave my email address on this site; and I certainly wouldn't ask someone else to do something I was afraid to do. Finally, let's get the straight, right here, right now: the word "wiki", at least in the context of "I know a wiki exists", is solicitation. Quite frankly, if they did know what I mean, then they probably already know everything I do. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 20:01, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}

:Since you mentioned my name I thought I'd pipe up. Ironically, I only know what you are talking about because I've seen it censored from people's pages. Had I not seen "removing solicitation" in the RC longs, I probably wouldn't have gone to those user's pages and seen the link in the first place.
:But I digress. You can email a user without posting your email address to spammers. If you have set up your email address in your [[Special:Preferences|preferences]], and have checked the "enable e-mail from other users" box, you can send or be sent an email through the wiki using the Email this User link on a user's page or talk page. This doesn't leave you open to spammers, because they don't actually have a way to access your email address unless you give it to them. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:16, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

::Exactly. And use <code><tt>Special:EmailUser/<!-username-></tt></code>. As I said above, "''If someone wanted a possibility for [email] then there is the possibility they would not mind recieving an email about such things.''" --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:26, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

:::I have been on this wiki for some time now, and I had no idea that function existed. Thanks for the heads up. And Green Dragon, I still have no idea what "''If someone wanted a possibility for [email] then there is the possibility they would not mind recieving an email about such things.''" means... --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 20:46, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

:::::I spent a lot of time on a wiki that was a little obsessed with back-channel talk, so I learned pretty quickly about the email user function. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 21:29, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

::::Meaning that I hope people make sure their preferences are their preferences. I hope that those who add an email also make sure to select or deselect "Enable e-mail from other users". --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:59, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

:::::Not all users read those boxes carefully, and the box is unchecked by default. It's the kind of thing that most people don't know is there until someone tells them about it. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 21:29, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

::::::Is that included in Green Dragon's Welcome Message? If not, I move we add it. I know I glanced at the preferences page the day I first signed up, and not again until just now. I know that's on me for not being more careful, and through, but I imagine many people don't know that exists. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 22:49, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

:::::::I changed it a bit ([http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User%3AGreen_Dragon%2FWelcome_Message&diff=465597&oldid=428051 diff]). Your thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:21, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

::::::::I'm curious as to what prompted the change from "love" to "enjoy", but I do think it is much better. Might it also be beneficial to have a straight-up welcome page for new users? The message is personal and nice, and for that short and sweet is best. But a more in-depth welcome page might also be helpful, perhaps with a list of admins, or very active users, and their areas of expertise. For instance, asking you for campaign writing advice would be useful, but given my time here I think Hooper is who I would direct questions to. Again, you may be able to help with d20 Modern, but there is no doubt in my mind that Jazzman would perhaps be more helpful. Nothing against you or your abilities, but everyone has a strong suit, we should embrace that. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 03:28, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::One enjoys websites not loves them? Dunno. Sounds better? Dunno.
:::::::::And no. That's not going to happen. Everyone interprets things for themselves and having a D&D Wiki-mandated page telling users how certain things are which is interpreted on a personal scale is not good policy.
:::::::::And if people do not know the generals of wiki's then they need to learn — but D&D Wiki is not Wikipedia in the sense of a trillion help pages to learn MediaWiki and so. One can go there. We assume if one cares they can first look for it theselves. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:54, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

== Hello ==

Good evening Admin.
i have a question.

What would you say for a LA+0 Race to have +3 STR, +6 DEX, +3 CON, -6 WIS, -4 INT, -2 CHA() Size= Large. Would you say that would be fair? im considering on making a race thats not too over powered but just right. I would love to make a Na'Vi race. From the movie Avatar. i love that movie and i think it would just be awesome to bring it into D&D Wiki. {{unsigned|Powershart}}

:I'm not Green Dragon, but I saw this and thought I'd respond anyway. LA +0 seems low for a large creature, especially one that gets a total of +12 to physical stats. Plus you have exactly offset the physical bonuses with mental penalties, and if we use the orc as a precedent, physical stats are more valuable than mental. (By the way, odd numbered stat increases are generally frowned upon, because they don't add a static bonus/penalty.) I'm not sure that Na'Vi would have low Int or Cha, and they ''definitely'' don't have low Wis. They are very spiritual, insightful creatures; if anything, they should get a Wis bonus. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 14:54, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

::First racial changes should always be even. Second, large size normally means LA 1-2. With the bonus' to dex it could get very overpowered, for example with ranged fighting. I would recommend upping the LA and tonning down the ability score changes and then it could be LA 1. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:49, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

think you for welcomeing me even now it's alittle late for my response but it is one.

== How do I Delete? ==

I realize that the Special Operative Gunslinger is way off balance, and I want to delete it... How would I go about doing this? {{Unsigned|Rogue The Demonchild|06:02, 4 May 2010 (UTC)}}

:See also [[:Category:Candidates for Deletion]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:33, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

== Search and DPL Problems ==

When trying to browse the D&D 3.5 pages, many things do not load in the list, cutting off about a third of the way down to about half the way down. The search function is also broken. These problems have been occurring for a few months, and I am a little upset that I can't access all of the data available on this website. Sorry if you've heard these complaints many times before, but I figured I should report it, since it hasn't been dealt with for a while. {{Unsigned|216.134.174.192|20:37, 5 May 2010 (UTC)}}

:Both of these problems have been dealt with, and thanks for mentioning the problems. Please see below and [[Talk:All 3.5e Races#DPL Problem]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 02:49, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

== Trouble with the wiki ==

Hey, I'm just stopping by to say, and I know this has been said before, but their seem to be some problems with loading pages on the wiki. It seems as though every second time I try to load a new page it says 'error wiki down' or something of the sort. Not to mention it taking a very long time to load pages some times. In addition to this, it is impossible to search and to move pages as it keeps on saying error. I was under the impression that the slowness of the wiki and the constant downs were supposed to be fixed a while ago from your response to my earlier post about this on the discussion page, however it seems to still be causing trouble.

I don't mean this in a threatening or rude way, so please don't take it the wrong way, but if this keeps up the wiki may start loosing some of its community, which would be a terrible thing as I love the wiki and the people here. So I'm hoping that this can be figured out some how and the wiki can start working at optimal capacity again. Perhaps it is having problems with loading because of spikes that the servers can't handle at certain times of the day? Anyways, hope its worked out, thanks. :)--[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 21:08, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

:Search was repaired.
:Moving pages now works.
:With regard to the speed I am going to switch hosting soon again (to something a little different) and from there we can see once again.
:Sound okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:55, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

::AWESOME! [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 21:24, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

:::Thats great, thanks for jumping on this so quickly, I look forward to a faster wiki! ''':)''' --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 21:30, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

::::Hosting has been switched and the problems are being ironed out. We'll have to see how it is now and then see. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:12, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

== Idea about "authors" ==

I was thinking last night. A ''lot'' of pages still have "authors" listed in the infobox, and I've noticed you've spent a ton of time editing this out. Would it make sense just to take out the authors parameter from the infobox templates? That way it would stop showing up everywhere at once.

I would be glad to do it, as it's a good way to learn how templates work, I just wanted to make sure you approved before I changed almost every page on this wiki! [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 16:05, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

:Why are the authors being removed? I think it's a great idea to have them so that the creators can easily be contacted about the page, or other pages they have done. It also allows authors to take pride in the work they spent so much time creating. I would hate to have the author section removed on my pages and pages I view, just something to consider. :)--[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 20:36, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

::the long-short of it is if you wanna see authors, look in history. --[[User:Name Violation|Name Violation]] 20:43, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

:::As Name Violation said, the authors are always in the history. The bigger issue is that "authorship" gives users a misleading impression about the GNU license. What ends up happening is people see the "authors" box and then don't edit pages because they are afraid they are going to be treading on someone else's work, and those pages sit around without being completed. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 23:32, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

::::However what happens with pages made weeks ago? or months ago, or more? Or what if people like what they have posted and want only minor edits, I realize that it's ok for them to be edited, but some people only want certain degrees of editing done to their pages. Also it says in the box that constructive edits are welcome, unless specified otherwise. If people care enough to respect the author then they should also care enough to read that part. Plus, it won't change a thing if the author isn't listed, its still not made by them and they know there is another author, therefore they will most likely give the same degree of caution.

::::So if having authors has advantages and some people want them to be listed, and the disadvantages will be in effect either way, it seems there is still no logical reason in my mind to remove them. Anyways, thats just my two cents, ignore me if you want to. :)--[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 00:59, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

:::::Personally, I'm with Vrail on this one. I don't pretend to understand the legal ramifications behind authorship/ownership and GNU-FDL, or whatever else. I know if I see a minor problem with a page (typo, minor formatting, circumlocution, etc) I fix it. If I'm making a mechanical change I post it on the talk page first, and wait for someone else to pipe in (even someone else other than the author) and if they think my edit is for the better I'll make it. I know I have a few things on this wiki, and I'd like to be told before someone is making mechanical changes to my work, not just see it in the revision history. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 01:24, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

::::::There's a couple different issues here:
::::::#People who don't want their articles edited. "If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here." Sorry, that's just the way it is.
::::::#People who want to take credit for their work. As was stated before, the author's name is on the history. If you want to take credit for you work, put a link on your talk page. There's really no need to take credit on the page itself.
::::::#People who make edits to pages without taking into consideration the original author. This is going to happen (and in fact, does happen) whether or not there's a little box at the top saying "this page belongs to X". It's good wiki etiquette to ask before making major changes; Wikipedia has pages that are so long gone from the original authors that literally thousands of different editors have made changes, yet still it's expected that any significant changes are explained on the talk page. I think this is a better way to do things, really. Having an "author" relies on the fact that creators stick around to help other people with their pages, and I think it's pretty clear that in the long run that very rarely happens.

::::::I should clarify that I'm not trying to change policy here, I'm just going along with what [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Duck_McGraw_%283.5e_NPC%29&diff=prev&oldid=459965 GD has already been doing]. Also, I like the idea of authors in theory, but I think on this specific website, it's making things worse, not better. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 02:50, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

:::::::True, but I'm not argueing that articles shouldn't be eddited by everybody. This, while as has been stated, can be done with poor etiquette I agree it is part of posting things on the wiki. It even says so as you have quoted. However a number of people do not check history or discussion pages, and it's nice to have people know it was you who developed the page. I also think that more people stick around to help others with the page than you think, I'm constantly going through all my pages, either checking them for comments or revising them.

:::::::In the end I do agree with some of your points, but wish to stick with my original position. I think authors are a good idea, and why would they have been added in the first place if they were all bad?--[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 05:29, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

::::::::''[A] number of people do not check history or discussion pages...''
:::::::::We shouldn't be catering to the people who are doing it wrong, we should be teaching them how to do it right. Besides, if someone's not going to look at the history or discussion page, they probably aren't looking at the author template.

::::::::''[It's] nice to have people know it was you who developed the page.''
:::::::::Meh. If you need the satisfaction, your name will forever be in the history, and you are free to link to the articles on your userspace. I don't see this as a compelling reason to keep the author template.

::::::::''I also think that more people stick around to help others with the page than you think...'''
:::::::::I bet more ''don't'' than ''you'' think :) You can't use yourself as an example, because you are one of the 10% of editors who actually comes back more than once. Trust me, in cleaning up the d20 Modern side of things as well as several hundred deletion candidates, I can tell you that there are tons of people who never stay for more than 1 week, tops. But the site's only 4 years old; what happens a year for now, or two, or ten? If we assume that the site exists forever, then eventually every editor will leave and never come back.

::::::::''[Why] would they have been added in the first place if they were all bad?''
:::::::::I don't know why they were added, but people rarely do things ''knowing'' they aren't going to work out well. You do them, then ''later'' figure out they didn't work well.

::::::::Remember, not having the word "author" on the top doesn't stop you from ''acting'' like one. If you create a page and someone comes along and changes a mechanic without explanation, you have every right to change it back, whether or not it's your name on the top of the page. But that's a product of wiki etiquette, not a product of who was the first person to edit the page.

::::::::So in the end, what's changed by removing the author template? Sure, you lose (some) recognition, and that's hard for some people to swallow. I have created very little original content on this wiki, and the few things I have created have gone unnoticed by the community, and yes, it made me a little sad. But I know that anyone who comes along a week or a month or a decade from now can look at the pages and say "hey, I really like this, I wonder who wrote it?" and only be a couple clicks from finding out it was me.

::::::::What else do you lose? I can't think of anything. But what do you gain? Things might actually get done, instead of waiting for a long-gone author's permission to correct spelling and grammar errors. People won't have a false sense of ownership over pages (I don't pretend to know all the things that have gone on in this wiki before I got here, but from what I ''do'' understand, this single fact could have solved a lot of it). New users won't be so intimidated and will contribute more and stay longer. We can progress to a community of discussion and move away from one of unilateral action.

::::::::I'm not trying to be biased in my assessment, but I really don't see the costs/benefits favoring keeping the templates. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 06:03, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::lol, nice counters to my points. :P However I am one of those authors who finds it hard to swollow loosing some recognition. Also, many new users, if the author isn't presented on the main page then they won't know were to find it if they like the page. Instead of not having authors, we could just make it clear that you have full creative principle with others articles and can edit constructively, as the box usually states. As well, for things such as classes and races, yes, some people do get to overprotective of their articles. However, if somebody came along and started making major changes to my campaign setting, which I have invested many hours into, then I would be a bit displeased. Although I do have to agree with your point that it would be less intimidating for new users. However for this to happen, we would have to make it clear that all posts are comunity developed instead of just not including authors.

:::::::::You are slowly convincing me, but remember, I ''do'' have a biased assesment of things, seeing as I have always loved being able to see authors, and having people be able to see myself as an author. So therefore I may not be the best candidate to discuss this with. :P--[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 06:18, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::"''I also think that more people stick around to help others with the page than you think, I'm constantly going through all my pages, either checking them for comments or revising them.''"
::::::::::Of course keep in mind "''If necessary please use the "Watch this page" checkbox before creating the page. Keep in mind "my preferences" → "E-mail me when a page I'm watching is changed". Your username or IP address will be recorded in the new pages history for authorship purposes.''" ([[Add Instructions]]).
::::::::::"''[Why] would they have been added in the first place if they were all bad?''"
::::::::::[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] made it since he felt people should have a sense of authorship. Over time this has been shown to be counter-productive.
::::::::::As [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] said "''People won't have a false sense of ownership over pages ... We can progress to a community of discussion and move away from one of unilateral action.''"
::::::::::And I would like to give an example. Quite a while ago I made the [[Flying Archer (3.5e Prestige Class)]] and then decided that authorship should be disregarded as the editing method. As such I put it up for adoption (as this was the 'correct' way to approach this at this time ([http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Flying_Archer_%283.5e_Prestige_Class%29&diff=289660&oldid=233570 diff]) ). Over time my article was changed quite a bit and a picture was added ([http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Flying_Archer_%283.5e_Prestige_Class%29&diff=444354&oldid=289660 diff]). As a person I still feel a sense of "ownership" of this article. My plan? A while ago I looked at the [[Flying Archer (3.5e Prestige Class)|Flying Archer]] and thought maybe I should just revert it. However I saw some merit and ideas. So, now when I have some extra time, I am planning on piping in on the discussion and helping to make it 'good' as I see it. So, what is authorship? If I had kept my name on it all the new merit and ideas would never be able to be seen, and I think it would have actually ultimately hindered the future of the [[Flying Archer (3.5e Prestige Class)|Flying Archer]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:06, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::::It's called having two articles with different names and different authors. You should try it some time. -- [[User:Jota|Jota]] 18:27, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::::You can look at it like that, and please do, however I find that the ''idea'' behind a certain creation type should be the best that it can be. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:33, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::::::Would you be willing to put the idea to a vote? Clearly among the 5 contributing users commenting on this thread we have a 3-2 split, overall in favor of keeping the author tag(Vrail, Jota(?), and myself for, Green Dragon and Jazzman opposed). I think the fact that "wiki" is in the name of the website should be a hint enough that you can edit freely any article you want. Also, I believe your welcome message encourages editing of all articles. Finally, we don't know what would have happened if you had left your authorship on that page. It's just as likely that someone would have seen it, and left their comments on the talk page and you (as the author) could have started a dialog about what should go and what should stay. If you didn't want to be in charge of leading that dialog, by all means throw on the adoption template and walk away, but many of us are in favor of being the main contributor to our work. I personally don't think we all should forfeit our rights to credit and ownership because you did it once and it turned out ok. To me that is likely the exception, not the rule. Look at how many unfinished articles are up for adoption but remain the same, and how many with authors are being changed and collaborated on. One other note, looking at the talk page, it looks like most of the changes occurred after adoption (when a new user name was on it) and most of the contributions were by names I recognize to be "editing buddies" of the adopter. By "editing buddies", I mean wiki-friends who all contribute on each others talk pages all the time. I saw no new editors, merely conversation between comrades suggesting things to the adoptive editor. Quite frankly, it may only have been adopted because you, Green Dragon, are the one who put it up for adoption. I know I'd be curious to see something you wrote. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 20:57, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}

:This is not a voting issue. Voting is used when options are equivalent or have to be classified as equivalent (e.g. taste).
:What are the options? (a) To use history for authorship purposes (see also [[Add Instructions]]) or (b) use [[Template:Author]] and history for authorship purposes.
:Why are (a) and (b) not equivalent? Since they do not serve the same purpose. [[Template:Author]] is a template with a creation date, username & options for contact, and an 'overall' editing summary. Although these ''are'' equivalent to the history tab in ''presence'', they are not comprehensive. This non-comprehensive aspect makes them not equivalent.
:Although they are not equivalent (the history tab and [[Template:Author]]) why not just add it onto the page to add another aspect to the page, fulfilling the criteria of (b)? This is where this discussion has its core. My answer is because the non-comprehensive aspect can be deceiving. It can appear to many as a ''comprehensive'' history tab, making it deceiving to users which may not understand tabs (e.g. [[User talk:Green Dragon#Ganteka]]) and through the process disregarding some users.
:I ask anyone to give their input to the question of "''Although they are not equivalent (the history tab and [[Template:Author]]) why not just add it onto the page to add another aspect to the page?''" --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:28, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

::I think the Ganteka section you pointed out is a prime example of why author templates would help. If Axl could have seen "'''Author:''' 238.346.23.6785" up in the main info box he would not have assumed that Ganteka wrote it. As to perceived comprehensiveness, I think we both know that's silly. No one expects a page on a wiki to have a single contributor, that's not how wikis work. If anyone sees an author tag and thinks "Well, I can't edit this page because it belongs to that guy" the problem is with teaching how wikis work. I understand that somewhere we should have a comprehensive list of who contributed what to where, but I don't think that means we have to get rid of an author template. History is important, and I don't think we should ever get rid of it (I don't even think we can, that's kinda the point), but I don't see any problem with having a single line that says "'''Author:''' Badger". --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 19:05, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

== Moving Pages ==

I noticed that recently you were moving a number of DnD pages to 4e or 3.5e or their corresponding eddition. Is this being done to all pages? If so, I could help. ''':)''' --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 05:17, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

:Ya, it is. If you would like to [[DnD Rules]] could use some page-moving help. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 05:21, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

::So are all the pages on those lists just being moved to 3.5e rather than DnD? Or am I missing something? It just seems like a simple task to have not been completed yet. ''':)''' --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 05:39, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

:::It's been a few days now, just wanted to say I'm still waiting for an answer. I really want to help out, but I don't want to start moving pages and find out I'm doing something wrong. ''':)''' --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 03:21, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

::::That is what needs to be done there. A lot of simple tasks have yet to be completed, a great example is [[Special:ListRedirects]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:54, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

:::::Awesome, just wanted to clarify. I'll start moving some pages, although many may have to wait a bit, it's pretty late at night were I live right now. ''':)''' --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 04:36, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

::::::'''I DID IT!'''. That took a lot more work than I thought it would, but it's finished now, and I can rest happy, knowing the wiki was helped. ''':D''' --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 06:50, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

:::::::I just finished converting all of the 3.5e campaign setting tags from DnD to 3.5e. I was wondering if there were any more big pages to convert? --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 19:32, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

::::::::I can't think of anything that involves moving pages, but if you are looking for something with lots of work, check out [[Special:DoubleRedirects]]. If that interests you, basically what you need to do is change the first redirect to point to the third redirect, skipping the second redirect entirely. But then you have to go to the second redirect, hit the "what links here", and change all those links to point to the third page. Finally, add a deletion tag to the second redirect, and I'll come along behind you and delete the unneeded redirects.
::::::::Of course, it's a lot of work, but it's pretty mindless work. Luckily since we mostly use DPLs instead of direct linking, when you moved all those pages 90% of the links to those pages will have moved with them, and you won't have to change much. Unfortunatly, as of this moment there are 984 double redirects!! If this interests you but I didn't explain it well just leave a message on my talk page and I'll be more clear. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:01, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::Awesome, so I've moved all the big pages of DnD to their correct editions. What a great feeling it is to have finished, that was a lot of work. ''':)''' Anyways, I'll get to work on the double redirects. ''':)''' --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 18:29, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::Of course, if you want to do something less mindless, you could update the classes pages and look over their content. Let me know if you are interested. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:05, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::::Lol, that does sound pretty interesting, but I have a lot going right now, perhaps when I finish up my campaign setting, or fix a few more double redirects I'll do it, but right now I just don't think I have the time.
:::::::::::But if the job is still open in a couple of weeks or a month or two I'd love to do it. ''':)'''--[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 03:36, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::::Well it's open until the task has been completed. I started on [[DnD Base Classes]], and will finish the task sometime in its current state. Just let me know when you have time and still want to, unless you understand what I am talking about then of course at your leisure. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:23, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

== what would be involved in hosting an OD&D derivative? ==

There are several old school D&D clones, most of which are ostensibly derived form D&D3.0, like labyrinth lord, OSRIC, Swords & Wizardry.

Would it be a possibility, assuming one of them consented to be hosted here, to have a section added to be populated with that content?

Their PDFs can be sometimes a little frustrating to navigate.

-- Greg.gilbraithATgmail.com

:Of course. If you need to know how to start your own section please let me know. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 02:50, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

== Quests and Encounters ==

When you try to create a new Quest on the [[3.5e Quests]] page, all it says is AAA. Their is also no page to make encounters. Is their any way for this to be fixed with relative ease? I was just looking into adding an adventure/quest and couldn't create it that way.--[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 04:16, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

:Please see [[Talk:DnD Flaws#Flaw Form]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:50, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

::What's the advantage of using a form vs. a preload? [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 21:36, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

:::Preloads are better. This was discussed somewhere (I think on a form's removed page (please see [[Talk:DnD Flaws#Flaw Form]])). The reason was that preloads make it so wiki syntax is learned sometime whereas forms do not do that. And both are about the same difficulty to understand. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 02:49, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

== Deletion ==

I don't know how to delete things on this wiki; I'm assuming it's a mod's job, but I've honestly got no idea. I'm trying to delete [[Epic Access (3.5e Feat)]] and [[Greater Epic Access (3.5e Feat)]], as I've turned both of them into [[Epic Access (3.5e Variant Rule)]]. If deleting things is a mod's job only, would you delete them for me? If I can actually do it, I'd be more than happy to learn how so I don't bother you or Hooper over this again. Thanks! --[[User:For Valor|For Valor]] 23:36, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

:Please see [[:Category:Candidates for Deletion]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 02:46, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

== Spam ==

Today alone I have already removed four spam posts, and thats just one person on one day. It seems recently the pace of spam has increased. Am I imagining things or did some spam blocking protocol get messed up or something? Anyways, just wondering if there is anything that can be done to help keep spam down. ''':)'''--[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 20:47, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

:Oops, just noticed this was already talked about, feel free to delete this comment if you wish. ''':)'''--[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 20:53, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

::Honestly, I don't think blocking the spammers really does anything. I've never seen one IP address spam more than one page, so they've got some kind of program that randomizes the IP after every spam post. However, the reason you probably saw more today is because traffic was much lower, so the same amount of spam makes up a higher percentage. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 01:07, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

::Actually, I take back that last part. The spammers are out in force today for some reason. Good work, as always, Vrail.

::The only pattern I ''have'' noticed is that they seem to hit the same pages over and over (can't quite figure out why they choose those pages though). When I see a page has been hit more than once I protect it for a couple months from anonymous edits. Don't really know if that helps or not, I'm hoping that the bot hits a protected page, tries to edit, and isn't smart enough to figure out that it's locked so nothing happens. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 03:09, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

== 3.5e Page Names ==

I have noticed that a number of the larger pages in 3.5e are still called DnD (i.e [[DnD Character Options]], [[DnD Classes]], [[DnD Campaign Settings]], etc.). Since all of the pages in these categories have been moved to 3.5e rather than DnD, shouldn't these larger pages be moved too? Anyways, I was just wondering, just say the word and I can do it. ''':)''' --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 06:03, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

:Of course, and please feel free. Also, since they are related to one another, the templates with "DnD" present (e.g. [[Template:DnD Prestige Classes Breadcrumb]]) should also be moved. They are also considered subparts of the 'larger pages' as well. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:45, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

::When you were changing the links on the 3.5e homebrew page so they skipped the redirect you missed [[DnD Maps|maps]]. Just pointing it out since I can't do it myself. ''':)''' --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 23:20, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

:::Oops, nevermind, just checked and the maps pages are the same for 3.5e and 4e. Sorry, I guess I should check before I talk next time. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 23:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

::::It would make sense to add an addition, but I do not think an edition really defines a map. Maybe if they have creatures detailed (e.g. [[dndmedia:File:Blacksmith's Cellar.jpg|File:Blacksmith's Cellar.jpg]]. Dunno, your thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 02:41, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

== Images Lost ==

So it appears we have yet again lost all the uploaded images on the wiki. Everywhere that there should be an image is the link, but no image (on my computer at least). What's the deal? I know this happened once before, I want to say when mediawiki was updated. Is that what happened this time? --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 18:40, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

:I don't know what happened, however I would just like to say that this has happened for my computer to, so it's not just you! ''':)''' --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 20:36, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

::I looked into it a bit more, and figured out that the pictures are still there in the media wiki. However the links are going to the normal D&D wiki categories rather than linking to the files in the media repository. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 21:59, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

:::Images are working once again. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:48, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

== Races Not Showing Up ==

Um, hey Green Dragon. I made 3 races, one used to show up (they're all for D&D 4e) called Hyrulian, and now none of them show up. there was Dark Hylian, Hyrulian (I changed the name once you click on it), and Zora. The Zora is not the same as the 3.5e. I never created that one. Anyway, if you could tell me, that would be nice. Thanks, and thanks for creating D&D Wiki! --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 00:22, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

:I fixed those. When you add things make sure the categories are correct. Categories make pages show up on other pages and the removal of categories or the incorrect changing of categories will stop that from happening. If you want a category for your user, although not recommended since links on ones userpage is the same thing, please add that in addition. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 02:36, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

::Hey ''Green Dragon'', 2 of my races have shown up: ''Dark Hylian'' and ''Hylian''. So you don't have to worry about those two. But, Could you put my '''Zora''' (4e race) one up? Thanks,
::Hmm, Maybe I should watch the introduction someday. All right! Thanks! --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 03:53, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

:::It is. The template at the top of the [[Zora (4e Race)]] page makes it show up in the lower section. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:58, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

::::I found out where the Zora race went. I finished the adventurers. Do you have to manually move the Zora so that it won't be edited? Thanks, --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 03:59, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

:::::If you dealt with the issue on the stub template then feel free to remove the template. When you do it will be moved up to the upper section. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:02, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

== D&D wiki, whats the status? ==

Hello fellow D&D gamer,

I was surfing D&Dwiki, and looking for some maps, and when I finally found them, I sadly realized that the jpeg files were no longer their. Then when I went back to the home page, I also saw that the picture of the Rock worm was gone (which has been their for ages). So what's going on? How's D&D wiki doing?

A fan of D&D WIKI!

Cheers,

Amrit van der Lely (Netherlands)

== question ==

What does d% mean or is that just the drop ratio and if you do give me an answer do you mind telling me how to use the drop system?? {{unsigned|Billojava|2010-06-02 07:54}}

:[[SRD:Basics#d%|What d% means]]. No idea what you mean by the "drop system". —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 14:04, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

::I actually found a really cool d%. It was a big clear and hollow d10, with a smaller solid red d10 inside. When you roll it both roll simultaneously creating a %. It's really awesome.--[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 16:46, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

:::I've got a few of those die-inside-a-die for each type, and they're really neat. We also wear '''d%er''' patches, much like bikers wear '''1%er''' patches. Its hilarious.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 16:48, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

== Fell Knight 4e Powers ==

Hey,

If anyone could put down how to create Class 4e powers, that would be great, cause I need to provide a power list for my Fell Knight.

[[User:Axl|Axl]]

:[[Add New 4e Power]]. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 19:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

== Locking Pages ==

Hey Green Dragon, Do I really have to let people edit my races that I created? 'Cause, I really don't want anyone editing them. Thanks, --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 22:32, 2 June 2010 (UTC)Axl

:Yes. Its a collaborative site. If you are not 100 percent okay with others working with you, then don't upload the content.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 23:37, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

::You can request to get your content locked, but then you cannot edit it either. Let me know what you decide please. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:40, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

:::How do you lock your content? I'm thinking that's what I'm going to do. Can I unlock it without troubling you? --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 00:19, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

::::Actually, I'll just let people edit things, and if I don't like it, I'll click the revert button. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 01:52, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

:::::If you want your content locked post something on the talk page saying it. Or supply some links to an admin. A few editing deviations exist, of course. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:31, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

== Power Ideas ==

Hey, if anyone has any ideas for my classes powers, just put them down [[Fell Knight Powers (4e Power List)|here]].

Thanks,
--[[User:Axl|Axl]] 19:22, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

== Tavern re-opening ==

So it's been a while since the tavern was closed down. I know there was some trouble with it in the past, and doubt as to it's use/need.However, I see dozens of messages on talk pages that are posted minutes apart, and I for one have been hit by plenty of edit conflicts. I know before hosting the channel was an issue, but as I understand that was resolved. Is that still the case? I wonder if there was any other interest in re-opening the tavern. A vote/discussion on the topic would be worth looking into, I think. As for hosting, if the server support isn't there, I'm sure we can find some free IRC hosting. Just something I've been thinking about, it might help to drive some life back into the site, and increase the community user-base. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 23:19, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

:GD believed that the tavern was actually a bad thing for the wiki to have, and therefore it was never re added even after the server was fixed. However, reading over the discussion about it (I would post it but I can't remember what it was called), it seemed like more people wanted to keep it then discard it, and it was never really voted on.

:I know this was dealt with already, but now that it's brought up I'd like to put in my own 2 cents that, I loved the tavern. It was a great resource and could be used for not only common discussion but it can help with people wanting reviews on their pages, or help/advice. It also seemed to help create a more welcoming community and allowed at some point for a D&D game to be played, which was a good idea and seemed fun. For all of these good things about it, it seemed only one negative point could be brought up, the amount of spam on it. However with the ratio of good to bad being 5 to 1, I do think this discussion could be reopened. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 02:18, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

::I think you are referring to [[Discussion:The_Tavern:_use,_expansion,_and_availability.|this]] discussion. It seemed toward the end of that conversation that Green Dragon was opening up to the idea again, maybe I'm misinterpreting, however. I think we should seriously look into opening it up. From that discussion it appeared that many of the problems were surrounding users no longer involved with this project. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 20:42, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

:::Hrm, was the tavern just like a chat room? I've had a lot of bad experiences with off-wiki communication on other wikis... all it does is make people paranoid and exclude people. Even now, with the Tavern dead for 6 months, there are talk pages on this wiki which say "go to the tavern, we are discussing it right now". Well, that only really works if you happen to be there at that moment of time. But if I want to read that discussion to figure out how they reached some decision, I can't. Wikis are designed to have everything visible always, not some stuff visible once.

:::I can see the value of, say, hammering out class ideas in real time, or chatting about your most recent D&D game, but I don't think any off-site communication should be relied upon for more than that. If someone makes a change to a page based on a tavern discussion, someone else a year down the line needs to be able to understand why that change was made. And no policy discussions should ever be held on the tavern, period.

:::So to clarify, I'm not strictly against it ''per se'', but we need to be very careful of how it's used. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 23:02, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

::::I figured the tavern was almost exclusively for "hammering out class ideas in real time, or chatting about your most recent D&D game", and other things, like quick rule questions that don't need to be a discussion forum, like "does DR from multiple places stack?". It was never my intention to have it be anything more than "Hey, can someone check out MyClass?". --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 23:32, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

:::::In the past it's been used for more than that... naturally I can't remember where I saw it, but there was at least one policy discussion that was discussed on the tavern, and then people who weren't on were very confused. But like I said, as long as we are clear about it's use, it can be a great feature. And really, I don't see why we'd need to host it ourselves... given the bandwidth problems, I'd go so far as to say we don't ''want'' to host it here. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 23:54, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

::::::That's why I've looked into the free hosting provided by freenode.net. As for policy discussions, I think as long as we remember the tavern is part of a bigger whole, that shouldn't be a problem. I've started a mockup in my [[User:Badger/sandbox1|sandbox]] of what the tavern portal should look like, if you want to suggest changes to text, or see what I'm trying to do, or something.--[[User:Badger|Badger]] 00:01, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

:::::::I think it would be nice to host it ourselves, just for consistency and easier management and placement. We also have the bandwidth to host it ourselves, unless I misunderstood a previous post on the tavern discussion page. So really it shouldn't be a problem as to us hosting it ourselves.

:::::::It would be nice to have GD's opinion on this, seeing as it is his decision in the end anyways. Soooo, care to stop by and chat dragon ol' buddy? ''';)''' --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 01:40, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

::::::::I think we ''thought'' we had enough bandwidth, but seeing as we are having bouts of server off-time daily, I think we probably don't have the bandwidth we thought we did... But yeah, obviously we're in a holding pattern until GD weighs in. Then I think we move this conversation to a discussion forum and open it up the the entire wiki, and see if the community actually wants it. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 02:09, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::Bump. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 00:42, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::Bump. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 23:52, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::::So then, you've had right around 5 months to read this thread. Any thoughts? --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 15:56, 28 October 2010 (MDT)

::::::::::::There are some D&D chats on the web. Cheers! --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 16:52, 28 October 2010 (MDT)

:::::::::::::Right now the technical expertise are not available. When they are I will respond in the discussion. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:54, 28 October 2010 (MDT)

::::::::::::::What expertise do we need available? Are you considering returning to an IRC channel run through the wiki, like before? I'm more than willing to learn what we'd need to make that happen. If you want to consider using a free outside server, the expertise is already here (I think). I don't want to volunteer anyone, but I think Jazzman already has the knowledge to maintain a IRC channel. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 00:28, 29 October 2010 (MDT)

:::::::::::::::I'm also not sure what kind of technical expertise we need. We can easily (bonus: freely) have an IRC channel set up on a free host, so there's no expert even required. All you'd need is an admin or two to /ban troublemakers... though I hardly doubt that will be a problem anyway. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 12:15, 31 October 2010 (MDT)

== D20 Future Section? ==

Does anyone think that there should be a D20 Future section, or do we just put the future stuff in the D20m Homebrew? Thanks, --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 20:48, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

:d20 Future's already there, it's just not separated out into it's own section; it's integrated in with all the rest of the d20M stuff. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:55, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

== Legal Disclaimer ==

Can anyone tell me if I need to put a legal Disclaimer on all my 4e races? My races are: Dark Spike Hylian, Dark Hylian, Forest Hylian, Hylian, Gregar, and Zora. Thanks, --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 23:14, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

:They're based off Zelda races/classes, right? You bet you do. It's easy, just add the template to the bottom of the page, above the breadcrumbs. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 23:27, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

::I do? How come? Is it just because I used the name "Hylian"? Do I have to put in the disclaimer on my Megaman stuff too? Well, I'll get around to that. Thanks though. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 04:06, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

:::Um, do you mind giving me the template for that? I'm actually kinda new here on D&D Wiki. Thanks, --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 04:12, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

::::Sure thing, just add <nowiki>{{Copyright Disclaimer}}</nowiki> to the bottom of the page, just above the breadcrumbs. This should be applied to any material that is inspired by any copyrighted material, so Megaman, Zelda, or anything else you add.--[[User:Badger|Badger]] 04:23, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

:::::Thanks, --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 20:35, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

::::::Hey! It worked! Thanks! --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 21:19, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

== Spam and ReCaptcha ==

I was talking to Badger and he thinks that dealing with Captcha would be less annoying than dealing with spammers. Many people watch your talk page so we'll see who else agrees.

The problem we had before was that it was all or nothing. Were we using ReCaptcha or some other service? It looks like ReCaptcha [http://recaptcha.net/plugins/mediawiki/ has been updated] so that only IPs are affected. If that's the case, it should solve both of our problems at once. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 22:23, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

:I know you are busy fixing other things, but the spam is terrible right now. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 03:41, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

::The spam is getting worse. We really need to look into getting captcha implemented for IPs again. With the recent update of Mediawiki we shouldn't have any trouble doing that, right? --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 01:08, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

:::ReCaptcha is now implemented for all IP edits and user edits with an external link. Please let me know of any problems. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:59, 16 August 2010 (MDT)

== Templates ==

Can anyone provide the (improvement, Reveiwing, and some other) template? Cause I need it for stuff. Thanks, --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 21:17, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

:Check out [[Help:Improving, Reviewing, and Removing Templates|this link]] for any of the reviewing templates you need. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 21:22, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

::Whoops. I just found out how to do it. Sorry for putting you through the trouble. But thanks. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 21:27, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

:::Oh Hey! There's more in that link! Thanks! --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 21:29, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

== Content Question ==

I've recently created a Dungeons and Dragons drinking game (cleverly named DnDnD, Dungeons and Dragons and Drinking). A '''real life''' drinking game meant to be played alongside DnD; ''not'' a mechanic for including drinking games in DnD. Before I moved it into variant rules, I thought I would run it past you and see if you think it's appropriate for the wiki. It's currently in [[User:Badger/sandbox2|my sandbox]]. I already added the adult content template, as well as made it clear that we here at Dandwiki support drinking responsibly, and do not condone under-aged drinking. What do you think? Is this in line with the kind of content we want on the wiki? Should I move it into variant rules, or leave it in my sandbox? Thanks, [[User:Badger|Badger]] 01:23, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

:Seems fine to me. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:24, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

== Ganteka ==

Is [[User:Ganteka|Ganteka]] still on D&D Wiki, or is he finished with it and left his account running? --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 03:54, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

:I do believe Ganteka is gone for good. He's moved elsewhere, if I'm not mistaken. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 04:18, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

::Was he the one that created the [[Wolfkin (4e Race)| Wolfkin Race]]? --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 19:57, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

:::It appears to have been originally made by an unregistered contributor (an IP), but was worked on by [[User:Kernac|Kernac]]. I don't believe Ganteka made any edits to it at all, other than undoing what appears to have been some vandalism. You could always ask any questions on the relevant talk page, rather than Green Dragon's personal talk page. It'd be more likely to be answered by someone with more information. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 20:13, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

:::::Do [[Add Instructions]] and [[Special:Contributions/Ganteka]] answer your questions? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:36, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

::::::When was the [[Wolfkin (4e Race)]] created? Because I only looked at the first page of Ganteka's contributions.

::::::--[[User:Axl|Axl]] 21:37, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

:::::::Use the "History" tab. The first edit was Oct 21, 2008, and Ganteka's only contribution was Feb 26, 2009, when he undid vandalism. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 21:48, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

== Incomplete Quest ==

:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:A New World (3.5e Quest)#Stub]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

== Lock down? ==

While I was doing D&D Wiki yesterday, I tried submitting something, and it just kicked me out, and I couldn't get back in. Is the reason for this is because now there are pictures for like Green Dragon's talk page, and contributions and so on? If anyone could tell me what happened, that would be nice.

--[[User:Axl|Axl]] 18:01, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

:Hmmm, I do not know what happened if you were simply barred from the site, that seems a little bit odd. However if you were just getting the message 'the wiki is down' or something of the like, that has been happening a number of times recently. However the time you are mentioning it is most likely that the wiki went down for temporary maintenance to restore the pictures. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 05:18, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

::Yeah, That's probably it. Thanks.

--[[User:Axl|Axl]] 20:07, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

== I'd like to hear from you about reopening the tavern ==

As I asked you earlier on you talk page, I was wondering about re-opening the tavern. It's been over a week without hearing from you, so I made a discussion to ask the community their thoughts. I'm polling the community to see if we would like to have one again. Here is where you come in. If you have some time (it shouldn't take more than a few minutes), stop by [[Discussion:Re-opening_the_tavern%3F_What_does_the_community_think%3F|the discussion]] and post your thoughts. I look forward to hearing from you on this one. Thanks, [[User:Badger|Badger]] 21:52, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

:Bump. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 00:42, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

::So it's been over a month and a half since this discussion was started (on your talk page, I might add), but you've not yet chimed in. Since you're online now, I thought I might be able to get your attention by reminding you I'd like your opinion. We started a discussion thread (linked [[Discussion:Re-opening_the_tavern%3F_What_does_the_community_think%3F|here]]) and the community seems to embrace the idea; the current vote is about 5 to 1, in favor (I say about, because I don't know that one of the votes "for" is still around). In case you don't want to read all the discussion let me give you the cliff's notes: Free hosting that is run offsite, so as to not tax bandwidth. People want it. We're working on rules too. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 22:09, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

:::Bump. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 23:52, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

== integrated pictures? ==

Green Dragon?

Do you know how to integrate pictures into a Race instead of forming a link to it? If you could show me that, that would be nice.

--[[User:Axl|Axl]] 22:06, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

:I'm not sure I know what your talking about. However if you just mean having a picture show rather than a link being formed simply link to the file with these brackets {{}} instead of the normal square ones [[]]. You may have been having trouble because the links to pictures have not been working recently. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 05:14, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

::Yeah. That's true. Some links weren't working, so I took them out. These were links for two of my races. But, I still don't understand how I get the files to integrate on the page that I'm working on once I save the page. I just don't know how it would work.

--[[User:Axl|Axl]] 20:11, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

== Barnstars ==

Hey, I'm just wondering what the barnstars are all about. I searched through the site a little bit, and didn't find any talk pages on them. I also did a google search and it came up with it being a decorative item put on barns. I'm just wondering a few things: Why are they given as awards, who can give one, and can I give one to myself (I'm not saying I will, just wondering ''':)''')? Anyways, thanks! --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 05:11, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

:Does [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Barnstars Wikipedia:Barnstars] answer your questions? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:52, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

::Lol, it does thanks a lot! I really should have thought of checking wikipedia. ''':P''' That's a lot of different barnstars... think I can get em all? ''':P''' --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 19:31, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

== hi ==

hi there...it wud seem the tavern is gone...i miss talking to the guys here...

:There is actually an ongoing discussion on bringing the tavern back [[Discussion:Re-opening_the_tavern%3F_What_does_the_community_think%3F|here]]. If you would like to see it again you may contribute your thoughts and ideas there. However please try to back up your thoughts with logic, that way your contributions can have more merit to them. ''':)''' --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 15:38, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

==Knowledge Devotion from "Complete Champion"==

I currently have a question about a 3.5 edition feat and its rules..

Knowledge Devotion from "Complete Champion"

Here is what the feat says in short form:
"You then receive an insight bonus on attack rolls and damage rolls against that creature type for the remainder of the combat. The amount of the bonus depends on your Knowledge check result, as given on the following table..."

Do these bonuses apply to all weaponlike spells such as Acid Arrow and Ray of Enfeeblement? I'm assuming they do because they require an attack roll and damage roll (if they hit).

I'm not sure how to check pages on the site anymore, but if you would be kind enough to email me a response at obokuri-eeumi@hotmail.com it would be greatly appreciated. thanks :)

:Yes they do apply; if you are still checking this page. If not I'll let the e-mail come from GD seeing as you asked him. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 21:45, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

== Summon soulblade ==

I have created the class "Soulknife," and wish to begin creating the powers for my class. However, the power I wish to create is called "Summon Soulblade," a title which, when I entered it into the creation bar, sent me to the "Blades of the Ancestors" power's page. I have tried changing the inputted name to "Call Soulblade," and even "Soul Summoning" (two other possible names for the power). I do not know what to do about this, and are concerned as to why this glitch would occur. Thank you for your time, and I appreciate your patience.

Sincerely,
Nathanmccarthy789

== D&D 4e Future ==

Hey Green Dragon, do you think that in the 4e Homebrew section, we could either create a seperate 4e Future homebrew section, or that we could just add in future stuff to the 4e homebrew? Just let me know what you think. The rules will be the same as in 4e, but it will be in the future, instead of the past. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 00:00, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

:What is 4e Future? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:50, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

::It's just something that I wanted created. It's like Dungeons and Dragons 4.0, but instead of being in the past, it will be situated in the future. It will be basically the same (same rules, different equipment, technologically advanced classes) as D&D 4e. So, yeah. Just let me know what you think of it. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 02:16, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

:::Your thing? You make the call. If you think it is radically different from 4e then please make a new section (maybe starting from [[4e Rules]], e.g. how [[D20.00 decimal Rules (3.5e Variant Rule)]] was intended) or just a page. If you just make a page it will, of course, have to be discussed and could have any result. If you choose to just merge the content into 4e just make sure it works with 4e, and then I don't think it should matter at all. Of course a rule category could help keep it together (or a sourcebook, of course). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 02:32, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

::::Yeah, it'll use the 4e rules, it just uses different equipment and different classes. Shall I put up a vote?

--[[User:Axl|Axl]] 03:01, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

:::::4e is a rule set, not a time period. 4e Future, unless the core rules are radically different, is just normal 4e. Many 4e adventures are set in the future. In my personal opinion adding a future section is pointless and illogical. Not to start a debate or anything... ''':P''' --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 16:50, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

::::::Then can I just start inserting futuristic powers, races, classes, and feats?

::::::--[[User:Axl|Axl]] 19:53, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

:::::::Yep, that would work fine! Oh, and sorry if I sounded a little rude with my pointless and illogical thing, I was looking for another way to word it except I had to run. ''':)''' --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 19:10, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

:::::::It's fine. Do you think that inside each section, that we should have a link? You know, like: D&D 4.0Future races inside the races folder?

:::::::--[[User:Axl|Axl]] 17:43, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

::::::::Hmmm, thats a good idea. That could be really useful for people playing through 4e campaigns set in the future, so that they don't have to sift through hundreds of past based articles. That sounds like it could even be applied to 3.5e and d20M (however opposite, since most d20M articles are based in the future.). --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 18:03, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::So, does Green Dragon put in the subcategory, or do I have to do that?

::::::::::--[[User:Axl|Axl]] 20:19, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::::You can. Again, if you make a rule or sourcebook about it then it's even more organized of course. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:49, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::::Hmm, I'll try to do the best I can.
--[[User:Axl|Axl]] 19:14, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

== Losing Articles ==

No, don't worry, I haven't lost any. However I am wondering, is there any possibility of the wiki losing its articles/pages? I'm asking to know if I should be backing up the stuff I post here on my computer or something just in case. Thanks. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 03:39, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

:It ''has'' happened before, please see also [[Talk:3.5e Flaws#Flaw Form]], but they are going to be recovered. It's not really a problem, no. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:19, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

::The new hosting setup has redundant hardrives so that is one level of protection of making sure nothing can get lost. A backup solution is in the works. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:14, 16 August 2010 (MDT)

== Base Class Infobox ==

I've noticed on some pages you've removed the Base Class Infobox Template along with the Base Class template. Was this accidental? [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:43, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

:Yes, they are not used with the 4e classes anymore (just [[Template:x0]]). Although I don't know what you mean by "Base Class template". --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:51, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

::I meant category. So there's no rating of 4e classes then? And I've been gone a lot the last couple of weeks, where was this announced/talked about? [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:57, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

:::I actually started removing that template a while ago. Actually, I think you are right. You should start this discussion on [[Talk:4e Classes]]. The only reason this has happened is since I find that the template system works better than rating. It has not been discussed. I removed the template since the primary editor/subsequent editors who display their username are not longer displayed in that way. We now assume that one understands MW (as you know). Although why not use both (the template system and a rating system) huh? It's a different topic. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:07, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

==Hiding text==

Hey! I'm having some trouble finding the correct way to format something. I'd like to find a way to create hidden text on my page, but the formatting articles on wikipedia haven't helped. Is there a way to format hidden text similar to the way you can show or hide a contents box?

:To create hidden text you can place the text in between these <nowiki></nowiki> i.e.  (yes there is text there, check the source code). Alternatively you can use <nowiki><includeonly></nowiki> and close with <nowiki></includeonly></nowiki>.

:If you want to create an option to show or hide a block of text on the page then you may use this code:

:<nowiki>{| class="collapsible"</nowiki> 
:<nowiki>|Text</nowiki> 
:<nowiki>|}</nowiki>

:What that would appear as:

:{| class="collapsible"
|Text
|}

:Hope that helps, I'm pretty good with wiki code if you need help in the future. ''':)''' --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 00:06, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

::Thanks! Collapsible text was indeed what I was looking for, and I figured there was a solution that I just couldn't find. Also, I'm very new to the wiki scene and navigation is still pretty alien to me, so thanks for the heads up on my Talk page! --[[user:ThatGuyEli|ThatGuyEli]] 16:13, 23 June 2010

== Blocking IP ==

For the first time since I became an admin, I've blocked a couple IP's. Hope I did it within acceptable parameters. I am pretty sure they were both outside link spammers. --[[User:Calidore Chase|Calidore Chase]] 17:49, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

:They look fine, except I would have blocked them longer. But whatever. If it happens again we can do it for a more extended period of time. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:23, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

== Moving pages ==

I am currently moving all of the DnD pages to their corresponding editions according to [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Special%3AAllPages&from=DnD&to=DnD+zz&namespace=0 this] list (all pages starting with DnD). However some pages that start with DnD are edition neutral. Should I move these to 3.5e/4e, or just leave them as DnD? --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 00:25, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

:What pages are edition independent? I could be wrong, but I would guess that most pages are (or should be) slightly different, depending on the edition. If there are truly edition independent pages I would say leave them as "DnD". Just my 2 cents. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 01:07, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

::I have actually run into a number of pages that apply to both editions. A few examples would be [[DnD Discussion]], [[DnD Maps]], and [[DnD Guidelines]]. The breadcrumb and categories links to both editions. The page that brought this up was [[DnD Guideline Preload]]. I was getting ready to move it to 3.5e, and I checked the [[DnD Guidelines]] page just to make sure it was for 3.5e and so that I could change the link on that page to 3.5e not DnD. Oh look! It links to both 3.5e and 4e. Anyways, just showing you what I mean. ''':)'''--[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 03:04, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

:::I don't know much about DnD 4e, so everything I am about to say may be wrong. With that in mind, here are my thoughts. Discussions are generally about rules, which vary widely between 3.5e and 4e, so we should probably make edition specific ones, so we can provide more exact help. If someone say "how does barbarian rage work?" we have to find out what edition they mean (I assume barbarians still rage in 4e), and then provide help. If it was posted in 4e Discussions we'd not have that problem. Maps I suppose can go wherever, but if they are maps for an adventure/campaign, we could certainly stick them under the edition for which the campaign/quest was written. As for guidelines, it should probably me moved to something like "Wiki Guidelines", as it has nothing to do with actual DnD. Again, these are just my thoughts. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 19:04, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

::::Ya, you're right. Feel free to make a 4e one, add an edition identifier in some way, and move the 4e ones over. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:16, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

== Can't Log In ==

I was trying to save a response to [[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman]]'s comment on the talk for the [[Mundus (3.5e Class)|mundus]], however when I hit save it said there was a loss of session data and I should try again. I tried twice more and it gave me the same message. It also told me if this error persisted I could log out then back in again, so I logged out. However when I tried to log back in again it gave me this message:

''"Login error 
''There seems to be a problem with your login session; this action has been canceled as a precaution against session hijacking. Please hit "back" and reload the page you came from, then try again."

I hit the back button, reloaded the page, and tried again twice. Still nothing. I am unable to log back in to my account. --[[Special:Contributions/206.45.30.209|206.45.30.209]] 18:08, 25 June 2010 (UTC)([[User:Vrail|Vrail]])

:Ok, I just tried to log in a third time and it worked. That was weird, do you know what happened there? --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 19:12, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

::Actually D&D Wiki maxed out the server's hard disk space, so maybe that had something to do with it. If not I don't know. But I cleared up some space. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:22, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

:::Out of curiosity, what kind of space are we talking here? Would it be worth it have a fundraiser to buy an additional hard drive (or hard drives, depending on how/if you back stuff up)? Storage comes cheap nowadays. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 19:18, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

::::Hosting was switched once again (see also [[User talk:Green Dragon#Trouble with the wiki]]) and space should not be a problem. Since the server failure, actually, D&D Wiki was moved to a hosting setup with mt (mediatemple) so doing a fundraiser for such things is not possible. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:18, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

== Anti Vandalism Barnstar ==

I feel that Vrail deserves an Anti Vandalism Barnstar because of he is always removing spam and unwanted or offensive post from the site. I figured that i would nominate him to you. Thank you for reading and i hope that you consider him.--[[User:Grim914|Grim914]] 17:27, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

:Oh, I agree. Please feel free to give [[User:Vrail|Vrial]] one. Barnstars are given by anyone to anyone. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:14, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

== Deletion? ==

Green Dragon? Why hasn't my [[Displacer Disciple Powers (4e Power List)| Displacer Disciple]] power lists been deleted? I have two of them, both up for deletion, I think. The other one is [[Displacer Disciple powers (4e Power List)]]. I created them. Could you also delete the [[Fell Knight Necross (4e Power List)]]? Thanks. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 19:17, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

:No one has gone through [[:Category:Candidates for Deletion]]? I can say I have not recently. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:31, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

::I was going to but I have been really busy the last month-ish. And the couple days I had some free time the wiki has been slow/inaccessible. But it's not like the world's going to end if your pages don't get deleted; they'll be gotten to eventually. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 19:34, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

:::Ah, okay. Sorry for bothering you. ''':)''' --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 21:47, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

::::It will get dealt with though, no worries. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:14, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

== DPL Problem ==

Hey Green Dragon, When you go into the D&D 4e races, there's just coding there. Is this because D&D Wiki was moved? --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 02:09, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

:Ya, it is. The dpl's (dpl, dpl2c, dpl2cu, etc) are not working. They will soon though, don't worry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:11, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

::Ok! Thanks for letting me know. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 19:40, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

:::Ya, no problem. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:35, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

== The Site Crashed ==

How long are it going to be like this?

:[[Help:Talk Pages| Just a heads up here, don't forget to sign your posts.]] Thanks,

--[[User:Axl|Axl]] 18:15, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

== File Problems ==

Lately I've had a lot of trouble uploading pictures for my campaign setting. In particular, I've run into an error when creating the thumbnail for the images I upload, which would be excellent to have displayed on my pages.

"''Error creating thumbnail: libgomp: Thread creation failed: Resource temporarily unavailable''" is an example of the problem I'm having. I've tried uploading the image again, but to no avail. Should I try to change the file type of the image on my computer and upload a third time, or is there a solution I don't know about?

While I've got your attention, is it appropriate of me to be directing all of my questions to you? I get the impression that you are bombarded with questions regularly, and while I would direct them to someone with a little less on their plate, I don't really know how to go about finding that person. [[User:ThatGuyEli|ThatGuyEli]] 17:46, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

:Hello again. I was just curious about D&D Wiki Media. It seems that thumbnails are no longer showing up when new images are uploaded. Instead, the following error message appears. ''Error creating thumbnail: libgomp: Thread creation failed: Resource temporarily unavailable''. Is this an internal problem? --[[User:Akherontis|Akherontis]] 07:04, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

::I had a similar problem, but only when trying to decrease the size of an image, keeping the size the same or larger the image showed up. Might this work in the mean time until this is working again if it is an internal problem? --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 08:24, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

:::In a few weeks when D&D Wiki gets moved problems, like this, should get worked on as well. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:20, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

::::Hey Green Dragon, I just went onto D&D Wiki Media Repository, and I found out that most of the new pictures aren't working. Do you know what's wrong? --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 00:09, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

:::::Hey Green Dragon? I tried to upload a picture, but it said that "the directory (public) could not be written by the webserver" or something like that. What's goin on? --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 20:22, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

::::::Is this ever gonna get fixed? I would like to upload more pictures for some armor I'm gonna create (I've already created 1 armor). --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 21:17, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

:::::::Images and uploading are now working. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:28, 16 August 2010 (MDT)

== Wiki troubles ==

I see you are fixing redirects/fixing links. What's our progress on dpls, images, tables and whatnot? [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 00:14, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

:Oh, also, what does it take to build a bot? I don't know much about programming, but it seems like it shouldn't take much to program a bot to fix the DnD links. Do you know some resource about bot-building? [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 00:16, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

::My wiki skills are minimal, but my research skills are astounding. Will [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/API.php#APIs_for_bots this link] help? It looks like we might be able to build an anti-spam bot, and a redirector bot with relative ease. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 00:20, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

:::With regard to the problems of the moving of D&D Wiki, they will be fixed soon. To the best of my knowledge right now the DPL's, DPL2CU's, DPL2C's, Odd-Even, SMW with regard to displaying links, and a few table things (vardefine — [[Template:Spell]]?). And the reinstalling of imagemagik again (as said above). Do you know of anything else? And API (http://www.dandwiki.com/w/api.php) is a great tool. A few other options exist too of course. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:31, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

::::When you say "soon", are we thinking soon means "24 hours", "within a week", or "about a month"? Just looking for an estimate on when we can see the wiki up at full capacity again. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 00:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

:::::(Edit conflict) The Semantic stuff isn't working either, I think. Do you have a timetable? [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 00:44, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

::::::When you say "''Semantic stuff isn't working either''" do you just mean the links, or am I missing anything? And I do not have a timetable. Soon, is what I'll say I guess. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:36, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

:::::::Well, it seems to be working now, so I may have spoken too soon. Very recently I saw links that looked like <nowiki>[[3e Prerequisite::Such and so]]</nowiki>, but I just browsed some pages and they seem to be formatted correctly now. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 02:08, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

::::::::I know what you're talking about, I saw them earlier too. I looked for them again, before posting the above, and couldn't find them either. Dunno. Maybe they got fixed as well as the modern dpl's (I think they were not working earlier either). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 02:35, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::I would also like to add that mathematical formulas aren't working either.

:::::::::<math>F = (\frac{3.439*10^-8 ft^3}{slug*seconds^2})(\frac{4.10*10^23 slugs*.031 slugs}{20,931,758.5 ft^2}) = 1 \frac{foot*slug}{second^2} = 1 lb </math>

:::::::::As shown there for an example. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 21:34, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

== DPLs again? ==

Hi, one question. The homebrew power lists aren't showing up at the [[4e Powers]]. Is this caused by the DPLs? Thanks. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 00:01, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

:Yes, it was. I modernized the dpl's so it is no longer a problem. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:15, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

::Thanks for fixing it! --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 01:45, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

:::Ya, no problem. If you bring more pages to my attention which use the old DPL's and not the dpl's I would be more than happy to change them. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:13, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

::::Yeah, actually, I have one on my talk page (and another one hidden in my [[D&D 4.0 Future (4e Sourcebook)|sourcebook]]), and just more stuff in my sourcebook. I'll see if there's anymore. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 04:27, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

::::There's actually some (maybe only 2, I don't know) in the 4e Homebrew. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 04:31, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

== Add new equipment? ==

Can any of you fix this? When I try [[Add New DnD Equipment|Add new Equipment]], It brings me into this 3.5e equipment stuff. Is that the way it's supposed to be? --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 21:19, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

:The link you provided is for adding [[Add_New_3.5e_Equipment|3.5e Equipment]]. It's designed to add 3.5e Equipment. None of us do much with 4e, and there hasn't been much need to make an official 4e equipment preload yet, I guess. I'm sure someone can set up a pre-load for 4e if you ask. I'd try, but I think an admin has to handle that. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 21:51, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

::Please feel free. Just no one has made one yet, but one should be present. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:12, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

:::So the page is locked, so I can't edit it to add the "add new" forms that I made, but you can find easy ways to add 4e Armor, Weapons, Magic Items, and Vehicles on [[User:Badger/sandbox6|this page]]. The ones on the far right don't do anything, so don't use those yet. I put them there so when I find more 4e Preloads they will be easy to add. I've not tested any of them, so they may need some tweaking. let me know on my talk page, or here (I'm keeping an eye on both). --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 21:08, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

::::Thanks for helping me out with this. So, I'll test it out and let you know what happens. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 15:48, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

== Tables aren't working ==

Um, Green Dragon? Some tables aren't working. Do they have a different DPL than the others? All right, thanks. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 21:53, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

:Kind of. They use [[Template:d20]] which uses vardefine, which is not working. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:10, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

== Copying from your Userpage ==

Would you mind if I used the [[User:Green Dragon/Top Template|top template]] on your userpage (with a few minor adjustments) for my own userpage? Thanks. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 04:17, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

:Of course, please feel free. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:58, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

== Strange bug ==

I was just going through and moving some DnD pages to 3.5e (which, btw, after my latest stint I'm almost halfway done, a lot of pages!) when I found a bug. When I tried to access the page [[DnD Archetype Feats]] (Unsure if it was already moved) I couldn't load it, then my internet eventually took me to a page that said there was a DNS error. After that I couldn't load any pages on the wiki. I had to close my internet then reopen it to get the wiki working again. Is this happening for anybody else? What's going on? --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 02:24, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

:Something like that happened to me too. I ended restarting Internet Explorer (which wasn't too bad) in order for it to work. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 04:23, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

::Does this still happen? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:57, 16 August 2010 (MDT)

== Moving DnD pages to 3.5e ==

Just wanted to let you know that my previous comment was slightly wrong about being halfway done. I was a lot closer than halfway, and just finished moving every single page starting with DnD (according to [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Special%3AAllPages&from=DnD&to=DnD+zz&namespace=0 this] list) to its corresponding edition. I'll have to check the to-do list, but if this was on it I can check it off. :D

There are a couple of pages that I did not move. These are protected pages (not many, just a couple preloads), eddition neutral pages (again, only a couple of these exist), and the one page mentioned above that I couldn't get to. Also, I may have forgotten to switch the instructions for one or two preloads on the page they link to. I think I got most of them, but if you find any, please change them. :) --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 03:34, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

== Categories ==

Hey Green Dragon,

I noticed in the [[:Category:Candidates for Deletion|Candidates for Deletion]] category, that the 4e Future category is going to be deleted and all that stuff moved. Is that really necessary? --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 04:17, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

:Yup. 4e Future is a sourcebook, not a published SRD, so it needs to be formatted like the other sourcebooks. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 22:33, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

::Okay. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 00:19, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

== Sourcebooks ==

Hey Green Dragon, I found that the sourcebooks are still not showing up. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 00:21, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

:[[3.5e_Sourcebooks]]. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 00:30, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

::4e sourcebooks are using the old DPLs that need to be updated to work. Someone more diligent than I can update them. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 00:53, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

:::I went through this morning and fixed the DPLs. Everything shows up properly now. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 19:51, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

::::Thanks.

::::--[[User:Axl|Axl]] 22:45, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

== A race I posted ==

I have a question, several months ago I created an article for a homebrew race called the "Heartbound" and it is still not on the list for homebrew races. Is there something I have to do for it to be added to the list? {{unsigned|Firerush}}

:Fixed. You needed to add [[:Category:Race]]. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 15:33, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

== VariablesExtension ==

I took the liberty of making [[Template:Spell]] not use VariablesExtension (#vardefine) because the spells were messed up. Of course then I realized that other things are broken too. And I don't have permission to edit those (and I am not sure how well they can be made to work without the extension). —[[User:Edwin|edwin]] 16:08, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

:I noticed your edits on [[Template:Spell]]. It seems to work the same, so thanks a lot for helping fix that. I would gladly unlock pages if you know how to make them work, however I agree in that some may need #vardefine. For example [[Template:d20]] is not working (which I would gladly unlock if you know how to fix it), or [[Template:Weapon Stats2]] which is not locked. In any case, however, many pages by themselves use #vardefine in the tables, so switching it would be a lot of work. It will be fixed sometime. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:01, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

::I would think it's a better plan to fix what's broken, instead of finding ways around it. If vardefine is going to be eventually fixed, then there's no need to waste time changing the templates around. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 23:54, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

:::Vardefine is working once again. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:56, 16 August 2010 (MDT)

== Category DnD ==

Should this page be merged with to Category 3.5e, and then all pages linking to it be changed to say 3.5e rather than DnD? I'm just wondering because all of the DnD pages (that I can find according to the lists I was given) have been moved to say 3.5e, and as far as I can tell the DnD category applies to 3.5e material only. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 16:07, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

:No. It actually is going to be expanded once all pages with [[:Category:DnD]] have [[:Category:3.5e]] (which are for 3.5e) with all [[:Category:4e]] pages, as 4e is an edition of D&D. Although, yes, all the 3.5e dpl's need to be changed to use category=3.5e. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:33, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

== Powers ==

Um, Green Dragon? My Fell Knight's [[Fell Knight Powers (4e Power List)|Powers]] don't show up. Is that a problem with the DPLs, or are they gone forever? --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 02:32, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

:There's a pretty easy way to find out. Just look for one of the powers, or adjust the dpls to search for something you know exists. As it is, though, the dpls are broken. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 02:48, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

::Your DPL tables are the old ones that don't work. Switch them to the new versions and it should show up. [[User:Badger/sandbox4|This link]] shows you the kind of DPL you need for everything to show up correctly. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 03:54, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

:::The old DPL's are working once again as well. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:55, 16 August 2010 (MDT)

== Items ==

Hey Green Dragon? Is there supposed to be no magical Items in the Arm Slot, Armor, and Weapon items?
--[[User:Axl|Axl]] 03:23, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

== Server Error ==

Often times when I try to load a page on the wiki, it will just load a blank page and say it is done. I then have to reload the page 1-2 times before it shows up. Also, usually when I attempt to save a change it just loads a blank page and doesn't save the change. I then have to hit 'back' on my browser bar and try again 5-6 times before it saves. Is anybody else having a similar problem? Can it be fixed? This is happening on firefox btw, it also happens to me on internet explorer, but it is less often and requires only 1 page reload. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 18:30, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

:The issue is the current hosting setup. I just bought a server and it will be running D&D Wiki by the middle of next month. At that time all the problems should be dealt with. See also [[Talk:4e Creatures#Not Working]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:53, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

::D&D Wiki is now hosted on my server. Thoughts on the loading times and so now? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:54, 16 August 2010 (MDT)

== Sourcebook Categories ==

Hey Green Dragon?
My [[D&D 4.0 Future (4e Sourcebook)|sourcebook]] weapons (and probably races and every other stuff that I created) is loose in the [[4e Homebrew]]. I figure it's because that they're categorized as 4e. What do I do? --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 04:00, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

:Axl, your creations aren't so much "loose in the 4e Homebrew". In fact, that's exactly where they should be. Maybe you didn't catch what Jazzman wrote [[Talk:Add_New_4e_Future_Implement|here]], or what I wrote [[User_talk:Axl#Problems_with_your_Sourcebook|here]]. Everything that you wrote for your sourcebook needs to be categorized under 4e, and should show up as 4e equipment/armor/weapons/whatever. Everything you've written is considered "4e" not "4e Future". "4e Future" does not exist. Anything labeled "4e Future" needs to be changed to "4e" and anything you added the "formatting issue" template to needs to have that template removed. For example, if you have a piece of armor labeled "4e Future Armor" it needs to be moved to "4e Armor", and anything that says "4e Future Equipment" needs to be moved to "4e Equipment". I hope this is clear. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 06:21, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

::That's kind of the reason why I made the sourcebook instead of just creating classes, races, etc that are based in the future put into the 4e classes. There's a conversation with [[User:Vrail|Vrail]] somewhere on this talk page. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 16:45, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

::The section's called D&D 4e Future. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 16:47, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

:::What you should have is a category called "4e Future", and tag all of your content with that. What will happen is if you're looking though a list of all the 4e homebrew, you will see 4e and 4e future, but if you click on the 4e future category you will only see 4e future things. You need to write up all of your content exactly as if it was plain old 4e, including leaving it in the regular namespace like (4e_Armor), and then when you're done you need to add <nowiki>[[Category:4e_Future]]</nowiki> to the bottom of the page. Then on all of your DPLs where you want to list your 4e Future creations you need to add the line <nowiki> |category:4e_Future </nowiki> and all of your creations will pop right up, without anything else from 4e.
:::What your sourcebook should do is tell users how to use any and all content tagged with Category:4e_Future. If you aren't making any new rules, you don't even need a sourcebook. The idea behind the sourcebook is to write out how to play a slightly altered system. A sourcebook is nothing more than a collection of variant rules, but if the rules are identical, then you don't need to write it. I hope this is making sense. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 18:16, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

::::I was told to use the category: 4e. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 00:16, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

::::I thought it was there. I'll check on my talk page. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 00:18, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

:::::You can use more than one category. You should include both "Category:4e" and "Category:4e_Future". Technically, 4e_future should be a sub-category, but we don't seem to use much in the way of sub-categories on this site, so I wouldn't worry about that. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 00:27, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

::::::So, how do you make a sub-category? --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 16:53, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

== is there a way to delete a page? ==

I created a page and by talk to me before revisions i meant dont just go right in and revise, hence why im simply going to make the class it was on my own laptop and take it off of this site? is there a way to do that?

:Your English is a bit wacked above, but I'm assuming what you're trying to say is that you created an article, and another user contributed to it. If the article is good quality with contributions from you and the other(s) than it will not be deleted. There is a very clear warning every time someone edits letting them know about this collaborative nature of a wiki. If it is in horrible condition, left incomplete, and unplayable, than anyone can tag it with the delete template, where an admin will eventually get around to it.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 14:29, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

::That may have been me editing your article. I generally post on the discussion page and discuss things before making a change. However, I noticed a class with grammar issues similar to those in your above comment. I spent a while fixing the grammar, sorry if this disturbed you. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 22:58, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

== Admin Badge ==

I was looking around a bit on the wiki and noticed references to an admin badge. I had never seen it so I looked around for it, and realized it had been deleted. Then I looked around for something discussing ''why'' it was deleted, apparently that discussion was on the template's talk page and was deleted to. This was a little bit frustrating. So I was wondering, why was it removed? Also, could the reasoning for its deletion be re added somewhere for reference? It seems a little bit strange that the page discussing its deletion was deleted as well. Thanks! --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 03:19, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

:Talk pages of deleted pages are always deleted as well. Why was it deleted? [[Special:ListAdmins]] was used on [[Meta Pages]] to let people know of a list of admins, and as such the use of that template was nonexistent. As an aesthetic taste thing anyone could make one I guess, just not in a template form (an admin can restore and move of course). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:30, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

::Good to know, thanks for the quick and well informed response. ''':)''' Do you think it would be worth it to post the reasoning for removing the admin badge somewhere (such as on the [[Special:ListAdmins]] page or the like), or do to little people even care/know about it? --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 04:37, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

:::That's a special page and cannot be modified. If you give me a link to the page I can re-delete it explaining the deletion more. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:41, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

::::Alright, I was unsure if as the sites owner you could edit special pages or not. Anyways, here's the link <s>Template:AdminBadge</s>. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 04:49, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

:::::Backend I am sure, but is that really necessary? How does that sound? Does that get the point across and make it less confusing? I am assuming that if one cares they will check the deleted page. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:55, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

== More broken wiki ==

I'm not sure what's different about these pages, but none of the Random Ability Order templates are working right. See, eg, <s>Template:Random Ability Order - Table 7</s>. They are all like that. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 21:39, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

:Most likely that was a problem associated with the wiki syntax and not anything MW related. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:52, 16 August 2010 (MDT)

== Xenophon's RfA ==

I noticed in the rfa's that Xenophon's rfa was approved, and he was never renominated. This would be normal except for the fact that he is not on the admin list. Just wondering what's up with that? --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 05:00, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

:I re-did that section of [[Requests for Adminship]]. Does that explain the Xenophon scenario? Is that is unjust (a different process should be done — that is now not a policy, it just happened)? Is there anything I missed? Is it easier to understand? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:02, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

== author template ==

I am having the darnedest time figuring out the syntax to use for the author template and this page doesn't help explain anything: http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Template:Author

Following what I've found on others' contributions and the syntax displayed on the template, the closest thing I have come up with is this:

<nowiki>{{author</nowiki>
|<nowiki>[[User:Mercurious|Mercurious]]([[User talk:Mercurious|talk]])</nowiki>
|date_created= 07/28/10
|status= Incomplete
}}

but instead of displaying my linked name and linked talk, it just displays the suggested syntax with the {{{}}} around author_name.

I've tried looking everywhere I could to not bother anyone, but I'm just plain stuck and some help would be great.
thanks,
josh

:The author name doesn't work the way you are doing it; see my correction below (in bold). It actually already adds the formatting, so you don't have to do it yourself.

<nowiki>{{author</nowiki>
|'''author_name=Mercurious'''
|date_created= 07/28/10
|status= Incomplete
}}

:[[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 16:49, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, Jazzman!

== 4e Power List Preload ==

Green Dragon? Do you mind if I update the 4e Power List Preload to the new DPLs? --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 20:55, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

:Not at all, please do. That has to be done huh. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:41, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

::I'll get right on it then. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 23:58, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

:::Well, I finished quite a while ago. But I haven't tested it out yet. But there's one problem. These new DPLs are going wacky. I don't know what's going on. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 17:31, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

::::Looking at [[Enchanter Powers (4e Power List)]], for example, it seems fine. Unless you mean you want to add a parameter like <tt><code>|rowcolformat</code></tt>. Could you supply a link to what you are talking about? An example I can think of is [[Featured Articles]], where the dpl displays <html><a href="/wiki/PAGE" title="Talk:PAGE">Talk:PAGE</a></html>. Is it something like this? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:36, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

:::::Let's see, I don't think I added anything to the Enchanter's powers, so it's fine there, but if you look at the [[Fell Knight Powers (4e Power List)|Fell Knight's]] powers, it's going wacky. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 23:53, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

:::::Yeah! Something like that. It just shows the webpage text, it doesn't show the link. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 02:23, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

== Kobold's ==

While browsing this wiki I noticed on the 'Talk:Stone of Monster Summoning (3.5e Equipment)' page you implied that Kobolds are unintellegent idiots.

Have you not read the 'Races Of The Dragon' supplement? One of my favourite characters of mine was a wise, and INTELLEGENT kobold sorceror. Also I you look Kobolds don't have any penalties for any of the Mental abilities. It is just a prejudice, created when the 'Civilised races' sided with the Kobolds enemy the gnomes.

I do also take into account that they do the bidding of dragons. In the Neverwinter Nights expansion pack 'Shadows Of Undertide' Deekin my favourite team-mate of all time chooses to go stop following his master.

Still other then that you have been spot on keep up the good work.
--[[User:Milo v3|Milo High-Hill]] 07:53, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

:I believe what you are referring to is this: ''(Kobolds coming up with something like that, wow!)''. However earlier he also implied that kobolds are exceptionally smart by the plan that they thought of in this theoretical situation. Basically I think he was saying this just to show they are not quite as smart as earlier implied. A spectacular plan like that and the knowledge of those stones, how to get them, work them, and implement them would often have required a creature with an intelligence bonus. So in this case GD is just showing that they don't have an intelligence bonus, rather than saying they are unintelligent. Hope that clears things up. ''':)''' --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 15:29, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes this does clear it up thanks. I guess I was just so angry, I didn't think. --[[User:Milo v3|Milo High-Hill]] 01:39, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

== Speedy Deletion Template ==

So it seems the spammers are getting smarter. They are now creating accounts, and making new pages rather than just spamming old ones. People like Vrail and I revert the edits, but that is leaving blank pages on the wiki. We should get a "Speedy Deletion" template to put on these pages. It would be the same as a delete template, but the idea is it only goes on pages that need to be deleted right away. It could be used for re-directs, and other pages made by accident too. Because admins wouldn't have to judge the merit on the page, it would also be easier to maintain the list, once a week you could just stop by and delete everything. I can mock up a speedy deletion template if you'd like. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 18:18, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

:Seems like a good idea to me. --[[User:Axl|Axl]] 20:33, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

::I went ahead and made a template, let me know what you think. [[User:Badger/sandbox11|Here]] it is. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 18:24, 19 August 2010 (MDT)

== Plz Help ==

I created a class and now when I tried to make a link to the page for it it took me to another persons class and if you search for it in the search bar the same persons page comes up not mine is their a way for me to move the page or change its name because I can't seem to figure it out also can you help me with the lvl table on the page I'm not the best formatter.
--[[User:Dragoona22|Dragoona22]] 23:37, 19 August 2010

:From what I can tell you are talking about [[Red_Mage,_Variant_(3.5e_Class)|your red mage class]]. It should be known that your class is named" Red Mage, Variant (3.5e Class)", because as you mentioned, a class named Red Mage already exists. So be sure to use that name when making links. If you want to change the name, you can use the "move" tab at the top of the page to move the entire page to a new name; just make sure that name isn't already in use. If you're still having troubles with tables, I can try to help you out. You can always just open up another class' page, and look at how they did it. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 00:49, 19 August 2010 (MDT)

== Also... ==

Also does anyone know a group in the milwuaki area of portland oregon that plays 3.5e and is willing to accept new members. If so leave a note on my talk page or send me and email at dragoona22@hotmail.com put D&D on the suject plz thank you.
--[[User:Dragoona22|Dragoona22]] 23:53, 19 August 2010

== My RfA ==

Recently I nominated myself for adminship on the wiki. I don't want to sound like I'm advertising my nomination, however it has been three days without any support or oppose comments. I am just trying to get at least a few people to take notice and comment. My nomination may be found [[Requests for Adminship/Vrail|here]]. Thanks. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 11:16, 18 August 2010 (MDT)

:I was just recomended by [[User:Badger|Badger]] to contact you or another admin about getting my RfA on a news feed. I still have no support or oppose comments, and while the neutral comments are good, it would be nice to have another few users comment one way or the other. ''':)''' --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 15:16, 19 August 2010 (MDT)

== Variant Guardian, Templates ==

:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:Guardian, Variant (3.5e Class)#Abandoned]].'' --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:30, 4 October 2010 (MDT)

== (class) shroud ==

Hi I was wanting to know is you could tell me who made the shroud class or more about its skills or if its been abandon if you know thanks --Columbus a.k.a R.I.R 21:51, 25 August 2010 (MDT)

== ... ==

I won't tell you which name... but one of your names contains my actual name lol.

== 4e Sizes ==

Hey Green Dragon (or anyone else that knows the answer),

:I would like to know what are the penalty and benefits to being size Large and up to Colossal. Thanks,

--[[User:Axl|Axl]] 14:49, 16 September 2010 (MDT)

'''Note:''' I do not have the rule books. That is why I'm asking here.

--[[User:Axl|Axl]] 16:09, 27 September 2010 (MDT)

== Little hiccup on a page. ==

Hello Green Dragon. I was just leveling my druid yesterday when I noticed a discrepancy on a page of the site, on (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Druid#Animal_Companion) it says that crocodiles are available to first level druids, whereas further down in the "Alternative Animal Companions" section it states that they are available at as an alternate candidate for the druid's animal companion at level four. I thought I'd let yah know since I checked in the 3.5 PHB and it said that it's not allowed to be used as a level one druid pet (for aquatic environments), unfortunately.

Taa.

.Willow.

== Some guidance please? ==

I've been trying to get the formatting right on my creation Eykanos Drakulzen since i created it. i've rewritten it about 10 times including direct copy/pasting and redoing to hold my info. the skills will not format correctly. please help.

== very old dnd forum posts—lost ==

I had made some races on the old DND boards, and decided to do a google search to see if I could find them again (I lost the computer they were originally written on)

Anyway, searching for one of my races (shatterskin) brought me here. Unfortunately you guys hadn't logged it, and it's no longer backed up on the wizard's boards either. So I was curious—do you have some sort of archive from the old wizards boards? I'd love to see some of my old posts if you have them. Oh, and I'd be totally cool with anything I made being posted here (I might modify them to make them suck less though)

you can email me at dustin.depenning@gmail.com if you need too

== Thank You =) ==

Thanks for the reply. I understand fully your situation and thanks for permission to base some 'Trickster' class features from the 'Tenken'(No plagiarism of course), And ill be sure to let you know when its finished so you can check it out.

== Uploading Media ==

How do I add a picture from the file "my pictures"? {{Unsigned|Raweno|21:11, 9 October 2010 (UTC)}}

:You upload the file to media, [[dndmedia:Special:Upload|Special:Upload]] and then use the standard wiki link syntax on a page you want to display it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:20, 9 October 2010 (MDT)

Okay, thanks. --[[User:Raweno|Raweno]]

== 3.5 Deity The Great Mon Gorge ==

Hi, I noticed a few changes to one of my contributions, I had left that note on the main page to draw attention to the kind act of the user who drew that (he did it without prompting and its really good, was very thankful) and I can understand moving that to the talk page, but the removal of 'The" from the deities name is in error, 'The" is part of his name and other things reference the use of the "The" (for example the main pantheon page his coffin is referred to T.G.M.G.) If you could change it back I would be thankful, im kinda new to wiki editing (ive been poking at it for some time but still slow) otherwise id just change it back myself. Thank you for keeping an eye on my pages I appreciate that too. --[[User:MCage|MCage]] 20:28, 9 October 2010 (PST)

:[[User:Kaden|Kaden]] is the uploader of the image. The history for the image and kadens name give a direct, non-discussion, relation to contributions. Anyhow, how does the pagename look now? You move pages by clicking the "move" tab up top. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:10, 9 October 2010 (MDT)

::Oh yeah thats perfect, thanks for the change and the advice on edits :) --[[User:MCage|MCage]] 23:46, 9 October 2010 (PST)

== My User Page ==

So what is the policy on stuff I am allowed to have on my own user page? Linking to a diff where you censored something I wrote doesn't seem very offensive to me. I was literally just offering a helping hand as to that D&D chatrooms already exist.

So, what is the policy for user pages, exactly? What kind of content is ok and what sort of stuff do you want to censor? --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 15:13, 29 October 2010 (MDT)

:See also [[User talk:Green Dragon#Censorship]]. What you are doing is solicitation ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism Wikipedia:Vandalism], external linking).
:{{quote|Partial censorship is something D&D Wiki has — to keep spam and non-relevant things at bay. All the recent spam from IP's (see the barnstars some have received) is not allowed — I think you would understand. It could become a serious problem.
|orig=--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:03, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
|src=[[User talk:Green Dragon#Censorship]].
}}
:Why was it solicitation? Because it is directing users else how then through [[DnD Links]] and was not decided by the administration to be a beneficial recourse (e.g. Wikipedia's policies). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:26, 29 October 2010 (MDT)

::Please note you supplied an external link, and then desired users to find it once again. And links are something, "what is a link?" - it has a purpose.
::Revision histories have been "cleaned" - see also [[Talk:Meta Pages]], [[Talk:Main Page]]. If enough problems exist, it is considered.
::And The Tavern software, no matter the software, was specific to D&D Wiki. Re-opening the tavern implies a ''D&D Wiki'' tavern. This is understandable. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:09, 29 October 2010 (MDT)

:::Are we seriously fighting about this again? Why does it matter? Tons of users have links to other wikis they collaborate on, or links to sites they find helpful. Those go uncensored. If I picked 3 random editors from the recent edits, and checked their user pages I can guarantee they have links to external D&D sites. Are you seriously going to say that no external links are allowed? --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 20:37, 29 October 2010 (MDT)

::::It's solicitation, ya (although not redundant). They really should discuss on [[DnD Links]] and get the good ones put there. And if it is a beneficial recourse to D&D Wiki that would have to be discussed to. Why did I notice this in particular? Because it's a very blatant user redirection and done in redundancy. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:20, 29 October 2010 (MDT)

:::::So you're telling me if a user blatantly advertises another site that isn't listed on [[DnD Links]] it should be removed for solicitation? --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 13:17, 30 October 2010 (MDT)

::::::Ya ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism Wikipedia:Vandalism], external linking - more too). But who checks all the time? And I just remove them when I come across them (mostly), however when a user redundantly does it after it has been changed based off policies ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism Wikipedia:Vandalism], external linking) it becomes a serious potential problem, and may result in bans like [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]]. Do you see where I am coming from? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:58, 30 October 2010 (MDT)

:::::::Is there not a difference between "solicitation" (a policy which is, at best, arbitrarily enforced, and, at worst, enforced with serious bias), and complaining about censorship of said solicitation? Aarnott was banned for solicitation, and, while I understand he's been warned about this in the past (though not [[Warning_Policy|officially]]), he was not banned until ''after'' he complained about censorship. This does not seem right to me. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 12:27, 31 October 2010 (MDT)

::::::::The official reason Aarnott was banned was because of "Spamming links to external sites (not getting it and continuing soliciting)". Meaning that Aarnott spammed links to external links and then after being told about his actions redundantly continued. Why is this the reason? Since it is true and follows policies and things which the administration can operate through.
::::::::I assume you are asking for the more normal reason, e.g. a colloquial reason. Being censored does not mean one is going to be banned, it just means one should not continue with the problem activity. Aarnott solicited, was warned (through censorship), solicited again on Aarnott's user talk — the diff, which leads onward, was warned (through undo), and then solicited again twice here. What is too much? To me I see it as we have no time for such behavior — policies exist for a reason (ask Wikipedia?) and one disregarding them because he/she wants to is not a reason. It's like a virus. As such the administration should operate under such principles. Just my way of looking at it. Does this answer any questions? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:59, 31 October 2010 (MDT)

:::::::::Are you suggesting that mentioning the website mibbit counts as soliciting? Aarnott had nothing to gain by suggesting it, and we were looking for suggestions and alternate hosting choices. I've mentioned Freenode several times in several tavern discussions, and there has never been a problem there. Mibbit and Freenode are essentially the same service. Also, if you don't technically warn him, I don't think it's fair to punish him as if you had. If you had issued a warning, per the warning policy you established, it's possible that he would have stopped. Furthermore, you've listed 4 incidents where he was "soliciting". Assuming you warned him separately for every single instance he should only be banned for 1 week, not 6 months. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 16:21, 31 October 2010 (MDT)

::::::::::Giving a specific link to one, not to a service, definitely is.
::::::::::{{quote|[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Civility Wikipedia:Civility] is superseded by the [[Warning Policy]] as applicable.
|src=[[Meta Pages]]
}}
::::::::::So no, they are different policy things. The edit itself and the diff are the notifications. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:53, 31 October 2010 (MDT)

:::::::::::If the edit and the diff are the notifications, why does the warning policy exist? How can [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Civility Wikipedia:Civility] be superseded by the [[Warning Policy]] if the only thing the warning policy says is "See Civility"? Also, you didn't address the second half of my comment. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 17:00, 31 October 2010 (MDT)

::::::::::::Because civility is just ''one'' policy on Wikipedia.
::::::::::::{{quote|As a general rule [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_policies Wikipedia's policies] are in effect. Please use common sense with this overarching policy.
|src=[[Meta Pages]]
}}
::::::::::::[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism Wikipedia:Vandalism], external linking has nothing to do with [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Civility Wikipedia:Civility]. If you have input into this this is not the place for it, please ask it on [[Talk:Meta Pages]].
::::::::::::The policies answer the bottom part of your comment. If not more information would be appreciated so I could answer them. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:07, 31 October 2010 (MDT)

:::::::::::::Wikipedia says, very clearly:
{{quote|Even if misguided or ill-considered, any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism.}}
:::::::::::::If we replace "encyclopedia" with "Dandwiki Community", surely you agree that is exactly what he did. That's why I will ask this again: "You've listed 4 incidents where he was "soliciting". Assuming you warned him separately for every single instance he should only be banned for 1 week, not 6 months". Why is he banned for 6 months? --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 17:19, 31 October 2010 (MDT)

{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}

:The gray line. Ya, but he should have listed providers like you did above (note, no censorship there). Banning lengths are only for the warning policy, this is the policy thing again. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:25, 31 October 2010 (MDT)

::So then you feel that a 6 month ban is an appropriate punishment for making multiple links to external sites? --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 17:29, 31 October 2010 (MDT)

:::You don't feel it is appropriate? One should understand that when the administration does something (e.g. censorship) it has a reason, and the opposition of that reason (not in discussion, in more vandalism) is the wrong action. Some recent IP's have been banned for a year for doing vandalism multiple times. It's following the same trajectory... Thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:09, 31 October 2010 (MDT)

::::Aarnott isn't some faceless IP just here to make trouble. You banned him before he could even have a proper discussion. Comparing him to recent IPs spamming pages about boots or whatever else is insulting to him. He was, at one point, an administrator on this site. Personally, I think letting him stick around long enough to have this discussion would have been best, and then banned him for some period of time, not more than a month. Honestly, if you had let him say his piece in this discussion I doubt he'd even need to be banned. Banning isn't meant to be a punishment, it's meant to stop future problems before they can happen. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 18:16, 31 October 2010 (MDT)

:::::(Edit Conflict) I'd consider a named user linking to sites that he genuinely finds helpful and thinks will be helpful to the community significantly different than an anonymous person intentionally vandalizing by deleting content or adding vulgar or unproductive material. While he has been warned before, I think there's a pretty significant jump between an implied, indirect verbal warning and a 6-month block. There should probably be some escalation in between there. There's another block on his account, but it seems to be unrelated to this issue. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 18:22, 31 October 2010 (MDT)

::::::Aarnott's comments to the matter (removed through censorship) I do not think can be considered in the way you want them to be.
::::::[[User:Jazzman831|Jazzman831]] just banned an IP (violated same policy) for infinity. Given the circumstances (user ''has'' been in good standing before) I guess I can change it to 3 months. People need to learn the policies, and banning is meant as a way of getting that done. So, although banning is not a punishment, it has a use for ''after incidents'' as well. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:54, 2 November 2010 (MDT)

:::::::No I didn't. I blocked someone who is part of a long-term scheme of placing blatant advertisements for a certain brand of footwear which is unrelated to D&D (and let's face it -- probably unused by most D&D players anyway). The user had no contributions that weren't entirely spam. I may have used the same reason in the drop down box, but that doesn't mean I blocked him for the same reason. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:29, 3 November 2010 (MDT)

::::::::Sorry, the violation of the same policy. I modified it above. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:32, 3 November 2010 (MDT)

::::::::: Despotism strikes again! --[[User:TK-Squared|TK-Squared]] 06:58, 5 November 2010 (MDT)

== Userpage Top Template and My Content ==

This isn't a major question but I was just wondering how you get the user/talk/contributions/awards bar on the top of your page. Also I was wondering if you could look at some of my posts and tell me if you like them. Thank you and congratulations on the amazing website. [[User:Nomnomking|Nomnomking]] 22:30, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

:See also [[User:Green Dragon/Top Template]]. You can make one in your own user space.
:I looked over the creations listed on your userpage (not usercontributions though) and gave input where I noticed things which are wrong. As those get corrected please ask me to look over them again for more things (balance, etc) and I would be more then willing to look over them.
:Also all the external links on your userpage you should be moved to [[DnD Links]]. Your userpage should then link to them by way of the page (an example would be [[DnD Links|External Links]]<nowiki>[</nowiki>[[DnD Links#Wizards of the Coast|1]]<nowiki>][</nowiki>[[DnD Links#WotC Tools|2]]<nowiki>]</nowiki>, etc) so you give mention to important ones and keep them on the page they are required to be on.
:Hope this helps. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:52, 3 November 2010 (MDT)

Thanks
--[[User:Nomnomking|Nomnomking]] 15:47, 4 November 2010

== Userspace Sandbox ==

hey, just wondering how to put unfinished work in my sandbox so it doesn't clog up the wiki? Thanks. --[[User:Fathirian Hound|Fathirian Hound]] 09:26, 4 November 2010 (MDT)

:Just move it (move tab) to your userpage/<!-name->. Then if you remove the categories it will not show up anywhere. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:36, 4 November 2010 (MDT)

User talk:Risek

2010-05-04T10:44:00Z

TK-Squared: /* Plushies! */

{{Messages of Interest|messages=
{{MoI-Row
|page=Acolyte_of_Necrosis_(DnD_Prestige_Class)
|section=someone changed something
|notifier=Daniel Draco
|date_time=13:48, 22 January 2009 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Acolyte_of_Necrosis_(DnD_Prestige_Class)
|section=Awake the Dead
|notifier=Lord Dhazriel
|date_time=16:27, 14 November 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Dakmaa_Of_Namat_(DnD_Feat)
|section=Comment
|notifier=Rithaniel
|date_time=09:34, 11 November 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Acolyte_of_Necrosis_(DnD_Prestige_Class)
|section=Rating
|notifier=Green Dragon
|date_time=13:15, 28 October 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Favored_of_Lolth_(DnD_Race)
|section=Nice
|notifier=Green Dragon
|date_time=13:24, 5 October 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Iron_skin_(DnD_Feat)
|section=
|notifier=Aarnott
|date_time=10:01, 6 August 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Ghost-Warped_(3.5e_Flaw)
|section=
|notifier=Calidore Chase
|date_time=14:06, 12 July 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Lord_Dhazriel
|section=Online D&D Group
|notifier=Lord Dhazriel
|date_time=11:16, 6 July 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Eiji
|section=
|notifier=Eiji
|date_time=16:33, 11 June 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Devolution_(DnD_Feat)
|section=Holy Dump Stat Batman
|notifier=Green Dragon
|date_time=20:20, 3 June 2008 (MDT)
}}
}}

== Welcome to D&D Wiki! ==

;Welcome!
Hello {{PAGENAME}}, and welcome to D&D Wiki. I hope you have been enjoying this site, and I hope you have been finding the information here on D&D Wiki useful. I am an admin (and, actually, the owner as well) here on D&D Wiki along with a couple other people who make up "The Face" of D&D Wiki. An entire list of admins can be found [[D&D Wiki:Administrators|here]].
;Questions:
If you have any question about D&D Wiki, D&D, formatting on D&D Wiki, what day today is, or whatever, an admin will, many times, give the best answer. Please feel free to ask any admin any question ([http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Green_Dragon&action=edit&section=new ask me a question!]).
;Formatting
Formatting on D&D Wiki (or any wiki for that matter) can be very difficult, and if you need help a good place to start is [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Editing Help:Editing] on Wikipedia (or even their [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Introduction Introduction] page). This will explain the basic wiki formatting and should provide quite a few useful links that explain more specific areas of wiki formatting. Again, if you have any questions about formatting on D&D Wiki please ask them as, I imagine, anybody will be more than happy to help you get them answered.
;Community
A strong and welcoming community exists on D&D Wiki, and I am sure you will find it rather nice. Most discussions take place on content talk pages, however please feel free to walk into [[Special:TheTavern|The Tavern]] (our local chat room) and talk to some fellow D&D Wikians. Anyway, on D&D Wiki, possibly since discussions are never deleted, people try to be nice. This means please follow Wikipedia's guidelines on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Civility Civility] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Etiquette Etiquette] when discussing anything. And, if an argument does arise, please use Wikipedia's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution Dispute Resolution] to make sure everyone comes out happy. Also, on a pretty different note, to ensure people know who posted what, please sign your name after a post with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) or by clicking on the signature icon. [[Image:Signature_icon.png]] This will automatically produce your name and the date. Anyway, I hope you come to love the close-knit D&D Wiki community and welcome again, you are now a D&D Wikian. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:57, 16 May 2008 (MDT)

== Plushies! ==

Hey, man. Was wondering when you and/or Eiji were going to finish with the plushie feats? Really Really Really Gotta Go sounds interesting. Hehe... -- [[User:Macvec|Macvec]] 15:50, 31 May 2009 (EST)

:I second this.[[User:Master K|Master K]] 09:31, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

:: Eiji and, as far as I am aware, Risek are no longer contributers here. --[[User:TK-Squared|TK-Squared]] 10:43, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Pun-Pun (3.5e Optimized Character Build)

2010-04-29T12:12:23Z

TK-Squared: /* Flaw */

== Posted on the Boards: ==

This optimized character was taken from the Wizards Boards by permission, the thread related to this spell is: [http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=491801&page=1&pp=30]

''Green_Dragon''

==he scares me==

let me just say one thing, pun-pun is so good if one were to fight him his CR would be somewhere in the millions, possibly even billions.

oh, and nice joke and manipulation of abilities and spells

== Wow... ==

How long did it take you to think of this?

== Somthing missing==
I can see one weakness in Pun Pun, he needs Mettle for the save for partial spells that are out there.

:He can simply grant himself Mettle, Evasion, and anything else that ever shows up in any printed book. No problem there. Alternatively, he'll just grant himself immunity to any effect you could ever create with partial Will/Fortitude spells (poison etc. etc. etc.) --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 03:18, 3 July 2007 (MDT)

== SUPREME Supreme Cleave ==

Grant Pun-Pun the War Hulk PrC's ability Massive Swing. Since he already has limitless sight and infinite reach (even across planes), you can now use a standard attack action to make one melee attack roll and compare that roll to the AC of every creature you threaten (which is every creature anywhere on any plane). Note that you can be selective about which squares you target, so you can use this for selective genocide to one-hit-kill entire species, or just go ahead and wipe out every living thing everywhere. {{Unsigned|IanUilliam|11:09, 8 January 2007 (MST)}}

:The question is... Can Pun-Pun do enough damage to kill himself? {{Unsigned|Aarnott|11:19, 8 January 2007 (MST)}}

::Infinite damage verses infinite health.... Hm... This is a very good optimization ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:19, 8 January 2007 (MST)

:::My heart weeps after seeing such a thing [[User:Flession|Flession]] 10:14, 24 March 2007 (MDT)

::::1-1=0, so Infinate-Infinate still equals 0 (X-X=0, mathmatical fact). {{Unsigned|84.66.55.0|13:31, 19 May 2007 (MDT)}}

:::::Then he takes himself down to zero... Hopefully he does not do a strenuous action, otherwise he will be okay ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:29, 28 May 2007 (MDT)

:::::WHOA!!!!! 84.66.55.0 --- Infinity is '''''not''''' a real!! You can not add infinity with the same rules you use to add reals---just like you can not add complex numbers with same the rules as reals. Infinity subtract infinity is '''unknown''', '''NOT''' zero!! — [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]]) 16:21, 31 May 2007 (MDT)

:Being a mathematician this is very close to my speciality (measure theory and fractional calculus) and actually ''is'' one of my supervisor's topic (descriptive set theory). The first thing you need to understand about infinity is that it is not unique. There are (literally) an infinite number of infinities. The "infinity" which corresponds with the integers is ''much'' smaller than the "infinity" which corresponds with the reals. So if I take R, and sift out all the intergers, I still get infinity. But if I take the intergers and sift out the reals, I delete my whole set, so I'm left with nothing. To follow up on BD, there is nothing wrong with infinity + infinity (the larger "kills" the smaller), the difference is this operation is not ''invertible'' so we have no subtraction. Thirdly to answer Aarnott, Pun-Pun has regeneration, and can always save himself from massive damage, so no. --[[User:Pwsnafu|Pwsnafu]] 19:03, 1 June 2007 (MDT)

::Note that Pun-Puns HD are infinite in the sense that he can boost them up to any natural number, or lim (a -> inf) HD = inf as a mathematician would put it, where a is the number of actions he takes to boost HD. It means that only if he uses the Infinite Action Loop to boost his HD they truly become infinite.
::And Pun-Pun can't kill himself with a weapon because he is immune to weapon damage and has both Fast Healing and Regeneration. Even if he manages to knock himself out he comes back like the Tarrasque. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 18:11, 3 July 2007 (MDT)

Pun-Pun could simply increase his Constitution to be significantly higher than his Strength, whilst keeping his Strength high enough to destroy anything except himself in one hit.

==Err...==

What if I shot him with a huge cannon of godly greatness at point blanc range? Would He die then? This Pun-pun thing is crazy. Also, you need a LINE OF SIGHT in order to make a spot check anyway (evem Pun-pun cannot see through a planet...). And, even with limitless ranks, a natural one ALWAYS FAILS. Any you still cant see someone who rolls a natural twenty for their hide check. {{Unsigned|84.66.55.0|13:24, 19 May 2007 (MDT)}}

:Incorrect. Pending a house rule, there is no automatic pass or fail for skill checks. -- [[User:Flession|Flession]] 17:29, 19 May 2007 (MDT)

::In many cases (and when I play) a natural 20 is plus a certain number while a natural 1 is minus a certain number. This variant is described in greater detail in the DMG. However, this variant makes it so pun-pun will ''always'' hit and ''always'' kill. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:45, 22 May 2007 (MDT)

:::Gods above a certain rank don't fail on natural 1s and gods above a higher rank (I think it's 16) automatically get the maximum roll on all attacks, checks and saves. [[User:MorkaisChosen|MorkaisChosen]] 03:59, 1 June 2007 (MDT)

::::Plus technically Pun Pun can do a hilarious variety of things to circumvent even this. Having limitless HD, he qualifies for virtually every feat in existence, including luck feats that give you rerolls and feats that mitigate the cost of skill failures. Having limitless or at least gigantic amounts of actions, if he messes up a skill roll he can do it again. He can always take 10 or take 20 for a large proportion of problems, especially due to feats and class abilities that let one do so under the vast majority of conditions. He can also grant himself immunity to every sub-variety of negative event from rolling a 1, infinite rerolls, etc. with Manipulate Form cheese.
::::Regarding LoS limitations, there's a ton of ways around this too. Pun-Pun could grant himself eyes all over his body with x-ray vision. He can abuse various clairvoyance or remote viewing abilities, or just grant himself an extraordinary ability that lets him attack without line of sight. And I believe he could grant himself eyes on his reaching "arms" of essentia or use touch.

== Ice Assassin? ==

So, I get this whole Pun-Pun business, but I'm still confounded on one point. The assumption of Pun-Pun's divine rank is depented on his creating the Nut-Puns which is, in turn, dependent on his receiving a divine rank from the god-clones he creates using Ice Assassin. What supplement/thread/board/etc. is this spell/spell-like ability found in? Everything else has a relevant source, but this one is left mysteriously unexplained. --[[User:Rakankou|Rakankou]] 10:38, 29 May 2007 (MDT)

:A [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/arch/fw Far Corners of the World] article; [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fw/20030124a Snow and Ice: Spells of the Frozen Lands]. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:50, 29 May 2007 (MDT)

::Most helpful; thank you. --[[User:Rakankou|Rakankou]] 11:59, 29 May 2007 (MDT)

:::Is a god a "living, breathing" creature as per Ice Assassin? That's debatable. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 03:16, 3 July 2007 (MDT)

::::Oddly enough, it doesn't stipulate that the creature to be duplicated need be a living, breathing one; only that the duplicate is a living, breathing copy. Theoretically, you could make a duplicate of an undead, construct, or a non-native outsider. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 09:08, 3 July 2007 (MDT)

:::::Ahh, you're right. The spell is just lovely. Even without Pun-Pun, there are plenty of ways to abuse the spell. The simple fact alone that you can create a copy of someone, which gains all the original's memories, and it is under your command, suddenly puts all knowledge that ever existed at your command. Just command it to tell you what you want to know. The spell doesn't even prevent you from copying people who are already dead, and (arguably) people who are not born yet. The one annoying part, that the copy wants to run away and kill the original, can be easily prevented by commanding it not to. Well, even if the stupid thing does kill the original, you can still use it, but I wonder what happens to the killing urge. Since the critter costs 20,000 gp and 5,000 XP and is very hard to heal, it is actually a waste of ressources to send it out to actually fight someone. I'd rather create a love slave, use it as a decoy for the king who is in my torture chambers, create a duplicate of my son to confuse enemies and paparazzi (remember that you can always command it not to kill him), create a pet archmage, heck, you could even create duplicates of Superman and Batman to finally answer the question of who would win in a duel ...
:::::Another funny fact: It says you can only ''repair'' damage using a certain ritual, but it does not say you can't ''heal'' or ''cure'' it, and that it is immune to Fast Healing and Regeneration. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 17:54, 3 July 2007 (MDT)

::::::Those are some good points you bring up, but it does leave one question. In your hypothetical duel between Superman and Batman, how do you plan to get some bit of each of them (one of the material components of Ice Assassin, as per the article linked above)? Furthermore, how is Pun-Pun supposed to go about procuring some bit of a deity with a divine rank of at least one? Or does that come with being a Divine Minion?

:::::::The easiest way to achieve that is either the Eschew Materials feat or the epic Ignore Material Components. Note that Pun-Pun has unlimited feats from unlimited hit dice. In fact, he can pretty much boost himself to fulfill almost any prerequisite, so he can be assumed to have almost any feat ever published.
:::::::By the way, he does have unlimited hit dice, but I assume these are racial hit dice? Or does he get class levels? --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 23:18, 3 July 2007 (MDT)
::::::::I believe they technically are neither. Rather, they are something like a positive energy version of energy drain made permanent. That wouldn't really count as racial or class, but still has all the benefits of HD.

== After all ==

The whole Pun-Pun example should serve as a warning to any game designer out there. The "Manipulate Form" ability was never meant to fall into player hands. But the designers obviously completely underestimated player creativity. Of course there will be a way to get it. So, never ever publish a "do what you want" ability and always check "what is the worst thing that could happen if this falls into the hands of a PC". --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 03:20, 3 July 2007 (MDT)

:Thankfully, they fixed this build with a errata. It's no longer possible to do what Pun-Pun does... -- [[User:Flession|Flession]] 07:07, 3 July 2007 (MDT)

::Did they really? What did they change? --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 23:19, 3 July 2007 (MDT)

== Native to Toril ==

I just realized that to pull off Pun-Pun, the PC has to be native to Toril (i.e. the Forgotten Realms Campaign world). It's right in the Manipulate Forms ability. I wonder whether there is a way to become a "native of Toril" when you're in a different campaign setting. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 18:30, 3 July 2007 (MDT)

:I hope not... --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:56, 20 November 2007 (MST)

::Gates of Dawn, Players Handbook 2 --[[Colona|Colona]] 18:33, 10 August 2008 (PST)
::: Or some of the rituals from Savage Species [[User:TheMadLinguist|TheMadLinguist]]

== Divine Minion Wildshape Ability ==

I was reading the Divine Minion template on the Wizards website and it clearly reads:

"A divine minion can wild shape as an 11th-level druid into one or more animal forms that depend on the deity it serves..."

Not to mention the under Master of Many Forms it clearly states it requires the Wild Shape CLASS FEATURE, and applying a template to a race makes it a RACIAL ability. If it was open to anyone who can change forms that would have said something like wild shape class feature OR shapechange ability. Otherwise this would open up the class for anything that can shapechange, like a werewolf. I don't think that is what they were thinking of when they wrote up this class.

Even if you do it, then your effective level for wild shape should be the divine minion level plus the master of many forms level (in this case 4, 1+3=4) and the "as an 11th level druid" should be limited to the specific animals granted by their diety, not to all their shapeshifting. It isn't even a true wildshape ability, since it's limited to a couple of specific animals

I wouldn't say this was done completely by the rules, but by a creative intrpretation of what CLASS FEATURE means and allowing them to use the "as an 11th level druid" in conjunction with the master of many forms instead of just the divine minion level of 1.

Here is the source of my information: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/mb/20050209a {{unsigned|76.169.169.233|2007-11-19 22:44}}

:This was actually not made on D&D Wiki. If you think it is broken please bring it up with the creators of this CO on wizards.com. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:59, 25 November 2007 (MST)

::Theres another way to stop this specific build with an interpretation of class feature. Technically, the Divine Minion template doesn't grant the Wild Shape feature at all in any form. It grants "fast wild shape" which is a new ability that functions as the Wild Shape ability of an 11th level druid. So the Wild Shape abilities you would get from being an 11th level druid are merely an explanatory way of describing the Fast Wild Shape ability. So you couldn't qualify for Master of Many forms at all, since you don't technically have the Wild Shape ability in any form.

:::Well this is easy to get around...take levels of Druid. It takes longer, but it works just as well. --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 10:06, 29 April 2008 (MDT)

== Not to mention... ==

When you wildshape, you change into a RACE, not a CLASS. WuJen is a class and not a race, so how can you give a WuJen ability to yourself?

You can change into a cockroach and give yourself the ability to live through a nuke, but you can't shapechange into a wizard and give yourself the scribe scroll ability. {{unsigned|76.169.169.233|2007-11-19 23:06}}

:You are right. Although I do not see why you would need to use it to transform into a cockroach and live through a nuke, as nukes have not yet been invented at the time D&D is usually set. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:54, 20 November 2007 (MST)

::The Wu Jen ability is not granted through wildshape. It's granted via the manipulate form ability. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:26, 20 November 2007 (MST)

:::In which case it is fine. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:17, 20 November 2007 (MST)

== Munckin. I would kill a player who tried to pull this. ==

Munchkin. That's all I have to say. SUPER MUNCHKIN. -Fallen.Angel09

:Many character optimizations are very much Munchkin. That's the point of them. They are usually either intended to just see if you can build one, or are intended for use in high-powered campaigns where the goal is mostly to build as powerful a character as you can. This particular build is so powerful that it's not meant to be played even in a high-powered campaign...it's purely a thought experiment. There's nothing wrong with munchkinism, it's just that there is a proper place for it...this section of the wiki is one such proper place. --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 10:03, 29 April 2008 (MDT)

::My boyfriend's characters could *maybe* wipe this guy off the map. This is not a good thing. What can I do (as a multiclass DM/girlfriend) to solve this problem?

:::Talk to him OOC. Explain the situation. Explain that people aren't having fun. Ask him to tone it down a bit, make a new character, etc, without getting angry or emotional about it. Hope that helps :-) --[[User:Ghostwheel|Ghostwheel]] 13:05, 1 September 2009 (MDT)

::::DM ''and'' girlfriend. Well, then you have it easier than most DMs. Just cut him off. Then he'll come to the table with whatever character you want. ;)  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 06:34, 2 September 2009 (MDT)

== sarrukhs ==

the only really good question about this thing is: why are there no sarrukhs who have thought of this???
and, by the way, from what book are the sarrukhs? cant find the in ''monster manual''
[[User:Hijax|Hijax]] 08:50, 8 August 2008 (MDT)

: Sarrukh's cannot use Manipulate Form on themselves. They're in Serpent Kingdoms. --[[User:TK-Squared|TK-Squared]] 08:38, 12 September 2008 (MDT)

::why? is it just stated that they cant do it on themselves? dont hey qualifi as scaled ones? dont it work on sarrukhs? [[User:Hijax|Hijax]] 08:22, 3 January 2009 (MST)
::: It's specifically disallowed in the ability. Wizards of the Coast may not do much editorial oversight, but at least they can cover the blindingly obvious loopholes. [[User:TheMadLinguist|TheMadLinguist]]

== Pun-Pun at Level 1 ==

Pun-Pun is available at level 1.

Pun-Pun, Ardent 1, 1 flaw
-------------------------
4 ranks in Knowledge (religion)
Trait: Absent-Minded (+1)
Trait: Specialized (Knowledge [Religion) (+1)
Psicrystal Affinity (Sage) (+3)
Call to Mind (+4)
20 Intelligence (17 base + 3 from venerable)... (+5)
Mantle Power: Knowledge (+5)
Mantle Power: Fate (+1)
Psicrystal: Aid Another (+2)
-------------------------
4+1+1+3+4+5+5+1+2 = 26.

1. Makes the DC 25 knowledge check (even on a natural 1, since natural 1s aren't failures as a knowledge check), learning about Pazazu.

2. Say Pazazu's name 3 times, ask for a ring of 3 wishes.

3. Retrain Skill Focus to Assume Supernatural Ability. The premise is that, Wish allows you to mimic any spell 8th or lower, and you can mimic Polymorph. Therefore, you've the ability to assume a new form magically.

4. Wish > Polymorph Any Object: Psicrystal into a viper.

5. Wish > Polymorph yourself into a sarrukh. Grant Manipulate Form to your psicrystal...

6. Proceed with Pun-Pun.

This requires the following books:

XPH
CPsi
UA - 2 traits , 1 flaw
Savage Species
Eberron - education feat
FC1 - Pazuzu
Serpent Kingdom - Sarruhk

== temporal distillation ==

the above mentioned Su is from the zerth cenobite and grants the user and his psicrystal one extra turn. That should be able to give pun-pun as much time as he needs

== Or a more general (and fast) first level strategy
Build: anything that can get a + 14 bonus to knowledge (the planes/religion) at level one so you can take ten to know about Pazuzu on a one (DC 25 knowledge check). One example is
Skill focus (+3)
four ranks (+4)
Masterwork tool (+2)
20 in intelligence (from race or age benefits) (+5)

1. Say Pazuzu three times. (being a paladin gets extra bonus points here - Pazuzu goes out of his way to "help" paladins, and makes sure that the 'first' wish doesn't cause evil)

2. Wish for a Lawful Evil candle of invocation

3. Use the candle to call an efreet

4. Wish one: plane shift for you both to the far realms. No more time is spend on the material plane - far realms time moves at an effective ratio of 1:0.

5. Wish two: A pony. Or anything else you like. Maybe you give the efreet something nice, and ask him kindly to forget all this. Or some kind of ritual, or a buff if you can't make the Sarruhk knowledge check. Or something to help you survive the far realms. Whatever.

6. Wish three: another candle of invocation.

7. Use the candle of invocation to gate in a Sarruhk. As per the spell, it has to obey you. Start ordering abilities

8. Get the manipulate form (ex)
9. Get the singular enemy ability of the Aleax, with the enemy being yourself
10. Get immunity to unconsciousness.
11. You are now completely unstoppable.

== Alternate first level trick ==
Aristocrat 1 (race independent)
Feat 1: Magical training (player's guide to faerun)
Feat 2: Precocious Apprentice: Summon Mirror Mephit (Expedition to the Demonweb Pits)
Starting gold goes into purchasing a single vial of liquid pain.

Rounds 1->a Attempt to cast Summon Mirror Mephit until you can make the check.
Optimization could allow this to autosucceed the first round, but it isn't needed
Round b: toss your mirror mephit a vial of liquid pain, and have him use it with his spell-like Simulacrum ability
As per the monster manual (which supercedes the SRD), a spell-like ability defaults to a standard action. With the vial, we have CL 9, sufficient to duplicate a 18 HD advanced efreeti (simulacrum is allowed to duplicate specific creatures). Divide the level by two, and we have a 9HD copy. Which is just as many hit dice as a normal efreet. Order the mirror mephit to order the efreeti to obey you completely before he vanishes.

You now have three free wishes. Start from step 4 of the above streategy.

== Spells to Spell-Like Abilities? ==

To get the ability increse, Pun-Pun must grant itself the Wu-Jen spell Giant Size and make it at will. How does it do this? Can he grant himself any spell as a spell-like ability or did he get it from copying the special attack or special quality of some class or creature? Same question about how often he could use it, could he make any thing that he copied from another monster, such as a Geriviar's telekinesis which is usable three times as day, and make it at will or would he have to use it as written in the monster stat block?

A third question is can Pun-Pun grant himself class levels? As some feats or saliant divine abilities can only be taken if you are of a certain level in a certain class.

And in the Manipulate Form and Extreme Cheese section it says that the shadow seed can be used to replicate any spell or person but the shadow seed isn't in the Epic Level Handbook, so in which book is it in? -- Michael 15:48, 1 Dec 2009

You really aren't understanding the ability. Partially that's because it's an inefficient old build. Anyway, manipulate form allows you to change size directly, without needing to duplicate a form. I think shadow seed is in one of the forgotten realms books... [[User:TheMadLinguist|TheMadLinguist]] 07:31, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

== Different Build ==

Man, this is crazy. I came up with pretty much the same idea last year when I finally got ''[[Serpent Kingdoms]].'' What I did was get the Tainted One template from ''[[Savage Species]]'' applied to my 7th-level psion (telepath) which, according to SK, makes him qualify as a Scaled One. Then, I arranged a lengthy search for a mage powerful enough to find and capture a sarrukh. Lastly, after we had found a mage and had him imprison a sarrukh, I used several applications of ''implanted suggestion'' (because of the higher DC) until the bastard was tricked into giving my character the manipulate form ability. Since our DM was both (somewhat) new to the game and certainly quite unfamiliar with how the ability works, it wasn't too hard to convince him to let me get away with it. I haven't used it for anything yet, but sooner or later, I'ma go Matrix on some fools. [[User:Joker|Joker]] 20:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

:You should add it here as another optimization. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:17, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Ehh, that would be kind of pointless. It would basically say: "Use the same info on the Pun-Pun page except for a different base character model." Not worth the effort, really, and it would be a waste of space. [[User:Joker|Joker]] 16:03, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

== IP Comment ==

Comment left in the Manipulate Form section by IP: [EDIT by unregistered user: <-- this is incorrect. The actual text (in Forgotten Realms--Serpent Kingdoms) allows only extraordinary abilities!! If this has any impact on the rest of this build, let that be noted] {{unsigned| 173.164.136.93}}

== Flaw ==

Ummm.... what happens when your fammiliar decides that he wants to kill you? If your familliar has all the abilities you do... even if he can't, then your familliar could decide not to help you any more. Either way, your screwed!--[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 23:11, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

: This is not a flaw. Assuming, as any optimization does, a static non-make-rubbish-up DM, the the build works perfectly. A familiar is permanently loyal to you. --[[User:TK-Squared|TK-Squared]] 12:12, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Discussion:Map making sites

2010-04-29T12:05:14Z

TK-Squared:

== Map making sites ==

=== [[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 04:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC) ===

Anybody know any good map designing sites/software (perferrably no download sites) for making my campaign settings maps? I have everything down on a peice of paper, and i'm actually quite good at drawing maps, they look nice and all, but they don't look very formal in pencil and on lined paper. :P

Anyways, thanks for any input! :)

=== [[User:Badger|Badger]] 05:19, 28 April 2010 (UTC) ===
I always just used pencil on white paper, then scanned it and went over it in Gimp (Open-source Photoshop, but it's a download), and it didn't look too bad. However, ENworld has probably had dozens of threads about map software. I'd check there, or The Cartographer's Guild, if you are looking for some other advice on map-making. Honestly, they are the best source for anything map-related. I don't know of any sites that allow you to make continents, but I'd be interested if you found any good ones. There are a few sites (no download) that let you make dungeon maps that I know of.

===  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 16:36, 28 April 2010 (UTC) ===
My personal favorite is Campaign Cartographer, now on it's 3rd edition. Takes a bit of learning, but it is great.

=== [[User:TK-Squared|TK-Squared]] 12:05, 29 April 2010 (UTC) ===

[http://www.pixlr.com/ Pixlr] is a web application for drawing and editting. It has a similar vein to Photoshop Elements, although in a 'lite fashion'. If you have a tablet, it's similar to drawing. If you do want to download, though, [http://www.profantasy.com/ Profantasy] have very good software for sale, including Campaign Cartographer. I hear they're worth paying for in such a respect.

{{Forumfooter|Discussion}}
__NOTOC__

User talk:Green Dragon

2010-04-29T12:00:39Z

TK-Squared: /* Kobold buffs? */

{{:User:Green Dragon/Top Template}}
{{Messages of Interest|messages=
{{MoI-Row
|page=Category_talk:Candidates_for_Deletion
|section=Idea_for_half-completed_pages
|notifier=Jazzman831
|date_time=21:09, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=LA_7_Races&oldid=397215
|section=
|notifier=Green Dragon
|date_time=22:09, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Green_Dragon
|section=Taking Author Information off Pages
|notifier=Jwguy
|date_time=01:40, 6 November 2009 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Detect_Disease_(3.5e_Spell)
|section=Author Template
|notifier=Daniel Draco
|date_time=13:55, 6 October 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Detect_Disease_(3.5e_Spell)
|section=Author Template
|notifier=Daniel Draco
|date_time=03:15, 4 October 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:SRD3e:System_Reference_Document
|section=Basic Character Classes
|notifier=Hooper
|date_time=16:45, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Hooper/Banned_Material
|section=Hugh?
|notifier=Lord Dhazriel
|date_time=17:57, 18 September 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Jason_Bagby
|section=Deletion Template on User Page
|notifier=Hooper
|date_time=17:05, 5 September 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Admin
|section=Transcribed Wizards of the Coast Online Archives
|notifier=TheWarforgedArtificer
|date_time=16:15, 5 September 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Admin
|section=Transcribed Wizards of the Coast Online Archives
|notifier=TheWarforgedArtificer
|date_time=16:01, 5 September 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Deviant_(3.5e_Class)
|section=Author Template
|notifier=Sulacu
|date_time=13:58, 28 August 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Knightwarrior_(3.5e_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Lord Dhazriel
|date_time=21:57, 27 August 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Calidore_Chase
|section=No longer an Admin?
|notifier=Calidore Chase
|date_time=12:51, 15 August 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:Spell
|section=
|notifier=TheWarforgedArtificer
|date_time=00:12, 8 August 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:Spell
|section=
|notifier=TheWarforgedArtificer
|date_time=23:58, 7 August 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Half-Troll_(4e_Race)
|section=Formatting
|notifier=Sepsis
|date_time=14:57, 3 August 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:4e_Power
|section=Strangeness
|notifier=Taritus
|date_time=13:40, 22 July 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:4e_Power
|section=Strangeness
|notifier=Taritus
|date_time=13:39, 22 July 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Ironbound_(DnD_Prestige_Class)
|section=locked
|notifier=GaaaaaH
|date_time=04:59, 12 July 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Dungeons_and_Dragons
|section=DPL?
|notifier=Daniel Draco
|date_time=22:13, 24 June 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:4e_Artifact_Part_1
|section=
|notifier=Sabreheim
|date_time=21:34, 11 June 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Rod_of_Orcus_(4e_Artifact)
|section=Template Issues
|notifier=Sepsis
|date_time=16:08, 11 June 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Green_Dragon
|section=Harassment
|notifier=Sepsis
|date_time=07:45, 31 May 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Giant_(4e_Race)
|section=Response
|notifier=Sepsis
|date_time=07:37, 31 May 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Category_talk:Martial_Adept
|section=
|notifier=Daniel Draco
|date_time=19:57, 28 May 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Nature_Bound_(DnD_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Sabreheim
|date_time=15:26, 28 May 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Daunting_Assailant_(DnD_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Daniel Draco
|date_time=15:46, 8 April 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Regiment_(3.5e_Template)
|section=Can't Access the Page Anymore
|notifier=Aarnott
|date_time=15:27, 6 April 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:Weapon_Desc
|section=
|notifier=Sabre070
|date_time=21:52, 7 November 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Main_Page
|section=Moving to new MediaWiki version
|notifier=Blue Dragon
|date_time=13:36, 28 October 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Bodily_Relics
|section=Talk:Bodily Relics?
|notifier=Rithaniel
|date_time=10:28, 16 October 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:DnD_Abyssal_Heritor_Feats
|section=DPL
|notifier=Aarnott
|date_time=11:08, 28 July 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Soul-Mate_(DnD_Feat)
|section=
|notifier=Xdeletedx
|date_time=23:03, 19 July 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Snake-Sword_(DnD_Equipment)
|section=
|notifier=Eiji
|date_time=02:07, 30 June 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Main_Page
|section=WYSIWYG extension
|notifier=Aarnott
|date_time=10:35, 20 June 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Snow_Silver_(3.5e_Equipment)
|section=
|notifier=Ice Paul the III
|date_time=13:21, 6 June 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Myrmidon_(DnD_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Kisame93
|date_time=08:16, 26 May 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=UA_talk:Variant_Rules
|section=Two Complete Chapters
|notifier=OptimizationFanatic
|date_time=15:15, 11 May 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Expanded_Religions_(DnD_Variant_Rule)
|section=Featured Article Nomination
|notifier=Hawk
|date_time=07:23, 28 March 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Regiment_(DnD_Template)
|section=Call out for help!
|notifier=Aarnott
|date_time=16:58, 17 March 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:Main_Page_FA
|section=
|notifier=Sam Kay
|date_time=13:21, 16 March 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Publishers_of_d20_and_D&D_Products
|section=
|notifier=Ramses IV
|date_time=11:15, 16 March 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Mesoamerican_Gods_and_Goddessess_(DnD_Pantheon)
|section=
|notifier=Ramses IV
|date_time=09:59, 16 March 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Marksman_(DnD_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Eiji
|date_time=02:30, 15 March 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Form_talk:DnD_Equipment/Preload
|section=Problems
|notifier=Hawk
|date_time=22:03, 29 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:DnD_Equipment
|section=Cost and Weight
|notifier=Hawk
|date_time=20:06, 29 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Form_talk:DnD_Equipment
|section=Date
|notifier=Hawk
|date_time=19:42, 29 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Catgirl/Nekomusume/Nekomimi_(DnD_Race)
|section=Dogs
|notifier=Xdeletedx
|date_time=16:28, 26 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Brawling_(DnD_Variant_Rule)
|section=Sooo tired...
|notifier=Eiji
|date_time=00:04, 26 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Marksman_(DnD_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Eiji
|date_time=13:11, 24 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:User_Base_Classes
|section=
|notifier=Sledged
|date_time=14:27, 19 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Vest_of_the_Bold_(DnD_Equipment)
|section=
|notifier=Cronocke
|date_time=05:17, 18 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Pedistal_of_Truth_(DnD_Equipment)
|section=Format Format
|notifier=Green Dragon
|date_time=09:40, 16 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Performer_(DnD_Prestige_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Cerin616
|date_time=18:22, 11 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Main_Page
|section=
|notifier=Sam Kay
|date_time=07:20, 5 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Paladin_Mount_from_first_level_(DnD_Variant_Rule)
|section=
|notifier=Sam Kay
|date_time=09:35, 4 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Myrmidon_(DnD_Class)
|section=all of it
|notifier=Tetsurga
|date_time=17:54, 31 January 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:DnD_Maps
|section=Maybe this should be in environments after all?
|notifier=EldritchNumen
|date_time=12:32, 3 January 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Chromatic_Dwarf_(DnD_Creature)
|section=Race
|notifier=Green Dragon
|date_time=23:45, 1 June 2007 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Combat_School_(3.5e_Variant_Rule)
|section=
|notifier=Green Dragon
|date_time=23:57, 21 May 2007 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=MediaWiki:Sharedupload
|section=
|notifier=Green Dragon
|date_time=23:01, 14 May 2007 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=dndmedia:D&D_Wiki_Media_talk:Copyrights
|section=Image documentation
|notifier=Cuthalion
|date_time=14:11, 11 May 2007 (MDT)
}}
}}

{{Archives
|label1= Archive 1 (Discussions 1 – 30)
|label2= Archive 2 (Discussions 31 – 60)
|label3= Archive 3 (Discussions 61 – 90)
|label4= Archive 4 (Discussions 91 – 120)
|label5= Archive 5 (Discussions 121 – 150)
|label6= Archive 6 (Discussions 151 – 180)
|label7= Archive 7 (Discussions 181 – 210)
|label8= Archive 8 (Discussions 211 – 240)
|label9= Archive 9 (Discussions 241 – 270)
|label10= Archive 10 (Discussions 271 – 300)
|label11= Archive 11 (Discussions 301 – 330)
|label12= Archive 12 (Discussions 331 – 360)
|label13= Archive 13 (Discussions 361 – 390)
|label14= Archive 14 (Discussions 391 – 420)
|label15= Archive 15 (Discussions 421 – 450)
}}

== Confusing Edit ==

On [[Snake (4e Creature)|one of my pages]] you recently added [[Template:Wikify]] with the following explanation (and I quote): ''The ":" should not be in the Encounter Groups (see preload or Books for reference). Instead an extra line should be added. ALso either a breadcrumb should be added or the current "Back To" footer condensed ("by Level" etc).'' I am not entirely sure what you're trying to say here. There is no colon anywhere in the Encounter Groups section, nor could I find anything else in that section that seemed off, much less something that warranted the template. The second part is also poorly worded, and all I pulled out of it is that you want me to change the Back To footers in some manner. Please clarify what you want changed, as I really am at a loss O.o --[[User:Dracomortis|Dracomortis]] 18:44, 9 September 2009 (MDT)

:I edited the page. If you look at my last edit does that clear up any confusion? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:56, 10 September 2009 (MDT)

::Oh, I see what happened. You mentioned the Encounter Groups section, but you actually meant the Lore sections. I feel I should point out, however, that the colons are part of the preload and not something that I specifically added. Might be worth removing them from the preload if it is preferred that they not be added. Also, on the issue of the Back To footer, did you mean that instead of this:
:::Back to [[Main Page]] → [[4e Homebrew|Homebrew]] → [[4e Creatures|Creatures]] → [[4e User Creatures by Level|User Creatures by Level]] → [[4e Level 3 Creatures|Level 3 Creatures]].
::It should be condensed to this:
:::Back to [[Main Page]] → [[4e Homebrew|Homebrew]] → [[4e Creatures|Creatures]] → [[4e User Creatures by Level|User Creatures by Level]]
::If so, that's another minor error you might want to look into, as the preload includes the former example and not the latter. Thanks for the clarification. -- [[User:Dracomortis|Dracomortis]] 12:46, 10 September 2009 (MDT)

:::Oh, your right. I meant the lore section instead, sorry. I must have not been thinking at the time. Although the colons have been removed from the preload for quite some while now ([http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=4e_Creature_Preload&diff=next&oldid=287610]). If you store a old copy of the preload on your computer you may want to update it (of course not using the old table and switching to the template (which needs to be updated on the preload sometime). And for the breadcrumb I would just use [[Template:4e Creatures Level 7 Breadcrumb]], etc. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:00, 10 September 2009 (MDT)

::::Ah, that would be the problem then - I've had my copy of the preload saved for several months now. I've added a breadcrumb for each CR on the page (something I normally do but must have forgotten on that page). Thanks again for taking the time to clarify what needed to be changed. -- [[User:Dracomortis|Dracomortis]] 22:17, 13 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::Ya, I know what you mean. I would imagine another main reason is because the template for the creatures is not added as well. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:33, 15 September 2009 (MDT)

== Userpage Gallery Clean Up ==

Noticed you hadn't gotten around to organizing the gallery on your user page. I will probably arrange them for you soon if you don't find the time. As a professional artist myself, a clean gallery is a must. Oh, and your talk page is super long and has a million MOI's on it. Time to clean your room GD. Hehe. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 17:50, 15 September 2009 (MDT)(The OCD guy.)

:Ya, I know. I always clean my userpage with time (see all the archives). Also, I find that the current layout of the pictures has a nice artistic touch; I find the placement to not only invoke thought and wonder but also stretch the images. Although, to be honest, they are slowly getting old on my userpage and I may remove them soon. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:48, 16 September 2009 (MDT)

::Sounds good. You da' boss. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 17:04, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

:::It's my userpage... You are in charge of your userpage. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:22, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

== Recent Tavern Changes ==

Hey, what happened to the tavern? It simply is not working, and the search doesn't seem to be working the same either. Changes? {{Unsigned|Dumai|17:52, 17 September 2009 (MDT)}}

:I need to get a bit more RAM to be able to get the Tavern back up and running with the servers. Most likely I will spend some of the google ads money on buying some more RAM. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:53, 17 September 2009 (MDT)

::What kind of funds need to be raised? Perhaps a fundraiser like years ago?  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 20:54, 17 September 2009 (MDT)

:::I was planning on using some google ads money for RAM but if people think that a little fundraiser should be organized as well I am more then willing. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:57, 17 September 2009 (MDT)

::::I'm sure every bit could help. $5 and $10 here and there can't hurt at least.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 20:59, 17 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::Maybe we could have a vote and see if more users like the tavern or not. Thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:22, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

::::::It could be a good idea. I like the ''idea'' of a wiki chat, but in practice it was nothing more than a distraction from the actual wiki. Voting would be good, especially if removing the tavern could assist in site performance.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 20:29, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::::It is my solemn opinion that the Tavern Chat system should be repaired and remain. My love for it is unconditional, despite the fact that it tends to be immature in many ways and attract the least virtuous of viewers it was a place I could always count on to give me some source of entertainment or conversation, however minimal. One of the greatest delights I had when I used to frequent this site, as I am beginning to do again presently, was popping onto the Tavern in the middle of looking through articles and thinking about what would be useful in a future campaign. I would always find a witty conversationalist or a helpful tinkerer out and about amidst all of the chaos, and it helped to know I was not alone. The Tavern, in my opinion, is a reinforcement of the comradeship of this Wiki, and can be utilized to go there for quick instant messaging communication instead of relatively sluggish editing of each others pages. My piece has been said for now, and my vote is for keeping the Tavern. --[[User:Harry Mason|Harry Mason]] 15:22, 25 September 2009 (MDT)

::::::::Taking the above, and giving it thought, The Tavern can be a great tool. Especially if the former abrasive temperaments are no longer present, it can be a really great way to bring in new wiki users. Combing through the old logs shows that many potential users were ran off because of the attitude within it. But as Harry shows above, even with that it did great things. Perhaps we should place this discussion on "hold" until the tavern is ready to come back online, and then hold it in a better place so all can discuss ways to make the tavern better and more manageable?  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 15:30, 25 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::::::Bullocks. The crowd that used the tavern (with a few notable exceptions) constantly strayed off-topic, and it came out as bunch of sentence fragments that tried to be witty and failed miserably. Especially TK's "Your mama" jokes, for instance.... I go on there looking for feedback on my work, and everybody would rather take cheap shots than actually offer constructive advice. Although I hate to say it, but for all his snide attitude, Surgo did point me toward Frank Trollman's material... --[[User:Mythos Specialist|Mythos]] 02:56, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

::::::::::Well do you guys think it helped more or hurt more? All we need to do is vote... It is all opinion; nothing to discuss. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:27, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::::::::It has been discontinued. See also [[Discussion:The Tavern: use, expansion, and availability.]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:17, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

== Recent Activity Lessening? ==

Do we even have anybody left who still posts here? Besides us three, that is... --[[User:Mythos Specialist|Mythos]] 10:59, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

:Yes, the site has been just as active lately as ever, only the 'tavern crowd' is gone. The site is improving on a daily basis and will continue to do so. In the last 30 days alone there have been over 42 active users (plus plenty of IP edits), so yes, yes we are very active considering.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 11:05, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

::Thank God. I hated having to go in there to ask for feedback and getting sarcastic commentary. Maybe it's funny to the younger users, but to an old-timer like myself it seemed pretty juvenile and pointless. -- [[User:Mythos Specialist|Mythos]] 13:09, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

:::Same here. I put up with it for years but recently started treating them the same way they treat others and they literally can not handle it. They freak out. Really pathetic actually. I hope this helps others learn how to be properly collaborative in the future.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 15:44, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

== Media's Mediawiki ==

In going through the media side of the site, I've noticed many users have basically used it as a personal storage unit. It is filled with images that are not used in any articles whatsoever (though unlike wikipedia our images don't always say what pages link to them, odd...). I was wondering if a purging of the mediawiki would help improve the server performance?  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 14:52, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

:I concur. Many of the images I uploaded, (as awesome as the are), are no longer linked to an article. It certainly sounds like a good idea. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 16:58, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

::No. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:20, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

== Possible Ban Circumvention ==

I think [[User:Ghostwheel|Ghostwheel]] has already paid enough and his ban is over in two day, amybe we could unblock him so he can actually tell his version of the facts? I don't want to do it myself in case you disagreed, it why I ask. --[[User:Lord Dhazriel|Dhazriel]] 18:42, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

:I strongly disagree with this. Firstly, there is no side of any story, as it was just a personal subpage note. Secondly, he showed his lack of respect to honor the ban when he broke policy and posted using his IP. If anything, his ban should be prolonged for that reason alone.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 18:47, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

::Your both mistaken. With Check User [[User:Ghostwheel|Ghostwheel]] has not been posting. Or which IP do you mean? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:53, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

:::He admitted to it on Surgo's page on the other wiki as well as on another user's page there. I would link, but don't want to spam, as I feel as though that may be.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 18:56, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

::::[http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=3258703 OBJECTION!] [http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=3258715 DURR...] [http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=3258720 PWNED!] [http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=3258730 UHOH...] [http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=3258734 2xPWNED!] [http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=3258738 WTFPWNED!] --[[User:208.90.100.111|208.90.100.111]] 11:41, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::All I would need is the IP... It's called "Chck User" (please use google at this moment if you are not positive as to what I am talking about). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:19, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

== Green Dragon and I ==

This may seem redundant to you ''(GD)'' and I, but I thought it would be good to note that we are not the same individual, do not always agree (nor even agree a lot of the times), nor do we even know each other offline. Before the rumors get started, even though some already have.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 18:56, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

:I don't know you... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:42, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

== Removing Template:Author ==

Would you please refrain from removing author templates from (my) articles? Whether or not they've priorly been marked for deletion, they should remain associated with their respective principal authors, as per article 4B of [[D&D Wiki:Copyrights|D&D Wiki:Copyrights]]. Thank you. --[[User:Sulacu|Sulacu]] 00:01, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

:History as well... As explained over and over again. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:17, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

::And I am asking you over and over again to refrain from removing the author templates. Being the person identified in the history of these particular pages as the first editor makes this request more than reasonable. --[[User:Sulacu|Sulacu]] 08:04, 20 September 2009 (MDT)

:::It seems you decided to respond to my aforementioned reasonable request by making [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Ghast%2C_Deathless_%283.5e_Creature%29&oldid=415512 this] and several other similar edits to my pages, in which you removed yet more author boxes and more references to my personal user category from my pages. What, are you just going to ignore me and merrily continue this scandalous behaviour instead without the courtesy of a direct response? I don't remotely care how much 'cleaner' you think the history is, I will not stand for seeing my work vandalized. ''Not even by site admins! Am I finally getting through to you?''
:::If you want to erase all evidence of my existence from this wiki for what happened back in August, then fine. Delete all my stuff. ''All of it.'' And I'll be happy to stay gone. If you're unwilling to do that, then don't touch it. I expected such sensible and gentlemanly conduct to go without saying, but apparently the word ethics does not mean a thing to you. This is the last time I will ask you this in a civil manner. --[[User:Sulacu|Sulacu]] 12:57, 26 September 2009 (MDT)

::::Usercontributions. Like how one looks at my contributions to some articles. History. This is to see who has done what to which article. One more non-logical response and I will issue a ban to you. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:41, 26 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::"''Usercontributions. Like how one looks at my contributions to some articles. History. This is to see who has done what to which article.''"
:::::... What are these sentence fragments even supposed to mean? The only responses I see that are incoherent and devoid of any logic are yours. Are you just being deliberately vague so you'd have a solid excuse to ban me when I respond? That's not to say that I ''ever'' saw ''anyone'' getting ''anything'' close to a ban for 'non-logic' back when I signed onto this wiki in May 2007. I never saw anyone getting their author box deleted from their articles back then either. Even omitting the fact that the author boxes disappear from my articles, what possible justification could you have for deleting my ''personal user-based category'' (<nowiki>[[Category:User Sulacu]]</nowiki>) from the article pages as well? That's like taking pages out of my user page's dpl lists. Isn't that like undermining the system of my pages on your wiki, as well as a form of 'orphaning pages' or whatever it is called (hence, 'vandalism', if you're too logic-deficient to see where I'm going)?
:::::Seriously, I've had more than enough of your stupid antics, and your pigheaded falling back upon your new favorite word, 'non-logic', which you seem to invoke primarily when people say something you don't like. As a faithful and dedicated contributor to your wiki for over two whole years, and the creator of over three hundred standing pages of homebrew articles currently displayed on the site, please honor my final request to leave those pages be, and stop being such a freaking bludger. A little admission on your side will make this whole affair a lot less smelly, and both our lives a lot easier. --[[User:Sulacu|Sulacu]] 14:27, 26 September 2009 (MDT)

::::::Banned. One needs to be understand civility and understand who is who on D&D Wiki. Stop just pestering people and making problems where none exist. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:25, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::::Out of curiosity, why was Sulacu banned? She was obviously upset that her name was being removed from the things that she had created, so it's not like she did anything wrong. I mean, I know I've not been here a long time, but Sulacu seems to have posted a high amount of quality homebrew, so shouldn't she be entitled to have her name on what she's made? I guess it may just be thinking aloud though. But really, consider if someone should be banned for voicing objections to losing the right to the things they made. I think a good example is if say someone took the Dandwiki from you Green, and removed every trace of you from it. Wouldn't you be upset and slightly protest against it? Obviously I'm not saying that that should happen, but I feel that it is a good example. Please reconsider this flurry of author removals, people merely just want to keep their name on what they've devoted time and effort into. --[[User:Dersius|Dersius]] 16:11, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

::::::::Although I won't comment on the ban, as far as comparing having a wiki that GD pays to maintain and content that a user freely posts online, it isn't really a good example.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 18:03, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::::::For the last time or your getting banned too; it's history and usercontributions. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:57, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

::::::::::What? Is this really what it's come to? I've never talked to you before and you are threatening to ban me for attempting to give my opinion and suggestions on something? Isn't this supposed to be a community-run site? I'm sorry, I'm just a little confused as to why it's suddenly everyone being banned for speaking. You didn't even answer my question, so obviously you are ignoring the average user, which isn't the path that any admin should take. If you feel like being a dictator and banning everyone, go ahead. Go ahead and ban every last person that brought quality work to this wiki. Go ahead and ban until there's no one left except for your butt-buddy troll Hooper and yourself. I'm through here. It used to be a nice place to come to and the community was friendly, and the few times you stopped in the tavern, it was nice to talk to you. What happened to you? Whatever. It doesn't matter. This wiki is going downhill in quality, I just think you are blind to it right now, but you'll realize it here soon. Hooper, I know you are probably reading this too. Stop instigating things over at the Wikia. If you leave us alone, we'll leave you alone. I know I personally just want this whole thing to end and for the separation to be finished quickly and painlessly. With that note, I fully expect to be banned by the dictatorship that this wiki has turned into. Just remember, the First Amendment is in place to protect the unpopular opinion, and you are crushing it beneath your heel by banning everyone who isn't Hooper. Just remember that you ruined your wiki by driving off those that kept it running smoothly. --[[User:Dersius|Dersius]] 20:12, 28 September 2009.

:::::::::<code>"''... butt-buddy troll Hooper ...''", and "''What happened to you?''" (direct rudeness: name-calling, ill-considered accusations of impropriety) (1:1).''</code> --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:17, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::::I have never said anything to anyone from wikia in my life. You don't know me — don't say that. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:17, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

::::::::::::He said that Hooper was instigating things at wikia.. Geez, if this is the way the administration of this site is I'm not going to put my homebrew on here, I'm going to make sure the people I know don't ruin their work by having it stolen by this wiki.

{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}

:As I haven't even visited the other in seemingly forever, and you guys are here still causing problems - well, you get the picture. Are you done calling people who don't know each other "butt buddys" while also calling them the trolls ''(??? - Irony?)'' so that we can get back to work? You state ''"If you leave us alone, we'll leave you alone."'' yet here you are, when no one is messing with you. Either contribute or stop starting problems. Thanks in advance for your cooperation.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 06:34, 29 September 2009 (MDT)

::I don't have any take on Sulacu or any other user on this site, really. I only came in and started editing recently, after all, myself. I have been thinking on this for a while, though. Why ''exactly'' is author information being taken off of pages? Watch and History are reasonably insufficient in accrediting the idea of a creature or idea to authors, even if not so terribly important. Since it's homebrew, anyways, I am sure it's not so bad to afford someone that little bit of pride in seeing their name in the author template of their articles. Also, which articles are subject to this? So far, I've only ever seen creatures having their templates removed, which I don't quite understand. [[User:Jwguy|Jwguy]] 01:42, 6 November 2009 (MST)

::::I never said anyone was doing anything on Wikia. I could care less about Wikia — people going to a different site is not a war in my mind. D&D Wiki (about now) averages 8,000 unique visitors a day — I don't care about you. A war is a war in my mind. Think about logically — why in hells name would I care? As long as you guys do not transfer any content from D&D Wiki to Wikia (all the content here is under the GNU FDL v1.2 - putting it under the CC is a violation of the law and liable to be sued) or doing anything related (please see the GNU FDL - I, as the owner of D&D Wiki have the rights, additionally I, as the owner, can invoke aspects of the GNU FDL v1.2 as I wish too).
::::And why is the author template being removed? It hinders reading, and hinders a wiki-structure (editing for improvement not just saying "mine mine mine", etc.) Most people, before editing, do check history and before use many do too (seeing something from an IP is less likely as something, say, which comes from an established user). It just hurts the wiki - removing it helps the overall structure. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:19, 6 November 2009 (MST)

:::::I personally feel as though the author template adds a bit of authenticity to articles of homebrew. Sure, while in some cases, items simply are corrupted or bettered by the many anonymous edits that are to be expected on the internet, but in other cases, it's a nice gesture of pride to find an idea or page that you're proud of, and have your name sitting at the top. All as well, while I may not agree, It's not important, and I suppose I can understand that as a sufficient reason. Thank you for answering. [[User:Jwguy|Jwguy]] 19:50, 6 November 2009 (MST)

::::::(Haha, Jwguy is editing in above me.) Hopefully the author box will be completely removed from all articles and preloads. This is a Wiki. No article submitted to the site is considered static and unchanging. Should you wish to keep your pet projects to yourself, do not submit them here. Under every edit box are the words "''If you don't want your writing to edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here.''" You have been warned and forewarned. Author boxes are a privilege, not a right. Again, hopefully they will be universally removed. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 15:54, 6 November 2009 (MST)

:::::::Okay, I agree that's it a kind of a gesture of pride to see ones username on a page... But it's also a wiki. However another reason for the removed I see is that it creates editing problems. For example sometimes when I am playing I print something out, correct it, however do not change it since I do not want to have to talk to that author about it. If I was not the owner (rather a standard user or IP) I imagine I would feel more inclined and accepted to change it freely. I feel it creates more freedom for the perfection of content. However I see both sides. Currently I removed them from 4e deities, 4e races, and the preload for 4e creatures (and a few their). Personally I would like to wait a matter of months and see how those sections respond. Already I have seen positive improvements from the 4e deities section by IP's - which is a good sign - however it is still to early to say. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:39, 6 November 2009 (MST)

::::::::Sorry, it was my understanding from most of the wikis that I've been that the colon indentation is used to identify who is replying to whom, as well as keep track of subject. I read your post, Jay, but simply had nothing to say about it, so I went ahead and continued to reply towards Green Dragon's last post, which is the reason for the way I posted. I had assumed this was normal.

::::::::That said, I don't mind, either way. I appreciate you taking the time to appease my curiousity on this matter, however, Green dragon. As said, I like the idea of the authenticity and author templates, but they don't matter so much as to fight over them, to me. If it comes down to it, I'll go around taking them down, myself; I just wanted to get the reasoning for it before I conjectured any of my own, which you've provided, certainly. I can realize what problems you see for it, and they are well based and reasonable for it's exclusion, so really it's just my opinion that differs. Functionality is more important when it comes to this kind of site, I believe, and pride, while a encouraging thing as well, is subservient to that. [[User:Jwguy|Jwguy]] 21:49, 6 November 2009 (MST)

:::::::::@ Jwguy. No problem bro. I figured you had a good reason anyway. Thanks for being so vocal about your opinions. Your not the only one who feels the way you do. Keep up the good work. Peace! --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 22:33, 6 November 2009 (MST)

== Why Did You Delete the Bloodline I Posted? ==

I'd like to know why you deleted the optional Bloodline (Brachyurus) I developed and posted.

The only comment I see, and its only a single line in the deletion log, is "This is not OGL".

I would appreciate ''some'' explanation. At the very least, the minimum courtesy of informing me. To top it off, you ''also'' deleted the Discussion topic I started in which I asked for any feedback.

If you don't want new people posting anything, just say so. --[[User:Reddir|reddir]] 21:29, 21 September 2009 (MDT).

:It is from the [[Epic Level Handbook]], right? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:00, 21 September 2009 (MDT)

::It is also, according to your [[SRD:Brachyurus|website]], in the SRD? And the Bloodline was entirely my own construction; I am not aware of anything similar that has been published. None of which explains why you would delete the Discussion where I ask for feedback - a perfect place, I would think, to have this discussion. --[[User:Reddir|reddir]] 23:58, 21 September 2009 (MDT)

:::That's ones not from the [[Epic Level Handbook]]... That's SRD (probably MM or who knows). If the bloodlines was your ''own'' creation ''DO NOT'' put "this is from the [[Epic Level Handbook]]" on the bottom of the page. Also [[DnD Discussion|Discussions]] are for ''questions'' (not like a forum...). If you want something reviewed, like always, post it on the damn talk page. Not their. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:19, 22 September 2009 (MDT)

::::You are saying that you really thought I copied the bloodline from the Epic Level Handbook? Have you seen the UA style Bloodlines ''anywhere'' but in UA? And does that mean you did not even bother reading what I had written on the Talk page before you deleted it all?
::::Anyway, are you saying you would be fine with me posting the Brachyurus Bloodline I designed if I make it clear that I was the one who put it together?
::::re: Discussions, ok, I hadn't realized it was not a forum. Still, I would have appreciated ''some'' information ''somewhere'' about why you deleted my work. --[[User:Reddir|reddir]] 16:48, 22 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::This is what I saw:
:::::<nowiki> ==== Brachyurus ====</nowiki>
:::::<nowiki> </nowiki>
:::::<nowiki> [[SRD:Brachyurus|Brachyurus]] is the Platonic wolf/canine from the Epic Level Handbook. </nowiki>
:::::<nowiki> {| class="{{d20}}" style="text-align: left;"</nowiki>
:::::<nowiki> |+ {{#anc:Brachyurus Bloodline Traits}}</nowiki>
:::::(from a deleted revisions preview). Or is that part just superficial? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:02, 23 September 2009 (MDT)

::::::Should I assume you noticed the "SRD:Brachyurus|Brachyurus" portion of what you quoted? --[[User:Reddir|reddir]] 23:11, 23 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::::That's called a piped link... Not sure if you have ever heard of formatting or not. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:33, 23 September 2009 (MDT)

::::::::It seems clear that you are taking the issues behind this discussion much less seriously than I am. Therefore I will stop wasting my time with you. --[[User:Reddir|reddir]] 23:52, 23 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::::::That is a PIPED link. Without the piped link it looks like: "Brachyurus is the Platonic wolf/canine from the Epic Level Handbook."... let's see... can that be here? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:23, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

== When do Unrated homebrew prestige classes become Rated? ==

My Void Knight prestige class now has 2 ratings (3 if my own counts), and I was just wondering how/when exactly the unrated classes were relisted as rated. Edit: Forgot to sign [[User:Desril|Desril]] 15:09, 30 September 2009 (MDT)

:Really it is just a matter of doing the switch. You can alter that yourself.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 18:46, 27 September 2009 (MDT)

::Once all the ratings have been added one can. Although one cannot just create rating; [[User:Hooper|Hooper]] should have said that one can correct the ratings from the talk page onto the articles page. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:41, 27 September 2009 (MDT)

:::Yes, after reading my post I should clarify that once rated you can add that information to the class page with the proper rating it was given shown.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 07:14, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

::::Also, if you want to help rate things, please feel free. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:21, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

== Spheres in relation to the Tome of Fiends ==

The sphere pages connected to the Tome of Fiends, namely the Bone, Venom, Carnage and Bubbles, I believe, that you have already reverted, are ''not'', to my knowledge thus far, User items, and are in the sourcebook. Adding the User Category, on that level, is not necessary, nor correct, and it also interferes with the function on the page for the [[Tome_of_Fiends_(3.5e_Sourcebook)/Spheres_and_Feats#Fiendish_Spheres|Spheres]] listing, which has been separated so that User-made Spheres and Official Spheres from the Sourcebook can be better recognized.

If you feel that you are undeniably correct in maintaining that the Spheres you are moving are User made and that perhaps I have been mistaken, please state so and proceed, but if not, and I believe they are not, they should be as they were before the reverting. [[User:Jwguy|Jwguy]] 23:17, 27 September 2009 (MDT)

:Tome Material is not official material from established publisers or OGL - it is just homebrew Frank & K stuff. Thus, it is User content. It is hard to define something as "official" when it is all entirely user homebrew - even if that user homebrew is well established.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 07:13, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

::Well could we use that Tome article as the rule source? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:21, 28 September 2009 (MDT)
::This is, admittedly, true, given the nature of the Tome of Fiends, itself. Even in that case, however, the Tome of Fiends has no user category, and as a sourcebook, I use 'official' to simply designate those spheres which were created along with the sourcebook. I feel it would be best to separate the Homebrew'd spheres, in respect to the Tome, from those included by the authors, if only to maintain that the standard provided by the author shouldn't be confused with the likely standards of added-in spheres.

::That all said and done, I could simply use another category, which I don't have much of a problem with; I'm rather delightfully partial to the Tome of Fiends, myself, and the Spheres even more. I just want to get it looking nice and neat, and without as much clutter and fully distinguishing their authors. So, that said, what is going to be used for the categories? [[User:Jwguy|Jwguy]] 21:10, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

== WikiRPS ==

I saw you had did some alterations to the navigation. I was wondering if a link to the WikiRPS site would help get some more activity over there? Or if you're even still interested in that. Just curious as to the goals/future of that project.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 10:36, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

:They have their own wiki since a while now; [http://www.wikirps.org/wiki/Main_Page WikiRPS] (although using the same things, etc). I don't understand what your question is (see also [[DnD Variant Rules]]). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:18, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

::Yes, I know they do. I guess my question is: "Do you think it would be beneficial to include a link to that wiki on our navigation here, perhaps near where we link to the media repository?"  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 13:48, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

:::We do. It's linked to from [[DnD Variant Rules]]; as discussed and implemented since a long time. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:50, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

== Incorrect Adoptionations ==

Y HALO THAR. Recently I adopted a dozen or so pages because I have some future plans with them, and the original owner, Sulacu, is gone and all. I noticed you reversed those adoptions. Is something the matter, we're permitted to adopt unnamed and user-less articles are we not? Even more so if we actually have permission from the original owner? If you could redo those adoptions for me, that sure would be swell, it makes it easier to find when I don't have to comb through the history and just look up "User Eiji". Domo arigato desu desu desu-chan, ie! -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 21:00, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

:Eiji, your recent discussions in the chat your splinter group is using showcases those adoptions as bad faith adoptions. However, even with that fact, I can't speak for GD's decision. I believe a previous editor said "just stay away and leave us alone" and that has been our wiki's attitude. I humbly request you follow suit. Thanks.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 21:02, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

::Hi Hooper-desu! ''':D''' Well, it's very good faith actually, but the lower caste aren't supposed to talk to the upper caste. Wink wink, joke joke, nudge nudge. Anyway, I'm actually still active here (out of necessity, but that's a discussion for another time), so I can't leave.
::Anyway, awaitin' the Green Drag-man. I'll just leave this 'ere. -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 21:11, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

:::As your most recent quote on the subject was the following: ''"the reason I'd adopt them is to keep GD's dirty mitts off them"'' as stated in your IRC channel, I'd say that clearly constitutes a bad faith adoption. Alas, however, GD shall tell us both how it went down, so I agree with your thoughts on waiting for him.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 21:14, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

::::Where'd I say that? That's silly Hooper. -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 21:16, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::If GD requests it he will be shown proof of that and other things you've said of recent regarding the adoption. Ever since that chat channel decided to bring up the idea of using pirate software against this site I've daily logged on and pulled that day's chats from it. Thankfully, nothing as vile as the pirate attack threats has been discussed since.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 21:18, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

::::::Of course not. You know, internet... it's full of people who talk for the hell of it, and talk is cheap. Why just yesterday I was claiming to be wearing a dress, when I was really wearing TWO dresses. :D But Hooper, we've gotten totally off the subject, so, for Green Dragon's sake I'm reseting the indent and reposting my point (I hope he doesn't mind). {{Unsigned|Eiji|20:23, 1 October 2009 (MDT)}}

:::::::Just placing my 2 cents Hooper but is it entirely ethical/legal to record and store chats without notifying those being recorded? Just wondering if perhaps playing secret agent in the chat room is the best use of your time which should be invested in this wiki, not in the wikia. Back on topic: if an article is up for adoption, what makes one user more or less worthy of adoption than another? One who has made as many contributions as Eiji is certainly able to competently handle an article, unless you are saying you trust a complete stranger to claim ownership of the article over an established contributor to this wiki. --[[User:Ehsteve|Ehsteve]] 21:34, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

::::::::You did it wrong... And D&D Wiki is fine; no malicious software should be able to do much of anything. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:49, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::::::Ah, I'm doing it wrong? Well then, how may I do it right so I can get them re-adopted? -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 22:51, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

::::::::::Just don't. Just edit the damn things; it makes much much more sense (your name is added, what you did is shown, and you can create a link repository at a usersubpage of pages which ''relate'' to you, one can look with ''my watchlist'' the pages as they change, etc etc. [[Template:Author]] is just more of a hassle then much else (history; when created; does not change). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:56, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::::::::Explain that second part to me again? I'm trying to get the pages to appear on my User: Eiji page so I don't have to search through recent changes (also, I'd like credit for adopting them too, but I haven't bothered yet to look/copy paste the ownership box/dunno how to go about that). Anyway, the link repository is what I'm currently doing with my pages right, having them appear in my User: Eiji page automatically instead of linking them one by one. -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 22:58, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

::::::::::::{{quote|...and you can create a link repository at a usersubpage of pages which ''relate'' to you...
|orig=--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:56, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
}}
::::::::::::--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:04, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::::::::::Sorry, might be a little slow but... uh, I don't get it. Can you rephrase it in a different way, as right now it seems like you're saying we can't put things on our User page we didn't originally make and just adopted. Or... something, I'm not really sure. Thanks in advance. -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 23:08, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}

:Right; for example I have nothing (theoretically) to do with the images on my userpage. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:16, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

::Oooh. Aww, that makes me sad... that means we aren't allowed to adopt anymore (at least, not in the normal sense of "I now own this", we can only edit... but then, so can everyone's else so it's a moot point). Well, there's nothing I can do. ''':(''' They were nice articles too.
::Oh well. /thread and all. -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 23:18, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

:::Ya, but I find that usercontributions are much better then [[Template:Author]] and I find that when using history everything is much more fair then under the [[Template:Author]] system (each edit is that edit; not under someone elses' name). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:22, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

::::Posting under an IP because I don't want Hooper to think that I am an active user of this wiki (GD, he is seriously retarded and I would avoid giving him adminship at any point unless you want this place crashing down even worse -- I can easily back up this claim with evidence, just look at 90% of his contribs on talk pages). Anyways... To clarify, are you saying that the Author template is pointless to have on articles? Should we remove it from every article? --[[User:208.90.101.99|208.90.101.99]] 06:23, 2 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::Personal attacks should be refrained from, and they make any point you think you have become lost in your antics "anonymous". This isn't a forum for insanity or attacks or opinions, take that to salin.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 07:15, 2 October 2009 (MDT)

::::::I apologize -- that comment was out of line and pretty immature. I'm still a little sore over what happened and when I do visit this wiki (in this case I was responding to a private email about an optimized build I wrote a while back), I do the stupid thing of looking at the recent changes and get bothered by what is going on. This was my "home" for a long time after all. I can take a conversation up privately with you if you want to discuss why I think many of your actions are bad for the wiki, but needless to say, I sincerely hope that [[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] does not make you an admin until your behavior changes. I say that out of my old dedication to this wiki, not my new found bitterness. But, as I said, this is something for a private conversation and doesn't belong here on GD's talk page.

:::::::Thank you. I'm not seeking adminship, nor do I personally feel I need to be anything close to an admin, so I doubt such a conversation is necessary. [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 07:57, 2 October 2009 (MDT)

::::::To restate my questions to GD: "Are you saying that the Author template is pointless to have on articles? Should we remove it from every article?" --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 07:53, 2 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::::They do seem to hinder articles at time; however that is a long process. I say we should work on things which are a little more handalable at the moment. Maybe with in the year or two; who knows. Or what are your opinions and thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:43, 2 October 2009 (MDT)

== Euhm.... ==

Well, something very strange is happening here... I'd say adopting things to keep them safe is in good faith, and it is my perhaps not very humble opinion that playing secret agent in a chatroom is quite unethical. Additionally, I think it's unethical to remove an author's name from the front of the page, since that's where the focus is, no matter where else information on the original author can be found. Furthermore, I agree with some arguments brought in against Green Dragon, seeing as he acts in a seemingly random manner, getting angry and threatening with bans for little reason.

I tried (much earlier) to reason with both parties, and GD didn't even answer. Not ever.

I'm taking my creations. I created them, so they are my property, and I do not care which laws you quote. According to some test and multiple real-life experiences, I turn out to be CG, and I cannot abide a regime like this. I shan't use guerilla tactics or whatever to negative effect for this wiki, because it is rather pointless; it will be dead by itself without my interference soon enough. To summarize, I take possession of my work, and I will not comply with any attempts to restore them.

Further reasons for abandoning this wiki include a disturbing lack of interest in discussion pages; no one has shown an interest in several things I pointed out in several different discussion pages, and rather few of my own things where commented upon (seeing as I mean to implement those things I find interesting or design myself, I'd like a little more discussion about things like balance and powerlevel). Another point is the apparent failure of internal consistency in at least some creatures of the animal type and a tendency not to do anything about it.

I bid you adieu. I expect my pages to remain gone when I have removed them, and I expect there will not be a problem with that. I have no need for either wiki laws or dictatorial outlashings (they should be mutually exclusive, but reality proves to be otherwise, ey?), and I shall not abide either. [[User:Deranged|Deranged]] 16:18, 2 October 2009 (MDT)

:Imitating behavior/harassment. Banned. Content is content, usercontributions are usercontributions, and history is history. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:43, 3 October 2009 (MDT)

== WTF ==

Why is the tavern not working, still?! It's been nearly three months? {{Unsigned|Zetsumeimaru|17:52, 3 October 2009 (MDT)}}

:I know... One the servers got changed around a bit and as such the tavern is not configured right; another is that, as a discussion, we are not positive if we want a chat room. It seems to be there are differing opinions about. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:40, 3 October 2009 (MDT)

== Elaboration ==

:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:Omniarcanist of Caladon (3.5e Prestige Class)#Epic]] --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:18, 13 October 2009 (MDT).''

== Just looking... ==

I was just looking through some history and can I ask what MW is in reference to here:

"I restored all of the deleted pages right after they were wrongly deleted. Please learn something about MW before posting here (it's comparable to '''clicking''' the links above and '''looking''' at them). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:52, 10 September 2009 (MDT)"

Thanks. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 15:15, 15 October 2009 (MDT)

:MW is always MediaWiki. Where was this response? If you source it or supply a link I can better let you know what I meant. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:06, 20 October 2009 (MDT)

::It is on [[Requests for Adminship/Surgo2|Surgo's nomination]] for adminship. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 01:44, 22 October 2009 (MDT)

:::Surgo was not following the deletion policy. I had to restore pages he/she wrongly deleted. For this to make more sense to you maybe [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=delete&user=Surgo&page=&pattern=&limit=500&offset=0 This (&limit=500)] is a better associated link (the blue links are restored - the red are deleted). If you see any other problems please let me know (where he/she deleted good content). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:49, 25 October 2009 (MDT)

::::With the current deletion policy (That on [[:Category:Candidates for Deletion]]) he did not break any rules. It states: "In most cases 14 days after a page is nominated for deletion it will be deleted." Hence, there was no reason for those not to be deleted. Either that or you use the argument that it also says: "When nominating an incomplete page for deletion please make sure that it is not being actively improved upon." Which implies that it must be an incomplete page, though on a wiki nothing is ever complete so that cannot be an argument against it. I would like to know how you think that Surgo wasn't following the deletion policy and then we can amend it to make it clearer. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 22:41, 25 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::The pages had zero reason to be deleted. Were nominated for deletion a day before and were deleted right after. That's breaking the rules. Watch out; or you'll get banned. I've explained this 100000 times. I'm done explaining it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:47, 25 October 2009 (MDT)

::::::Actually, you had never explained that on Surgo's nomination page (and I haven't seen it anywhere else). They were nominated for deletion at least two weeks before: Aug 13 2009 nomination and 4 September 2009 deletion for many of them. There reason for deletion was that the author did not want them on the wiki, in the past that has been accepted though after recent events it was decided un-officially that it would not be, this was not put on the deletion page. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 23:08, 25 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::::Oh, your right about the times. That's probably why I did not say that on the nomination. It's because it is good content - one should never delete good content. "''I restored all of the deleted pages right after they were wrongly deleted.''" --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:19, 25 October 2009 (MDT)

::::::::I still think we need to clarify the deletion policy. Though my thoughts on the articles on this wiki are that they should be owned by the contributers and can be deleted by them if they wish. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 05:03, 26 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::::::That's not how they are. They are under the GNU FDL "''If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here.''" for example. If one reads the the GNU FDL 1.2 then you will see more as to what I am talking about. And the deletion time frame is a little variable - the important part is that no playable, good, etc content gets deleted. That's the main idea. If you read the "Adminship" message it explains deletion a bit from an admin side and the category explains deletion from a wiki-side. Please keep in mind that was just Surgo's 2nd adminship - not the reason for (h)im/er being banned. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:03, 26 October 2009 (MDT)

== Edit Summary Question ==

You just told me what barnstars are, and I thank you, though I had guessed their purpose, 'twas a kind gesture. But I was wondering why you edited it with the summary "Discussions get archived not removed....". Would you care to elaborate on your reasoning, or was it not pertaining to me? --[[User:SgtLion|SgtLion]] 13:14, 20 October 2009 (MDT)

:Basically, don't just delete something from your page, archive it. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 15:09, 20 October 2009 (MDT)

::Yes, you may not have noticed, but if you look at the actual [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SgtLion&diff=420227&oldid=420152 diff] in question, he re-added the welcome message you had previously removed. That was what he was actually talking about in the summary.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 16:16, 20 October 2009 (MDT)

:::I replied and used the edit summary to explain my edit. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:05, 20 October 2009 (MDT)

::::Ah, right, that was a mistake on my part. Thank you, everyone. --[[User:SgtLion|SgtLion]] 23:59, 20 October 2009 (MDT)

== Talosoi ==

A few days ago, I created the talosoi, a race of apelike people who live in dense jungles and ride giant wasps around. I decided to put it here, to share it with everyone else. But, since I didn't know anything about wiki formatting then, I put all of the separate types of talosoi as its own creature. Before I could realize my mistake, I put 6 new creatures on here, each of them a different talosoi (eg Talosoi Archer, Talosoi Shaman, Talosoi Chieftan, etc.). I wanted to know if there was anyway I could move all of those creatures to a single page. If was not, I would want to know if I could delete these pages and start again with the same creatures, but just under a different name (instead of talosoi, then it would be toldosoi or something like that). Thanks! {{Unsigned|Breo sabre|20:50, 21 October 2009 (MDT)}}

:If you merge them all onto one page (save the ones you cannot - the mounts; wasps, etc.) and add [[Template:Delete]] to the now merged ones it should cover your problem. Although one ''can'' "merge" all the pages together with their respective revision histories it's a long process and complicated; it's easier this way. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:00, 21 October 2009 (MDT)

== D20 Modern Material ==

:''Discussion moved from [[User talk:Tabris#D20/4e Issues]]'' --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:42, 27 October 2009 (MDT)

Please do not move my weapon contributions (namely flashbang, phosphorus grenade and smoke bomb.) as they were not made for d20 modern but instead as homebrew weapons for the dnd 4e game which I DM for.

If there is a way to set my creations to private please let me know as I do not want my contributions to be edited at all. I like them as they are but I do not know how to change the editing options to locked/protected. {{Unsigned|Tabris|01:23, 27 October 2009 (MDT)}}

:Please read the warning when you are editing on the site. It reads as follows: ''"If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here."''.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 06:36, 27 October 2009 (MDT)

::Thats not helpful at all Hooper, I'm aware of this however my equipment is posted under 4e equipment for a reason: It's 4e equipment {{Unsigned|Tabris|15:27, 27 October 2009 (MDT)}}

:::I believe that the reasons some of the pages have been misappropriated is that they were not all originally coded the way fourth edition material should of been, giving the appearance of D&D or D20 equipment. Admins are busy so it is easy to see how that may have been the issue. Anyways, please note that the identifier on the pages should read "(4e Equipment)" not "(4E Equipment)" and in the future I wouldn't edit war with an admin, just make a nice and simple explanation and ask why they think something is not what it is ''(i.e. in this case just ask what is giving GD the impression it is D20 equipment and then fix that before doing all this reverting)''. Just usually not a good idea to remove admin edits.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 16:28, 27 October 2009 (MDT)

::::Please sign your posts using four tildes, like so: <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>. Please see your talk page for more info.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 16:29, 27 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::You can move them to a subuserpage of your userpage area; at most (keeping them 4e) and changing the templates around so they do not show up anywhere. Simply flashbang grenades, phosphorus grenades and smoke bombs do not fit into 4e. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:42, 27 October 2009 (MDT)

== Editing, Overdeity ==

Hey, I got a question about the deities. When making them, I'm confused about how to write the "What type of god is it" part. If you look Saran up, you see on the page, there is that error, I need help on that. Thanks! {{Unsigned|CelticHippie|20:17, 28 October 2009 (MDT)}}

:That should help. See the diff in question to see the edit change. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:52, 28 October 2009 (MDT)

== Canidates for Deletion ==

Hey GD. I was looking through some of the articles in the Deletion Catagory. There are more than a few that have been unedited and abandoned for many months. I say this because I have about 15 articles I made myself that need to be deleted. How often does this site clear out those pages? Thanks. (Wow, I just noticed their are 3 pages worth of stuff waiting to be deleted. Almost 500 articles.) --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 02:31, 29 October 2009 (MDT)

:It's getting worked on... Just keep adding them. A matter of weeks ago it was more then double the current amount (six or more pages) - so it's slowly getting cleared. Everything has to get by-hand looked at (since "What links here", talk pages, links, etc can be strange) so it's just a work in progress. They will get deleted though if need be (or authorship stripped). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:53, 29 October 2009 (MDT)

::Sounds good. Thanks for the update. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 20:19, 31 October 2009 (MDT)

== Arcane Archer ==

I rated the Arcane Archer class, but the number of ratings nor the overall ratings didnt change, why is this? --[[User:Zackrb|Zackrb]]

:You posted your rating on the talk page. But, that is only half of rating. You must edit the article itself to reflect your rating. Their are placeholders for ratings when editing the article itself. Updating these causes a overall rating to appear on the article when viewed. (Please remember to sign your posts.) --[[User:129.123.245.182|129.123.245.182]] 03:04, 2 November 2009 (MST)

== Thanks for helping me fix my format ==

--[[User:Frodo Goofball|Frodo Goofball]] 06:30, 9 November 2009 (MST)

== NEW ==

Her im kinda new here and a was gonna set up a page for my friends to use my Digimon and Pokemon races and classes i know that might sound stupid but hey to each his own, any way you put up my renamon page for deletion and a wasen't done with it yet i'm not sure wether it was because of that or the fact that it's a digimon, if you don't want digimon and stuff on there a will not put it on there :) just let me know.
(p.s.) i did'nt understand the way you set stuff up till now so i understand if the page was just in the way {{Unsigned|Corycodered|01:00, 12 November 2009 (MDT)}}

:Well what is it? A creature? It's not formatted like anything... If you follow a preload (go to a certain section and click the "add" button - that text) and update the current thing to fit that the delete template will be removed. If you don't want to do that of course you can move it to a subuserpage of yours (e.g. User:Corycodered/Renamon) then no formatting is needed. But one of those is needed for the delete template to be removed. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:17, 12 November 2009 (MST)

I'd like my user page deleted, if possible. Thanks
[[User:Palantini|Palantini]] 16:51, 14 November 2009 (MST)

== WikiRPS ==

Hello. I joined this wiki from the WikiRPS, and I've been trying to find out who is running that wiki. While I could and probably will eventually get active here, right now I'm more driven towards working on a more broad system, adapting historical, current, and sci-fi culture, weapons, and technology to an open RPS, not necessarily D&D. Thanks. --[[User:Madkcat|Madkcat]] 00:47, 18 November 2009 (MST)

:Pretty sure [[User:Cuthalion|Cuthalion]] is, although [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] may be as well (I am not sure), or DotHectate ([http://www.wikirps.org/wiki/Special:Listusers/sysop Special:Listadmins]). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:53, 18 November 2009 (MST)

::As far as I have been able to find, [[User:Cuthalion|Cuthalion]] hasn't been active since December '07, [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] June '09 and DotHectate ([http://www.wikirps.org/wiki/Special:Listusers/sysop Special:Listadmins]) since June '08 on WikiRPS.
::I have some ideas of what to do, and how I'd like to do it, but I don't want to start messing with the Wiki until I can talk with someone who was/is active in WikiRPS to make sure I'm not stepping on toes, or causing problems by jumping in running.
::--[[User:Madkcat|madkcat]] 01:18, 18 November 2009 (MST)

:::I'm not in charge on WikiRPS. This wiki, where I did the initial setup, I know what's going on. There I do not — I have maybe only gone there a matter of times. you would have to ask one of them what's going on. Sorry about that. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:21, 18 November 2009 (MST)

== Language Style ==

As a born British English man, I'm somewhat accustomed to the British language. But I only could assume that this D&D Wiki is American, so in my language fixing, I didn't change anything like "armor" to "Armour" or vica versa, because I was unaware of what to do about it. So now I ask you, do I correct spellings to American or British English? Or something else, if that's how you roll.--[[User:SgtLion|SgtLion]] 11:01, 22 November 2009 (MST)

:It's American English. I recommend taking a look at [[Help:Standards and Formatting (DnD Guideline)]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:51, 22 November 2009 (MST)

::Guessed as much. And thanks, I'll take a look at that. Your response and help is appreciated. --[[User:SgtLion|SgtLion]] 00:02, 23 November 2009 (MST)

:::Ya, no problem. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:36, 23 November 2009 (MST)

== Vacation ==

I am taking a short five day long vacation or so down to New Mexico. I will have limited computer access however if everyone could keep an eye out for malicious edits, vandalism, etc it would be much appreciated. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 08:23, 25 November 2009 (MST)

== could u help? ==

Hi i was trying to find out if a slam attack is like an unarmed strike for the perpose of feats?

If u could e-mail me what u think that would be great

wolffboy66@yahoo.ca

== Hey ==

Im the one that sent the recent 7 dollar through paypal, can you keep me updated when you guys run donation drives so i can donate what i can. Also if you dont mind can you look over some the contributions that i made since i signed up to see if you feel they are constructive. Mainly i feel in love with aura guardian but want some feedback before i keep at it.

Thanks!
Starcry/novabladex

I like the anime shadow skill and was wondering if you ever thought about making a class based on the sevaars, specifically on gau and elle. I liked your tenken class and the frost knight one, so I was just throwing the idea out there.

== A different sort of game ==

I have a roleplaying game known as World Tree which uses skill advancement instead of class advancement. A character in the game is given a number of skill points at creation with no restrictions as to where they may go. I was thinking of doing a variant of this and even eliminating such things as abilities (there would instead be a lift and carry skill, for instance). I'm not sure this is the right place to discuss such a different system but I was hoping to work with others on it. Can you make any suggestions? My e-mail is brenner.mike at gmail.com

Thank you for your time, -Michael Brenner. {{Unsigned|204.210.188.32|10:23, 12 December 2009 (MST)}}

:Well a few options exist. How different is it from D&D? One option is to make a "radical" variant rule out of it; keeping the structure on D&D Wiki in general. Another option is to make a self-contained wiki (like WikiRPS); hosting could be discussed if that is the desired option. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:01, 12 December 2009 (MST)

== Aura Guardian ==

Hey Green, I was wondering if you would mind looking over the Aura guardian and see if anything so far could be abused? Also let me know what direction I should focus in, Defense of adding some offensive choices. Ive considered a VERY restrictive spell list, like maybe only the healing domain up to 4 and protection up to 4. Not sure. Also I could use some help with the flavor for anyone else reading this! Thank you in advance. --[[User:Starcry|Starcry]] 12:30, 19 December 2009 (MST)

:I took a look at it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:03, 19 December 2009 (MST)

== Brawler, fair fight ==

heya, i've been using this web site for ages and it's awesome, a player notified me of the Brawler class.
At 7th level i think, he gets a special ability called fair fight, i was just looking at it and thought it was... well a little overpowered/little... silly (sorry if that offends btw.)

The feat basicly entails that people make a save or drop there weapons because it would be unfair otherwise... this gives a huge advantage to the brawler, as well as seeming silly as people who want him dead wouldn't think that they should kill him fairly (mostly) and those who would can normally be persuaded/ goaded into it. The skill might be relevant if the brawler had any actual arcane/divine powers but other then that he does not.

Anyway, asides from that it is an awesome class, a monk without the code of laws and from what I've seen of it a very balanced class except that.

Constructive criticisms ahoy! (Btw, i let my player have a feat rather then the ability)

== Talk page is really long/Review too ==

Your talk page is really long. Might be time to archive. Hehe. Peace. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 14:50, 20 December 2009 (MST)

:GD, can you do me a big favor when you get a chance. I read your review of the Aura Guardian 3.5e Class. It was a flawless review. I was hoping you could give the Freerunner 3.5e Class a similar review. Currently the class is rated 20/20 and could really benefit from your perspective in particular. Thanks a million. (Just if you get a free moment.) --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 15:09, 20 December 2009 (MST)

== Leader of the Hunt ==

Really good article. Could also be the deity Cernunnos the Horned God, Leader of the Hunt.

== My article ==

how do i know when its ready to be used?

Just noticed the new Media Wiki version! Awesome! just having some issues, not sure if they are new or what but there is no more autoconfirmation group. so whenever I edit a page it is asking for a key code. Is this intentional? - 06:04, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

== MSRD cleanup ==

Hey Green Dragon: I think [[user:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] is the "official" go-to guy for the MSRD, but I think he's (semi)retired, so here I am. I use the MSRD all the time, and think it could benefit from some changes, namely wikilinks to other MSRD articles, especially the skills and feats. I wouldn't mind working on this project, but obviously all of the pages are locked. Where do you think I should go to start/discuss this project? [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 19:24, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

:Is there anyone left who's in control of the d20 Modern side of things anymore? I posted [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=MSRD_Talk:Treat_Injury_%28Skill%29&oldid=455659 this] almost a week ago, but I don't think anyone noticed. There are some things that need cleaned up, and I would love to help out but 95% of it is locked. I see no reason why we shouldn't be able to turn [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User:Jazzman831/workspace&oldid=451096 this] into [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User:Jazzman831/workspace&oldid=451102 this]. Or at a minimum, clear out all the typos. If there's anything I can do to help, or if there's someone else I should talk to, let me know. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:54, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

::Well that would need to be discussed before changing with someone who knows D20 Modern better. Or if you would not mind explaining it a bit more (since both the links you supplied are from a subpage of your username - or do you mean just adding links to the article?). Do you see what I mean?
::And, if you want to go through and add a few things throughout the MSRD and clean things up I would be more then willing to give you temporary admin rights for you to work a bit on that. Let me know please. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 06:29, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

:::First of all, thanks for fixing those other links.
:::Second, sorry about the confusion. I'm not trying to change wording or anything, just clean up some typos and make the pages more navigable. That page in my subspace is just a random page from the MSRD that I copy/pasted there to give you an example of what I want to do. If you look at the [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User%3AJazzman831%2Fworkspace&diff=451102&oldid=451096 diffs], you can see that the only thing I did was add wikilinks. (I had to do it in my userspace because I couldn't actually edit the article in question). As it is now, none of the pages have interwiki links, so if you are reading, for example, a class description and it references a feat, you have to go back up to the main MSRD page then navigate to the feat page then find your feat. I would just like to make the feat a link so all you'd have to do is just click it.
:::If you're comfortable giving me temporary admin rights then I'm more than willing to help out. It might take a while, though, since there are a lot of pages![[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 13:48, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

== Pooka Race ==

Sir, the rituals available for Wild Soul have always been listed there:
"You can use any of the following rituals as if they were at-will powers, with no component requirements and without a ritual book: Animal Friendship, Animal Messenger, Commune with Nature, or Speak with Nature."

==Access==

Hi there, for some reason my username doesn't want to co-operate with me. I try putting in my password and I get a message saying that it's invalid. I try to get a new one sent and nothing ever shows up in my inbox. I want to get on here and post some more stuff and because of this, I can't. Can you help me out? -- Mythos Specialist

:Actually, never mind. I didn't have anthing fully finished anyway, so I made a new account. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 04:28, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

::Oh don't. As long as your email is correct it is not a problem. I just have to wait a few days to do it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:35, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

:::I already posted a full core class to the new profile. But, if you can get my old account running, it'd make it a lot easier to do the transfer. Besides, I like the new name... -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 13:58, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

== Sorry if I am spamming you, I am trying to see what is stopping my submission from showing up. ==

Thanks for the help in advance.

BTW the submission is (Thrillseeker) base class submission.

:It's called a cache. It takes time. -- [[User:Jota|Jota]] 17:40, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

== Been away for a while ==

Hi GD,
Ive been gone for a while - one of those who left during the 'great admin dispute'
I have come back tho, and was just curious what happened to the tavern?
Thx - --[[User:Sabreheim|Sabreheim]] 10:21, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

:You'll find that after the 'great admin dispute,' as you call it, [[User_talk:Green_Dragon#What_Happened_to_the_Tavern.3F.21|the general consensus among those who were active before said incident seemed to be that the Tavern was superfluous and unproductive]], although I believe cost-engineering may be playing some part in its continued absence (inferred from the section above). -- [[User:Jota|Jota]] 12:22, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

:: first of all - thats what it was 'a huge dispute amongst the admins' that seemed to threaten the well being of the wiki (why i left) - but bygones be bygones
:: personally i think that the tavern was a good thing - it allowed for more person to person feedback on content --[[User:Sabreheim|Sabreheim]] 16:33, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

:::I wasn't disagreeing with your phrasing (though I have my own thoughts on said incident and subsequent changes), I was just using the same terminology to affirm that we were referring to the same event(s). -- [[User:Jota|Jota]] 17:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

::::See also [[Discussion:The Tavern: use, expansion, and availability.]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:13, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

== Repeatedly adding a stat to ac. ==

One of my friends in my D&D group has been planning to add wisdom at least 3 times to his ac by taking various classes that allow wisdom to be added to ac. Is doing something like this allowed?
BTW, the campaign we are doing is a gestalt, if that makes a difference.
--[[User:Cyte|Cyte]]

NO. It doesn't stack. Period. -- Mythos

Thanks much.
--[[User:Cyte|Cyte]]

Also there is an argument going on in my group about bloodline levels. Some of my group is saying that bloodline levels raise class abilities such as sneak attack and other things that are simply made more powerful at regular intervals. The regular interval thing is the key to their argument since they say that means it is calculated by class level. I don't believe them. But do bloodline levels do what they say?
--[[User:Cyte|Cyte]]

------

Hello I am with the above user. Do you have anywhere in any book where it specifically says that Mythos?

Thanks for the reply.

--[[User:Zachrb|Zachrb]] 21:22, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Mythos here...
I'm pretty sure in the SRD (I don't have time to look it up) when it comes to modifiers, that you can only apply ability score modifiers once, like for instance bonuses to AC from a high DEX or WIS score. I think untyped bonuses do stack, however. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 04:13, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Furthermore, as for gestalt (which I categorically despise), even under that, you can only, for instance, use one class' hit die at a time, in this case the higher. Ability modifiers work in much the same way. As for bloodlines, features such as spell save DCs, maximum skill ranks, caster level, those things are calculated using bloodline levels. Sneak Attack and such are only raised by actually having levels in said classes. Sorry to burst their power-gaming bubble. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 04:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply Mythos, only 1 of the classes actually have a type for the AC bonus thus the stat can be added 3 times. Also thanks for the reply regarding bloodlines!
--[[User:Zachrb|Zachrb]] 06:13, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Hold up. Which classes allow this to stack? Ability modifiers, as I've said, do not stack. By "untyped bonus" I mean bonuses granted by the class, or certain other factors, not including ability bonuses. This is done so as not to totally unbalance the game with class dips. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 08:01, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Many of the classes the player has allows you to add wisdom to AC. One of them is a deflection bonus, the other are just wisdom bonus to AC without any type. So what does this mean for the player? Can he add his wisdom once, or once as a deflection bonus and another as a regular bonus? --[[User:Zachrb|Zachrb]] 16:05, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I would think once as untyped and once as deflection, but which class is it that adds it as a deflection?
--[[User:Cyte|Cyte]]

I'm pretty sure you can add your ability modifier only ONCE. It doesn't matter what the type is. As for adding ability modifiers from different ability scores, I know you can, 'cos the Duelist does it. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 17:17, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

:While your interpretation is logical from a balance perspective, I'm pretty sure the reigning methodology is that while other types do not, untyped bonuses stack. -- [[User:Jota|Jota]] 17:25, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree that untyped bonuses stack, but not with themselves. eg adding wisdom twice to ac as an untyped modifier.
--[[User:Cyte|Cyte]]

That's what I'm trying to explain here. Otherwise with a few clever prestige class dips, or worse, misusing gestalt rules, whilst doing same, you have a build that becomes utterly broken. Any bonus derived from ability score bonuses can only be applied once, right? -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 20:27, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Logically yes, but I can't seem to find a rule that states this. --[[User:Zachrb|Zachrb]] 22:54, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

It's out there, but I don't know where. I know I saw it, and it clearly said stacking the bonus for the same ability score doesn't happen. Here's a thought, though. In lieu of finding the rule, why not err on the side of common sense and not allow the bonus to stack? I mean, it works that way with magic spells that have the same effect as each other, so I'd be willing to bet ability modifiers don't stack either. It's just more logical. Otherwise, as I've said before, you can end up with something that completely wrecks the system. Also, has this player considered taking these 3 classes for the assumed triple-stacked Wisdom modifier as being incredibly munchkined? Because this kind of approach to a build is almost always about "Oooh, pluses!!" more than "Oooh, compelling character.." -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 03:49, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

== My new class ==

For anybody that pays attention to new material going up, I present to you the [[Battlemage (3.5e Class)|Battlemage]]. Enjoy. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 08:43, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

== Mirror mephit ==

Hello I have a question about : [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Talk:Pun-Pun_(3.5e_Optimized_Character_Build)]
'''Alternate first level trick'''

Aristocrat 1 (race independent) Feat 1: Magical training (player's guide to faerun) Feat 2: Precocious Apprentice: Summon Mirror Mephit (Expedition to the Demonweb Pits) Starting gold goes into purchasing a single vial of liquid pain.

Rounds 1->a Attempt to cast Summon Mirror Mephit until you can make the check. Optimization could allow this to autosucceed the first round, but it isn't needed Round b: toss your mirror mephit a vial of liquid pain, and have him use it with his spell-like Simulacrum ability As per the monster manual (which supercedes the SRD), a spell-like ability defaults to a standard action. With the vial, we have CL 9, sufficient to duplicate a 18 HD advanced efreeti (simulacrum is allowed to duplicate specific creatures). Divide the level by two, and we have a 9HD copy. Which is just as many hit dice as a normal efreet. Order the mirror mephit to order the efreeti to obey you completely before he vanishes.

You now have three free wishes. Start from step 4 of the above streategy.

The mirror mephit has 8th level for the caster level for simulacrum.

Did the liquid pain use as optional material component to improve the caster level by + 2 ?
But simulacrum is a spell like ability, not a spell. Or use an other rule ? If yes, what page from book of evil darkness, please ?

The normal efreet has 10 HD, not 9. So, the caster level required is 10th level, no ?

Why do you choose aristocrast as class ? For the skills ? The starting money to buy liquid pain ?

Thanks for your future anwser.

:Once again, I fail to see the point in all this. Someone's misusing the rules for sure. Why not just be Pun-pun? -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 19:20, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

::Oh wait, this IS Pun-pun. Listen, feedback loops are not supposed to work. Maybe as a glitch in video games, but in D&D, no. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 19:23, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

== Necromancer editing and advancement ==

Mr. Green Dragon:

Thank you for taking a look at my "necromancer" 4e base class. I developed it in conjunction with a colleague with whom I am playing a long-form campaign.

I seek your advice in improving the necromancer with two primary goals: I wish to, over time, produce a class whose quality ranks it among the best 4e homebrew classes on the site; and I want to make sure that the necromancer conforms ''in extremis'' to the D&D Wiki formatting standards.

As it stands now, I do not possess the proper knowledge to achieve those goals. So, to solve a few formatting problems immediately, I wish to clarify:

*Which powers listed on the necromancer main page need to be moved to another page? If any, which other page?
*Which necromancer powers listed elsewhere need to be moved to another page? Which other page?
*Which creatures are listed on the necromancer main page that need to be moved to another page? If any, which other page?
*Given that worship of a specific deity confers a class feature power or bonus upon the necromancer character, why does the list of deities and their related class feature benefit need to be moved up to the "Overview: Religion" section?
*Given that you can see clearly which information is currently in tables which use HTML instead of the wikimedia editing format ("Phantom level/damage", "Phantom potential actions", "deity/benefit"; I assume that the "level/maximum Phantoms" table is satisfactory already), how can I change those tables into wikimedia format within those power and creature templates? The reason I used an unorthodox "HTML splice" technique to insert those tables is because I could not use the wikimedia format to add the tables within the templates (as it was apparently beyond my coding abilities).
*How can I cause the "Contents" list to show separate sections within the Necromancer Class Features section? I believe that that section has become long enough to merit separate sections within the Contents.

I think that with your help and the assistance of the other users we should be able to clear up these formatting issues relatively quickly.

--[[User:Ofidian|Ofidian]] 21:20, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Furthermore, I have discovered an issue with the "Add or edit" radio button under "Add New 4e Power". When you replace "MyPower" in the text box with the name of your new power (for example, "Frigid Cyclone") and click the radio button, you are not directed to a text form to write the wikitext of the power. Instead, you are directed to a page that says "Add Form:4e Power: Frigid Cyclone (4e Power)" (again, "Frigid Cyclone" is the example power to be created) with a preexisting power box already below it, called "Blast of the Ancestors" (a "'vorgal' racial power"). If a user truly wants to create a new power, they must first click the "Show preview" radio button, which redirects to the appropriate text field.

What is the method by which we can alter the form so that it works properly? The origin of the "Blast of the Ancestors" power is the [[Vorgal (4e Race)]] page, where a link to the "Blast of the Ancestors" racial power is found under '''Racial Traits'''. (If you click on ''that'' link, which oddly says "1", you come to a page called "Form:Form:4e Power" which ''again'' shows the "Blast of the Ancestors" power box.) I don't know what happened, and until I get your input I don't want to touch it because I don't know the proper method for fixing the system (blank the form? Delete the form and recreate?). I ''suspect'' that the creator of the "vorgal" race somehow accidentally altered the very power creation form itself, instead of creating a new power.

I'm going to use the workaround for now.

--[[User:Ofidian|Ofidian]] 02:00, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

== New Class ==

Hey Green Dragon. I'm creating a new class for my D&d campaign and thought you might want to add it to your site and perhaps help me refine it as well. I call it the Summoner Class. Apparently, you already deleted an entry for it because it wasn't done too well. I can assure you, I put a lot of work into it so far, and will continue to do so till perfected.

Anyway, this normally wouldn't concern you except that I'm not too good at HTML code and was hoping that you could help make the page for me? I can email you the Word File that I've been working on so far. I have everything I think I need for the first page and I have all the way to level 7 powers (for now).

== Creative Commons ==

I was trying to add some content in the D&D Wiki Media and the only CC license there was the Attribution-Share Alike. The content I'm trying to add is under Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative license. Can that be added to the licenses? Thanks in advance. --[[User:ElfsMaster|ElfsMaster]] 16:05, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

:Of course. In the license template just add it. For example <nowiki>{{license|Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative}}</nowiki>. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

::Ok, did it. However, when I added the image I forgot to put some characters and the link ended kinda weird. Now, when I try to edit it, the following messenge shows up:
::out of captcha images; this shouldn't happen
::I guess that that shouldn't happen (great insightful conclusion, I know...)--[[User:ElfsMaster|ElfsMaster]] 00:00, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

== archanist class ==

I was looking at your article on the archanist pretige class. I am curious as to why a class who's description refers to magic being deschooled and organized into one group, requires the player to give up nearly half of the available spells he can cast. This seems like a contradiction in the very nature of the prestige class.

you can contact me at kingdork5ooo@hotmail.com

== Ganteka RfA ==

I understand where you were coming from when you deleted my post, and I'd like to take a second to explain to you how I saw what happened: I posted a reminder to keep things courteous, as in the heat of the discussion everyone was beginning to get snippy (as you well know, from the number of warnings you gave out). You edited your post to make it seem less offensive, then deleted mine. My first reaction, I'm sorry to say, was "That jerk, he's deleting my comments and covering his own ass" (forgive my language, I'm being honest here, and this is, as far as I know, private. We're grown up, we have seen these words before). So you can see why I was upset, you made no mention that you were going to delete my post because the discussion was over. However, I have now understood what happened, and that's fine. I'm over it. I don't care that you edited your post so it seems better to you. I don't even care that you closed any and all discussion of the matter early. Whatever, I can live with that too. I don't care that you feel what you wrote was a "suggestion" or a "suggestion-like command", and not a breach of etiquette rules. Just, in the future, when you feel it necessary to delete one of my posts, I'd like to hear about it. That's why talk pages exist. Even if you didn't want to drop me a note on my talk page, you could have written in the summary of the page something to the effect of "Discussion has ended, edit has been deleted". I think as a fellow editor of this wiki, you owe me (and everyone else) that same courtesy. However, like I said, I'm moving on. I'm fine if we don't discuss this matter any further. Ganteka turned in his letter of resignation; I don't fully understand why we even went through this charade. Some semblance of cloture, I suppose. Thanks for your time, [[User:Badger|Badger]] 05:51, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

:The RfA is not over (when the RfA is it will be) just that discussion part was just so off-topic that it was over (it did not relate to Ganteka's2 RfA at all). Why was your comment after I stated "''This discussion is over from my post out.''" deleted? That is your answer. It was just too off-topic. Is that a breach of civility - recommending him to see a psychiatrist (which you asked to be addressed)? One, the correct place to discuss that is on [[Talk:Warning Policy]]. Two, I don't think so, I was just worried that that user was not thinking clearly (not meaning of less intellect - defiantly intelligent since he or she was able to respond completely). To me it is an honest worry since this user seemed to be contradicting him or herself and not noticing it. Although I could see of some which think that psychiatrists are not helpful to all in all regards (or I do not understand) who find it uncivil. I don't know, Your thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:23, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

::If you were genuinely concerned with someone's mental state, it'd be best to confront them privately about it, not on a random webpage. That's more tactless than uncivil I suppose, though. And if you truly believe that everyone is equal in all ways, there shouldn't be any admins at all. I understand that you want to have people assigned to take care of certain things (making sure pages are formatted, redirecting things, fixing errors and the like), but this is creating distinctions between people on the wiki. Furthermore, things like "Maybe you like begging? Who knows. Irrelevant." and "This site is not "risky" for me, I don't need to step around on tiptoes. I don't care. I own the damn thing." do come off as hostile, even if that isn't your intent. Continuing, "having a blatant bias" sounds like something everyone on this wiki is guilty of. Do you suppose we can get a psychiatrist on a group rate? Continuing on, you are also guilty of that last bit. Take, for example, this quote "I suggest you take a look at Requests for Adminship/Aarnott2. These people only contributed to about 7% of the activity of D&D Wiki. That's not "prime" and "perfection" that's 7%. Please, once again, do research before presenting things." You wrote that on Ganteka's RfA. If you took the time to look back you might come across one of my posts. You were simply denying my math. I know what you want to say. You wanted to say that those 9 people accounted for 7% of the total wiki edits. That is correct. However, that was not the point of the argument. The point was that 10% of the wiki's registered users account for 90% of the wiki's edits. So take those 9 names, add in you and Hooper, and about 390 other top editors and you'll see that their total contributions will total about 90% of the edits. I am not going to make that any clearer, I don't think. That is a prime example of you ignoring facts and "having a blatant bias". And as for your systematic warning policy that "govern[s] all", it doesn't. No one would dare warn you. You are above that law, it would seem. You know darn well that if Surgo had posted a comment telling someone to see a psychiatrist that you would have warned him. "Discussions are not deleted on D&D Wiki." That's another gem of a quote of yours from the Ganteka RfA page of yours. Or how about " Have I ever sworn on D&D Wiki? Yes, like 2938 times. No, not once. Yes, in a revision history and in a few edit summaries (User Talk: Eiji#Farmer revisions, and see edit contributions for edit summaries - "damn" was used, although not derogatory). Which are you going to trust?" I suppose you mean you swore on the farmer page. You also swore about the wiki 3 lines down. Does that count as proof? Taking a second to check out the farmer page (A really fun class, if I say so myself) you began the page with "Actually you can't move your things on D&D Wiki their - it's illegal. It's the CC and the GNU FDL v1.2. --Green Dragon 23:17, 11 November 2009 (MST)" and ended the page with "AND FOR THE LAST TIME ANYONE CAN REPUBLISH ANYTHING AS LONG AS IT IS UNDER THE GNU FDL v1.2 I HAVE SAID THAT ABOUT A MILLION TIMES AND SOURCED THE GNU FDL v1.2 IN THOSE PARTS AS WELL SO STOP REPEATING THAT WHICH I NEVER EVEN HINTED AT! --Green Dragon 14:26, 14 November 2009 (MST)". Just another example of contradictory statements that we all hate so much.One final note, check out the votes for RfA of people you stripped of admin rights. None passed. Not a single one. What's the point of having an election if we all already know the outcome? Feel free to say they could have been approved and kept their admin rights, but we both know that was never a possibility. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 01:19, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

:::Badger, when I read this I was forced to ask: where are you getting your stats that those 7% of users account for 90% of the contributions on the wiki? Or am I misunderstanding what you are saying. I know GD has 50k+ edits, I've got slightly over 10k, and a couple of those that left had 8k or more. But for the most part they only had a couple hundred (if that) edits. I'd really like to understand where you're getting your figures from.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 01:30, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

::::I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. Those 11 users account for less than 10% of the users(something like .2%, in truth). A collection of the true 10% would be like 400 users. I've not actually found the top 400 contributors to the wiki. However, considering 11 have something along the lines of 30% of the edits, I assumed we could find another 390 that would get an approximation of 90% of the total edits. Not to sound rude, but I've got better things to do than to track down the top 400 contributors of the wiki (I'm sure most of us do). It's certainly possible that I'm wrong, but given the data I did collect, I'm pretty confident that the 90/10 theory applies to this wiki about as well as it applies to most every other wiki. However, feel free to ignore that tangent if you feel it is incorrect. Honestly, I've not done enough research to really defend that point. Like I said, I think it works but you're more than welcome to prove me wrong. I'll accept any data you're willing to provide.--[[User:Badger|Badger]] 02:06, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::Proof is needed; a theory does not suffice. Another theory is that the entire world is only that which ''you'' can look around and see, touch, and in other ways influence. The rest does not exist. I don't exist. This wiki does not exist. Nothing exists except when ''you'' will it to. Is that then the case? Maybe, right?
:::::Therefore 90% is not the case - proof is needed. Those edits accounted for under 7% (less now) of the activity. That's under 7%.
:::::Your right about the tactlessness, sorry about that. Could we get a physicist at a group rate? Who knows, right.
:::::"''No one would dare warn you. You are above that law, it would seem. You know darn well that if Surgo had posted a comment telling someone to see a psychiatrist that you would have warned him.''" you could be right, I do not know. It's very hard sometimes to analyze oneself the exact same - one's own biases and ideas make it much more complicated, I find. In any case I did not mean it in any way to make him feel belittled, I said it out of (although tactless) concern.
:::::"''Have I ever sworn on D&D Wiki?''" right, but damn is not a "gross profanity" word and it's not used referring to someone. I think (I could be wrong - let me know if I am please) that damn, in the English language, has a number of uses and word types and therefore it is permitted in some uses and instances.
:::::About [[User Talk:Eiji#Farmer]] those are ''different'' licenses. That is not contradictory in the least.
:::::''Users are equal'' does not mean that ''users should be treated the same''. Admins are granted those abilities by users by way of a nomination but that does not mean they should be treated the same.
:::::And the systematic [[Warning Policy|warning policy]] ''should'' govern all. Am I above it? No... Do I want to be? Irrelevant. All conspicuous areas should be posted to [[Talk:Warning Policy]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:31, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::"Users are equal does not mean that users should be treated the same" What does that mean? They are equal, but should be treated differently? How are they equal then? If you're treating something differently, it's not equal! --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 03:38, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::"''Users are equal'' does not mean that ''users should be treated the same''" means a few things. One is that if one commits an act against a policy, policies being systematic in nature (e.g. the [[Warning Policy]], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_policy], etc etc, one just has to look at bit) they are not necessarily treated the same. For example one cannot vote on nominations. One cannot edit the wiki, etc.
:::::::Or, since admins are elected by users they are not "''treated the same''" although they are still users they can now also delete things, do things users cannot, etc, and as such held in different a different light. Do you understand what I mean kinda? I can explain more if you want. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::I think I'm done with this discussion. It's clearly going nowhere, and it doesn't even seem you're taking it seriously. You're making less and less sense, and I fear it's only a matter of time before one of us tries to ban the other (and I already know how that would turn out). So I'm going to leave you with this tip: Fix the description of the Warning Policy page. "When one does not edit with civility and etiquette one becomes a warning for each time" --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 04:41, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::I do not understand. What do you mean exactly? The wording seems fine to me and all this is implied. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 05:13, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::As far as the wording, GD...It should be "when one does not edit with civility and etiquette one '''gets''' a warning for each time," they don't become a warning. --[[User:Harry Mason|Harry Mason]] 12:24, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::: He also swore [[User talk:Surgo#Wikia]], which, I'm assured, is much worse than the word 'damn', according to certain civil servants. Just thought I'd chime in for you guys. --[[User:TK-Squared|TK-Squared]] 15:21, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

== GNU FDL ==

After watching the discussions over the past few months I have done extensive research into the GNU FDL. Any page without an updated author box is in void of the licence and no-longer licensed under the GNU FDL according to section 4B:

4. MODIFICATIONS
You may copy and distribute a Modified Version of the Document under
the conditions of sections 2 and 3 above, provided that you release
the Modified Version under precisely this License, with the Modified
Version filling the role of the Document, thus licensing distribution
and modification of the Modified Version to whoever possesses a copy
of it. In addition, you must do these things in the Modified Version:

B. List on the '''Title''' Page, as authors, one or more persons or entities
responsible for authorship of the modifications in the Modified
Version, together with at least five of the principal authors of the
Document (all of its principal authors, if it has fewer than five),
unless they release you from this requirement.

Before you say it is able to be in the history page:

For works in formats which do not have any title page as such, "Title Page" means
the text near the most prominent appearance of the work's title,
preceding the beginning of the body of the text.

And termination note:

9. TERMINATION
You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Document except
as expressly provided for under this License. Any other attempt to
copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Document is void, and will
automatically terminate your rights under this License. However,
parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under this
License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such
parties remain in full compliance.

In conclusion: Any authors will have to post their own authorship at the top of the page labeling the top 5 contributers (with each of their permission, as you are re-applying a licence) and also their name as publisher of the page. This means that any pages that do not currently meet these requirements (or any of the other requirements) can be removed by the author, as the licence requires permission from the copyright holder (the initial creator). If this licence is "re-applied" without the copyright holder's permission it is in breach of copyright laws and legal action may be taken.

I hope you understand fully and notify users correctly. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 13:09, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

:The bad thing about the license is it has never been upheld in a court of law, so really, no matter how much people may disagree, '''it really doesn't matter'''. Find a lawyer and sue, or shut up about it. If you win, then you'll be making a precedence that other sites can follow.
:Finally, go over to wikipedia - the largest website in existence using the license. Do you see any author spots on the pages? '''NO'''. Now, does that mean all of wikipedia and the lawyers they hired to look into the subject are wrong and you few are oh-so-smarter? '''No again'''. It means that it has been deemed that in a wiki format, as long as each edit is cataloged in the history, then attribution has been made. If you guys think we're doing it wrong, then you must also by the same logic think that Wikipedia is doing it wrong. Please, go tell them, I'd love to see the responses you get for a such a brazen statement.
:The following is a great quote to keep in mind: ''"...are (1) the five principal author listing (all the authors must be listed in 1.1; this is clearly not problem with Wikipedia as the history pages list all the authors of a particular GFDL work) and..."''. Additionally, ''"...The GFDL requires that the names of authors are preserved, and we keep a full record of exactly who wrote what in the history of each article...."''. It have even been said ''"...Editors are collaborators, not authors, and therefore have no rights (except for the right granted to them to reuse their contributions elsewhere). The rights are held by the individual projects, as publishers, and the foundation can act on their behalf....". Now, I'm not a lawyer, but I believe that last one would also need to be upheld in court before we could say it is 100% true.
:The best quote to keep in mind is a simple one: ''"..The "authors" are explicitly mentioned in the history log of every article. :I think you need to show evidence of why the history log is invalid as a record of authorship...."''.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 14:34, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

::Wikipedia ''did'' use the GNU FDL. They changed recently. If, theoretically, you are right what do you say about "''List on the Title Page, as authors, one or more persons or entities responsible for authorship of the modifications in the Modified Version''"? Therefore, why are my edits not displayed alongside (for example)? This conundrum in your logic (which makes it not work) has been discussed at length on [[Talk:Detect Disease (3.5e Spell)#Author Template]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:04, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

:::Under the license the fact that you edited must be shown, as you are an author. Also, you cannot compare wikipedia to this wiki, wikipedia is sourcing facts while this wiki are users creations. Also in that case wikipedia is the entity itself that holds the copyright for the information on the site, not the individual editors. Plus, the fact that they removed the GFDL is a sign that they came to a problem and had to remove it. Also, under the GNU FDL you cannot prevent someone from reverting your edits and history is not on the title page, it is a separate page. Also Hooper, if the licence "doesn't matter" and has never been upheld in a court of law does that mean we shouldn't follow it? We shouldn't give users their rights? --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 00:42, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::::No, I think Wikipedia just wanted to use a newer license. I could be wrong though. And you are incorrect. Wikipedia licenses everything therefore the same things do (well, did) apply.
::::"''Also, under the GNU FDL you cannot prevent someone from reverting your edits and history is not on the title page, it is a separate page.''" No. Anyone can revert anyones edits. That's silly to say. It's all part of the modified version. And, as I was saying, I think the "Title Page" is actually the line with the tabs on it (fulfills all the requirements) or maybe all the surrounding MW information. Why? The publisher, D&D Wiki, does need to be specific somewhere as well (maybe that is the logo - since it does not direct to an image). For example "''For works in formats which do not have any title page as such, "Title Page" means the text near the most prominent appearance of the work's title, preceding the beginning of the body of the text.''"
::::Let me know if this answers your copyright questions.
::::{{quote|
D. Preserve all the copyright notices of the Document.

E. Add an appropriate copyright notice for your modifications adjacent to the other copyright notices.
|orig=[[GNU Free Documentation License 1.2]]
}}
::::--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:14, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::Yes, we can compare this wiki to wikipedia and we are. If you are saying we are doing it wrong, then you are also claiming that wikipedia was doing it wrong during their time using this license. I suggest you seek legal counsel if you truly feel that way. We have the GNU FDL for many reasons, and I will not devolve into a straw man argument. If you do not agree, then do not hit submit - ever. Simple as that. In the meantime, either call your bluff of legal action or drop the issue.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 01:24, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::"If you do not agree, then do not hit submit - ever." So how am I supposed to take away the "hitting submit" that I have already done, how is anyone that thought there was going to be the author template meant to? "Anyone can revert anyones edits." So why can users not have the author template if they chose? And why would you refuse to change [[Detect Disease (3.5e Spell)]] back to the way Daniel Draco requested? Also, "Actually I think Template:Author is forbidden under this license." That's silly to say. It would be part of the document, having no effect on the licence itself. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 01:49, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::Because that template is being removed... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 02:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::Sabre, why don't we agree to disagree on how the license is properly applied in a wiki format. You go get a lawyer to prove your point, and that would sway my thoughts.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 02:45, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::Ignoring fulfilling the licence (lets assume that history does cover it) is there any reason why people can't say "I made this"? Most articles on this wiki aren't a collaborative effort. Also, I don't need to get a lawyer, I don't care about your liabilities though I thought I would warn you seeing I was doing the research anyway (this wiki seemed as good as any for a practical example). --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 02:53, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::When you first brought the subject back up it just came across as if you were threatening to seek legal action. That is why I said that. I know sometimes with type it is hard to come across appropriately, so I am sorry if I misunderstood. The simple fact is, if wikipedia did it - we can do it. And yes it is a valid example. Wikipedia's contributors are writing in their own words using a system or information already available. Our contributors are creating content using a system and rules already available. If wikipedia says that history is fine, then history is fine. The mere fact that the largest supporter of GNU FDL in a wiki format does that would be a huge point in any legal defense of the action ''(I don't remember the legal term they have for that, but basically it is when something is unsure at first but then through practice becomes reality)''.
::::::::::All that being said, I never cared for the author template. It's best feature to me was actually the "status" field where you can let a user know if something is still being figured out. I made a quick Article Status template and have used it instead for a bit. That is really all the information the average surfer needs. If someone wants to know who is the author, they can simply go to the history or any messages on the talk page about the article. It doesn't hurt anyone, and helps the average surfer have the content right up front. I really don't understand all the fuss. If someone ever added something to this wiki thinking that it would either be published and they could revert to sole ownership or that it would never change and be altered ''(which requires ignoring the warning every edit)'' then that was foolish.
::::::::::Additionally, I know that you said you have researched it. So have I, and I believe TK back before he was banned. What I discovered since was simple. Since it hasn't been brought to legal court, you can basically research it and take with it what you want. If you want it to come across a certain way, you read it that way. In short: it's vague.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 03:05, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::::I prefer that someone may take ownership, as the primary creator then people may go onto the history page to see who has contributed. On an open contribution site there should still be a way for the user to keep their own work as it is, even if it is under the GNU FDL. It can still be copied and edited on another website (with the history) though on this website would be their final creation. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 03:13, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}

:You may indeed prefer that, but that goes against the very nature of a '''collaborative''' site. Short of vandalism or spam, and that means that you wish to retroactively not have to accept the warning that has been in place for every edit since the site began, which reads: ''If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here''. This isn't a personal database for any of us to "dump" or "store" our ideas. It is a collaborative and dynamic site.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 03:18, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::I understand that, though each creation needs a form of leadership. Collaboration is only good if you have a goal, in creativity each persons goals may be different and you will get members editing the pages to their liking. A author box provides the creator (presumably the primary contributor) to lead the project, taking in others ideas (as it has previously done through giving ideas on talk pages. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 03:27, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

:::See, now I like what you're saying. Let me say that in our case, an Author template could theoretically never be correct. Yes, it may just be by happenchance that a user puts up an article and other than formatting or spelling no one else changes it. But for some of the big articles, we may have 50 users and IP and at least one chuck norris vandal over years of it being online and at that point the author template would either be huge and obstructive or it wouldn't be able to give everyone due - invalidating it. I made a quick Article Status template that I personally like because it allows someone to say where they are in their own process on an article and gives other users an idea to work with. Because we are different in our content in that degree than say, my above example of wikipedia, I do believe that we could utilize some sort of Article Status/Goal template. This would allow people to assist each other and improve articles, without getting into the author debate. But maybe that is another talk for another day.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 03:31, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::::Am I misunderstanding what is happening here? Hooper and Green Dragon seem to be arguing against having an Author template on a page. I don't see any problem with Author Templates. I think DnD Wiki is collaborative on the whole, meaning while each page has a unique author (or team of authors), the entire site's content is free for all and collaboratively edited. If I write a class (and I have), I want it to be my own. While I'm not going to pretend to understand the legal mumbo-jumbo, I would expect to be the next to last word on all edits (final word being an admin can choose to delete it if it is offensive or something and doesn't comply with policy, but that's it). If I've written a class I want my name on it; partly for credit, partly as a way for people to contact me, and partly because it makes me proud. We're going to take my name off my page because some random IP thinks I should get Power Attack as a bonus feat at level 2, and suddenly he becomes the author? No, that's just foolish.--[[User:Badger|Badger]] 07:50, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::Not Exactly Badger. This discussion mostly is about the legal mumbo jumbo. The GNU FDL is vague in regards to it's implementations of author and title in a wiki format. Reading it one way, the Author Template would never ever be enough to give all the proper credit. Reading it the other way ''(the way wikipedia does)'', the Author Template is invalid and should be removed but history can never be deleted.
:::::As far as "final word", we all have to keep in mind that there has always been a warning (which I quoted above) that once we submit content, it can be edited mercilessly.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 13:55, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

== Am I violating copyright? ==

Hello, GreenDragon, and thank you for your time. I am currently working on a page (Drevanius campaign setting) and I am wondering if including statistics of creatures (nothing else) from another DND source is violating copyright. The section is Creatures of Drevanius.

== Hello ==

You seem like a Very Knowledgable person, im currently working on designing an Epic level 3.5 Campaign, ive been designing NPCs Main chars and what not, and one of the main chars ive built diesnt have a name, as ironic as it is, it is a 15th Age Cat. Advanced Paragon White Great Wyrm of Legends, Leader of the Dragon council, and by far the strongest dragon among them, he is very unique and i just dont know what to call him, if you have the chance i would really appriciate it if you could shoot come good names at me, im just drawing a blank

Thanks - [[User:Envoyof aGod|Envoyof_aGod]] 19:22, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

==Something interesting...==

I noticed that your RfA was mysteriously and unexplainably deleted, Greeny. I was just curious what that meant for your re-nomination of adminship. --[[User:Bunnie|Bunnie]] 03:48, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:Read the subscript on [[RfA]] and this post will be removed. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:09, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::You mean the part where you belatedly added that you and Blue were exceptions to the RfA policy? Why yes, I did happen to read that. And the part where you said (and then removed) that if you were voted against, you'd demote yourself. Why taunt people with stuff you'll never do? --[[User:Bunnie|Bunnie]] 04:31, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::I changed my mind, and the policy as such, relating to adminship about [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]]'s and my admin status. It wasn't a "taunt". --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:35, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::'Changing your mind' about something while a process is already being implemented (especially in regards to yourself when you're about to 'lose' because of the policy) is just low. Why the change of heart anyways? If you think you might 'change your mind' anyways, why bother having policies in the first place? Just 'change your mind' about anything you don't like, even if other people like it. Sure, sounds fair, reasonable and perfectly acceptable. Right. --[[User:Bunnie|Bunnie]] 04:42, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::Not really fair huh. Oh well. D&D Wiki ''is'' also a physical thing (takes bytes, bandwidth, etc). Those physical aspects make it so the people relating to hosting and upkeep are not going to lose adminship (or bureaucratship; transparent in the case of [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]]). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::Incidentally since it was mentioned, , whatever happened to Blue Dragon? He vanished from everywhere a few months before the big smash-up, and I've not seen hide nor hair of him since. Would be great to get in contact with him again (contacting him on the Wiki has been all but impossible, so, I suppose I'd need some alternate method.). -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 04:53, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::He's been around. He came around me during the winter holidays. He actually was the one who updated MW and the extensions, although he is not done. You want to contact him? I'll tell him to add back the "hosted by" part and when he does you can click it and contact him. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 05:05, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::Well hosting has been changed. But he checks his user talk page. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:31, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

== Admin Resignation ==

This is a notice to say that I will not be coming back to this wiki again. The issues you obviously have with control has caused me to lose faith in you and lose interest in the wiki. You have changed so much since I became admin, in more than one way. I would also like to point out that even though you own the physical server doesn't mean you have to be an admin here, you are only the host. Your attitude towards policies (and your need for power) were proven in you deleting your nomination for admin, when it was first posted you had began to fill it out and comply with the existing policy, then when the votes turned against you the policy was changed and the page deleted. You should go back and think about your actions, think about them from another point of view and see why those members left. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 10:31, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:I will RfA you in a bit (with resignation as the reason or somesuch). I, as [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] (with bureaucratship), are not going to host something for people who got banned, and get annoyed as result, and then came back with just the intent to remove the person who banned them, based off their wrong actions, from adminship. Do you really not see how that is petty? One: This is not a democracy, although it has democratic influences. I don't care about all the democratic ways which things can be. It's not fair. Fairness, to me, is more important. On a different note they would no longer even edit, they may have just found it humorous to remove adminship from one who banned them for wrong actions. Look at it like this: Some people go to prison for committing crimes, they serve their time, they get out. After they are out they go to the town hall and try to impeach the mayor. Although in democracy that ''does'' work, I don't care. This is not going to be like that. Do you understand where I am coming from? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:33, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::When you say "Fairness, to me, is more important" do you mean "In my opinion, fairness is more important" or "It's more important for everyone to be fair to me, Green Dragon"?
::''EDIT'': He means the first one.
::Let me try and work through your analogy now:
::*Some people go to prison for committing crimes
::**Sabre070 <s>violated policy and was banned</s> was banned permanently <s>because of an inappropriate username</s> <s>without reason</s> with the implied reason that [[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] was banned, without reason (see his edits during the time), and was worried something was going on.
::**<s>Later others disregard policies and get banned as a result (spamming the FA, unwarranted deletion, etc etc).</s> While true, it's irrelevant. We're talking about Sabre070 right now. If he did that we can include that in his "crimes". Otherwise, let's try to focus on the important issues.
::*They serve their time, they get out.
::**Then Sabre070's ban <s>expired</s> was undone 2 days later and he was allowed back into our open hearts once again, born anew, like a mighty Phoenix
::*After they are out they go to the town hall and try to impeach the mayor.
::**Sabre070 doesn't like how you lead, and tried to change that, by removing you from office (with an RfA).
::*Although in democracy that ''does'' work, I don't care.
::** I don't care about what you think is fair, my word is <s>unimpeachable law</s> open to discussion, as long as we use logic. I, as Green Dragon, will delete that RfA, make new laws prohibiting future RfAs, and <s>pretend nothing happened</s> those are the results of the happenece. The deleted RfA's date and the revision history of [[RfA]] can be seen as evidence. This is my wiki, I own the damned thing.
::--[[User:Badger|Badger]] 22:14, 16 February 2010 (UTC), with Green Dragon contributing.

:::I don't think [[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] was banned though (save the small time right after I was banned). See also [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3ASabre070].
:::Only the first way works, and not fully at that. I mean that fairness, as the idea relating to ownership and hosting with regards to inherent userrights is an important concept for me and how this site it run.
:::"''my word is unimpeachable law''" - no. Things are discussed. Logic is used. I do not always get my way. It's just the idea relating to ownership and hosting with regards to inherent userrights. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:21, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::Allow me to amend my previous comment to reflect this new information. Until you reveal the true reason he was banned I'm leaving it as "without reason" because we both know there is nothing wrong with the username he'd been editing as since March of 2008.--[[User:Badger|Badger]] 22:41, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::I amended it as well, if you do not mind. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:55, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::Oh, '''''"...I, as [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] (with bureaucratship), are not going to host something for people who got banned, and get annoyed as result, and then came back with just the intent to remove the person who banned them, based off their wrong actions, from adminship...."'''''. Best cliffnotes ever.
:::::::Related note: Should it be required that a person RfAing and the person being RfA's be '''X''' amount active on the wiki? I.e. so many edits, meeting a certain edit-per-month count, etc. etc.? I've always thought so. I also don't believe that votes from new or IPs should be counted in RfAs (Wikipedia doesn't count them - arguing that they may very well be single-purpose accounts).  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 22:59, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::I don't mind at all, facts are important! I think we are approaching the best approximation of the actual events. Can you fact check as to whether or not Sabre070 was involved in the goings on? I don't recall if he was, but he was unblocked 2 days later, so I assume he wasn't involved.
::::::::Hooper, to address your question I always thought IPs were allowed to comment and such, but you had to be a registered user to actually vote (newly made voters subject inspection for meat puppetry).--[[User:Badger|Badger]] 23:14, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::That is a great question [[User:Hooper|Hooper]]. It needs to be discussed on [[Talk:Requests for Adminship]] though; this is not the place.
:::::::::Was [[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] involved? Who knows. If you look at [[Requests for Adminship/Aarnott2]] you can see a list of this so-called "RC Committee" - but not everyone on their was banned. E.g. [[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]]. People were banned for doing actions against policy and/or violating their positions of authority. Bans are not given out for any other reason. The policy comes from Wikipedia. This committee was never implemented since it was illogical compared to alternatives, which are now in place. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:19, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::The so called "RC Committee"? If you had've looked I am not mentioned on that page once. Also, the reason for my blocking was that Aarnott had blocked Green Dragon for 3 days for "Intimidating behaviour/harassment: You are acting out of line right now. Perhaps you should clear your head and come back to this later... Otherwise, this site will lose a lot of its users." and he explains other reasons on his RfA. If I am looking at the block list correctly, you are saying that you are free to intimidate and harass anyone, though others aren't? Also, I like how you always say "we use logic here" (Green Dragon Logic) and also say that it is a wiki and not a dictatorship, yet also say that it is your wiki and you cannot get banned, un-nominated, or treated like any other user.
::::::::::Also, I was not involved, the only edits I have done can be seen here: [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?limit=50&tagfilter=&title=Special:Contributions&contribs=user&target=Sabre070&namespace=&year=2009&month=8 Contributions]. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 01:53, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::

::::::::::::I don't know where you guys all grew up or worked, but the person footing the bills makes the rules. You are free to disagree, but in the end it comes down to the owner makes the calls. It is obvious from months of the transientwiki crowd and it's fallout's attempts that you will get nowhere, so just save yourself the trouble and leave. The owner has the final say, whether we agree with it or not. To think otherwise is insane.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 03:25, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::::::Ya, you can trust [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] fully, or you can look at my edit contributions during those days. Normal. A policy, which was not agreed upon, was implemented. As such it was removed. Next?
:::::::::::::The rest of what you said is not true. Well, I guess that means all of it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 05:09, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

== Oh Boy... ==
You may want to have a look at [[Talk:3.5e Open Game Content]]. Seems another wiki is having some issues with us. Two users just signed on and I believe wish to discuss the issue with you.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 01:38, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

== Hi Green Dragon ==

It appears that a recent edit of the 3.5e Open Game Content page appears to be taken whole or in part from my site (http://grandwiki.wikidot.com/publication-list).
The reason I suspect this is because

Steve Russell Presents…

appears on your page. Steve Russell owns Rite Publishing and personally sent me that material to upload on the Grand OGL Wiki. So I think one of your users may have
copy/paste that material.

If the DnDWiki intends to replicate the Open Game Content from my site on this site can you make sure that the section 15 for that material appears in your sites open game license.

If you wish to contact me about this matter feel free to email me at gedakm@gmail.com. I can put you in contact with Steve Russell if you like as well.

- Mark Gedak
DM Sketchpad/Grand OGL Wiki

:On closer inspection of the similarities of our page, [[3.5e_Open_Game_Content]], and theirs, linked above - it seems like we have most of the bigger names where they go a bit more in depth, and that the random Steve Russell Presents is the only shared link that shows a common history of edit. However, I am really confused as to the request to alter our Section 15 of the OGL. In that same sense, we could argue that the entire website Grand OGL Wiki should change theirs as we existed before them. I just don't understand the real problem here. An OGC game is listed on an OGC page, and that is absolutely fine imho, but then ianal.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 01:53, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

== My Campaign Settings ==

I know that I havent made a great edit in quite a long while, but, I feel that my campaigns should be left up for people to edit. My addition, the Fallout setting has come under an attack of sorts and I feel that more can be done with it, just because one user starts something doesnt mean others can help pitch in, I have helped edit a few pages, even added some weapons. So please, if possible, help me keep my Fallout setting from getting deleted, I put a lot of time into adding the building blocks for it. The Mighty Boosh.

PS - I forgot how to add my name at the bottom, the one with the time posted and all, sincere apologies.

:Wow it's not an attack, I just added at delete tag to start a discussion. There's no content and the two or three pages that are there are not very good. If you're going to fix it then that's fine, but there's no real way for anyone else to add it since only you know what's in your head. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:05, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

The only thing that I need to have done is basic stats for weapons, vehicles, creatures, etc. I will, slowly but surely, put up descriptions of weapons, creatures and vehicles. And I will also do my best to come up with detailed backgrounds of environments and adventures, all I need is some help coming up with stats then the Fallout setting should get rolling along. [[User:The Mighty Boosh|The Mighty Boosh]] 04:26, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

== SEARCHING ==

When I am trying to search by keywords, sometimes the search engine is not coming back with any results.

For example I am searching for HAWK for 3.5. There are no search results.

== Error while searching. ==

Hello all,

Congrats on the great job on the D&D wiki.

I was searching with keyword: ''Samurai'' and ''samurai'' and the result I got was:
''Query failed: connection to localhost:3312 failed (errno=111, msg=Connection refused). ''

I know there were pages resulting from this same search since I have been browsing them the past week.

Hope it helps.

Dervell.

:I had problems with this yesterday as well. But then it mysteriously started working again so I figured you were working on the problem while I was online. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 19:59, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

== Move Errors ==

Hey Green. It appears that since the server issue some of us are experiencing problems when we try to move pages. It doesn't happen every single time, but seems to be at least 3/4ths. The page will stay in a loading status for quite some time and then it'll pop up a database error. Just FYI.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 14:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

:So you don't have to, this is a quote of the error I'm getting: ''"A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was:

(SQL query hidden)

from within function "Title::deleteTitleProtection". MySQL returned error "2006: MySQL server has gone away (internal-db.s89449.gridserver.com)".''"  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 17:57, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

:I know. [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] said he has time to look at it tomorrow so that should be the case. Same with the sword, delete. Do you know of more things? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:03, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

::Not so far. Jazz above mentions some search problem but I haven't been able to duplicate that.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 03:20, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

:::It's hit or miss. I tried it just now and got the error again. Along with the error message, the "search in namespaces" list is misformatted. But then other times it will just work, so it seems to be an intermittent problem. The only other thing I noticed was yesterday every now and then after editing a page it would give me an error that made it look like my edit wasn't saved, but when I went back to check, it was saved. Again, it's nothing repeatable, it just happens off and on. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 05:08, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
:::I seemed to have found a pattern to the searching error: If you type in an exact page name (SRD:Fighter) into the search box then hit "go" (or hit enter), it works fine. If you type in a page name that doesn't exist ("test") you get the error. Also, if you type in a name that does exist but hit "search" instead of "go", you also get the error, so I'm guessing that something went wrong with the search function itself, and not the search box. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 16:39, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

::::Hopefully this weekend all the problems should be dealt with. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:42, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

== Featured Article ==

GD, I would like to recommend an article of mine for a featured article. [[Black Lion (4e Optimized Character Build)]]. I created an entire 4e Class, all of its Class Powers, an entire 4e Paragon Path, and built this Optimized Build just for it. Not only does it include all the prerequisites of a good article, it includes User-generated Tables by Tier, Class Summaries every 10 levels, explanations of unique items and their strategies for use, and an expanded information section which expounds upon the Classes Role in general. I even included a designers guidelines for enemy and character progression by level and a Compare/Contrast section with this builds biggest competing build. Everything you need all in one spot. Tell me what you think? --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 09:26, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

:I am curious as to what you say to the following. When ones makes their own content and then makes a Optimized Character Build from that content it normally is not an "optimization" but rather a "specific 'hole-in-the-game' optimization" specifically created by themselves to optimize an already exploited idea. E.g. natural weapons and natural fighting in this case.
:Of course this may not be the case, I have not throughly looked. I'm just asking for your opinion. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:36, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

::I noticed you used the words "Hole" and "Exploited". Words that rhyme with "Loop-hole", "Broken", and "Cheating". If that is what you mean, then no. This is not that kind of optimization.
::This is a what some people refer to as a "Build". A specific construction of levels, items, and powers that accomplishes a pre-defined purpose. That purpose being: "Maximizing Damage-per-Round during Combat". This also fulfills the Striker Role within 4th Edition as well. See.., the Black Lion Class is currently a working Striker Class within 4e, and this optimization is a fulfillment of it's ultimate potential. However, the Black Lion Class was not created with this specific optimization in mind. The class came ''before'' the optimization and not the other way around.
::I hope that helps. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 07:14, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

== Another post-server fail error ==

Looks like over on the Media Repository, any time I try to see anyones (even my own) contributions there it pulls up an error. Minor, but just fyi.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 05:00, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

== Media Fail ==

Everytime I try to log in to upload a pic, I get this. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 18:04, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was:
(SQL query hidden)
from within function "User::idFromName". MySQL returned error "1142: SELECT command denied to user 'db89449'@'205.186.184.15' for table 'wdd_user' (internal-db.s89449.gridserver.com)".

== Formatting Help ==

i would like to know how to reformat my submitted setting. i am pretty new to this whole thing...

P.S.~ sorry about completely over-riding your touch-ups, i meant to only make minor corrections, but you see i was in th emiddle of adding a lot of information on the playable races at the time, and i was getting very frustrated at the fact that every time i had an editing conlict, i had to pretty much write everything again. leastways the equivalent amount of work on it, what with taking out the dashes and spaces, and putting in the HTML... {{Unsigned|ChieftainTwilight|15:06, 28 February 2010 (MST)}}

:First if you press the back button it will retrieve the information you had been typing. Just Copy+Paste into the new version (with some minor editing if needed) and continue posting. Edit conflicts are not really a problem as such except for minor formatting or minor changes which deal with the other user's changes. What do I think of [[Mysteries of Andor (3.5e Campaign Setting)|Mysteries of Andor]]? I find that nothing is really fluffed out. I recommend that you make the deities and then link to them from that page. Although you say many names, what I mean is, what are they? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:41, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

== Mediawiki is unavailable? ==

I'm sure you've already been alerted, but just in case, the Mediawiki pictures are not showing up, and Mediawiki comes up saying there is an "Exception caught in Exception Handler". It's not working at all. [[User:Jwguy|Jwguy]] 05:41, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

== Captcha ==

Would it be possible to have only IP and non-autoconfirmed users have to fill out the captcha when inserting external links? There are a butt-ton of d20 Modern stubs, but since the "edit this page" is treated as an external link, I have to fill out a captcha for every stub template. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 02:24, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

== More post-crash problems ==

I'm sure you're aware, but I'm just letting you know of some other problems I'm finding since the server crash. First of all, the site is sllllloooooooowww. Sometimes it will be zippy, sometimes you will wait 10 seconds and get a "something went wrong" message, but other times, like right now, it will take literally minutes (sometimes up to 5) to open up a page. Which is just an eternity when you are trying to add a class.

Secondly, no pictures from mediawiki are being loaded correctly. They all just give the name of the image with a link, instead of actually showing the image.

Keep up the good work! [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 02:53, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

:I know. I have been told that the current MW install has many problems with it and lead to slowing down the site sometimes. Media will be dealt with. Another thing too, to make this even better (time wise), is that I just heard that MW has serious security flaws and needs to be upgraded. Maybe upgrading will fix many of the problems which are slowing it down sometimes too. And then if it keeps being slow sometimes then I will think of something else. Hopefully wednesday things will get better (this weekend did not happpen). Sometime though, I can promise. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:06, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

::Ah, that sucks. At least you've got a culprit and a likely fix, though. The worst thing about misbehaving technology is when you don't know what's going wrong. Maybe having a slow wiki will give me time to catch up on some of the things I'm ignoring while I'm spending too much time here ''':)''' [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 05:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

:::That's not what I said, but sure. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 05:17, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

== problems ==

the site takes forever to load. and i cant search.

== Spam ==

I think I might know why the spam problem has exploded lately: the Captcha doesn't seem to be working. When you add external links there's no captcha prompt at all. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:38, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

:That's because, as was said above, ReCaptcha's were showing up for stub, etc templates for users and external links for users. With MW one cannot just say "IP's have them" anymore, it is now for edit types or somesuch for all but users but those in the admin group. In any case they have been removed as such. Maybe if it continues to be a problem. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:20, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

::Gotcha. It's too bad they don't have more useful options. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 05:24, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

== Degradation without renewal? ==

I can't help but notice the large drop in admins, as of late, for whatever reasons be it. And though I hardly have any standing, nor say in the matter, I suggest some sort of action should be taken to renew the community on this wiki, before its community dies down too much to have any hope of revival. And still, I have little idea as to how to do so, I've seen many great communities fall and shrivel. So I'm convinced that unless someone gets out there and attracts some people into the community, not just general traffic into the site, the community will break down, maintenence and upkeep will fall, and I fear this great wiki could fall into a bad state.

Well, just my thoughts, I thought you should know. I could be terribly wrong and there's a constant amount of community and I'm totally paranoid and pessimistic. But this is how I see it, seeing the constant destruction of admins with no new ones does worry me. --[[User:SgtLion|SgtLion]] 21:19, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

:What are admins? Do they help? Although I have done no research into the subject I almost feel that ones editing decreases once attaining adminship. Do we need more admins? Yes. Of the top of my head I can maybe think of two or more people who need to be RfA'ed. Know someone? Ask them and then, depending on the result, RfA them please. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:20, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

::Makes sense. I don't know anyone, but your point is very much valid. --[[User:SgtLion|SgtLion]] 06:13, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

== Errata ==

Hey Peter Gabert,

I just had a discussion on the WotC board about all the absence of errata for a lot of the previous editions books. For most of these unofficial errata were collected by players.

My thoughts were that a wiki would be a good place to maintain such unofficial errata, given the transient nature of the WotC boards (most of the older errata threads have been purged). Your DnD wiki seems the most natural place to start such an endeavour.

Is this something you would be willing to accommodate, as I'm not sure it fits entirely with your current content?

I don't think I've ever contributed to your wiki, but I'm a regular at several other wiki's and would try to gather as many unofficial errata as possible if you'd give a green light to such an undertaking.

I will try to check back at this page for an answer every now and then, other options like e-mail, I can post if you want to.

Cheers.

Adriaan Renting.

:Yes, it would work. Is errata for OGC OGC? I would imagine so. In any case, a good place to start, (especially if it is unofficial errata) is to just make the page and link to it from the publication. Start by taking a look at [[Publication List]] and finding the book (or adding it if it is not added) and then placing a link on the page. For example [[Exemplars of Evil/Unofficial Errata]]. Does that make sense? Do you think that would work? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:29, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

== Title ==

Heh, sorry about that. For some reason I'm very set in the habit of not creating titles for the first post on a talk page. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 23:04, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

:It's the correct way to do it. No worries, of course, though. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:09, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

== Down for the count... ==

Hey, I didn't see any 'Contact us' options, and I noticed that you were the owner, so I decided to stop by and ask a quick question :). Recently this site has been experiencing more and more problems (i.e. not being able to load properly or going down for short periods of time). I just thought I would point this out and wonder if anything could be done?

Oh, and I just want to add, I love this site! Be proud! Thanks! --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 05:33, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

:First we need to clean up this site. For example, at this moment, [[3.5e Sorcerer/Wizard Spells]] spells is not able to load. Why is this? The code is not properly done (SMW and so), I think. In any case it returns a database error and eats up a lot of the server. Once all the code problems have been ironed out then we can see if this is still a problem.
:This should happen slowly. Soon D&D Wiki's MW will be upgraded (the current version has a few security problems) and that should make a difference. Then other areas need to be worked on. I hope this helps answer your question, and I look forward to seeing some of your content. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:39, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

::Well D&D Wiki has been upgraded to MW 1.15.2. Pages like [[3.5e Sorcerer/Wizard Spells]] work now. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:38, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

== MoI (of sorts) ==

Hi GD, I've got a couple of things to tell you about:

#First of all, I've finished adding PL categories to all the d20 Modern homebrew equipment, so Phase 1 is complete!
#[http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User:Jazzman831/workspace&oldid=461878 Here] is my current progress on Phase 2. Let me know what you think before I continue creating the rest of the pages.
#Three items ([[Flashbang (D20 Modern Equipment)|Flashbang]], [[Phosphorus Grenade (D20 Modern Equipment)|Phosphorus Grenade]] and [[Smoke Bomb (D20 Modern Equipment)|Smoke Bomb]]) are created for D&D 4e, not d20 Modern, so I don't know what to do with them. See my opinion on the matter [[Talk:Flashbang (D20 Modern Equipment)|here]].
#MoI: [[Talk:Grenades (D20 Modern Equipment)]]
#MoI: [[Talk:Halo (D20 Modern Campaign Setting)#Rating (again)]]
#What do you think of [[User:Jazzman831/preloads#Ranged Weapon Preload|this]] preload/template as a way to standardize ranged weapons? It's the format used in Weapons Locker, and the most useful format I've seen.
#MoI: [[Category talk:Rifle]] (Note also that [[:Category:Longarm]] actually exists; possibly my next project should be standardizing the categorization of the Modern side of things? Where should such discussion take place?)

Sorry about the long list, but I think that should get us caught up to date. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 17:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

:I copy-pasted your prototype page for [[D20 Modern Equipment]] onto that page. I changed a few things. Do you think the changes make sense? I modernized the subpages. Once all the subpages are created (so called Phase 2) then [[D20 Modern Equipment]] can be cleaned up. I will deal with the rest of your comment above soon... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:17, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

::The changes make sense, though in a perfect world the last two categories (not categorized by age or type) should always be empty, correct? Perhaps this is a good way to make sure that everything gets labeled. For the "all" category (I thought about something similar myself), do you want to create a separate page with every PL X item, or just link to the PL X category, which is effectively the same thing? While we're on the subject of the "all" category, I notice some of the totals (PL 2 and 5) don't add up right. I'll try to figure out what's happened; probably something isn't categorized correctly.

::The only things I really don't like are adding "equipment" to all the pages, because it gets wordy, and removing the PL number from each line of the table. The former isn't really a huge deal, since users probably won't ever type that anyway, but the second is bigger. All of the books (as well as the MSRD) refer to PL primarily by number, not by name, so I think it's better to have the number actually there instead of counting up or down.

::I hope to get to adding the subpages sometime soon. It'll be a function of how much my carpal tunnel is flaring up and how bored I get... [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 00:37, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

:::Alright, subpages are finished, though as I said before, I'm not sure what to do with some of the pages.
:::Have any comments on the rest of my points yet? [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 19:08, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
:::Also, I think a database has crashed. Every time I try to move a page or use the search I get the following error: <code>145: Table './ddwikidb/wdd_searchindex' is marked as crashed and should be repaired (localhost)</code> [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 19:17, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

== Protect Page ==

I'd like to request a Protection from IP's be placed on my [[White Guard (3.5e Class)]] article. Thanks GD. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 04:26, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

:You actually don't have to request this, just find a page that has it and look at the source code. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 05:26, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

::Oh, good idea. Hehe. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 06:02, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

:::There isn't a source code for protection, it's an additional tab that only certain users (on this wiki, I imagine only admins) have access to. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 17:06, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

::::I protected it from IP edits. And yes, only admins have access to the tab. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:58, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

::::: Ummm..... GD, I don't know whats going on, I may be mistaken as to what you were asking, however I just tried getting it from the source code of another page for IP protection and it worked... [[Orion (3.5e Campaign Setting)]]--[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 22:52, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

:::::: I'm pretty sure that's just a template to let IPs know they are unable to edit the page. They still can edit it, unless an admin has actually protected a page. Think of that source code (the template you copied) as a sign saying "road flooded", but you need an admin to actually add the flood water. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 22:17, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

::::::: Ahhh. Ok, thanks for the clarification. However this can still be useful. If a sign reads 'road flooded 10 km ahead', most cars wouldn't test it. :) --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 22:52, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

== Uploading an Adult Picture ==

I was hoping to place a certain picture on one of the pages that I'm going to design for my camapign setting. However, this picture has nudity in it. It's not pornographic, a female witch is simply naked. I was wondering if I would be allowed to post this? Or should I send it to you first for clearing? --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 05:29, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

:It should be okay. Just make sure to add [[Template:Adult Theme]] to the top of the page. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:27, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

== Kobold buffs? ==

Hey, I was just looking at the negitive level adjustment page, and looked at the discussion page.
And someone said that they didnt think that kobolds were -2 la, cause of the "buffs" they been getting.
You said that the "last few books that wizards published" made them more of a -1 la.

I was wondering what are these buffs/books?

::he probably means Races of Dragon and possible Dragon Magic. RoD actually made kobolds kinda cool--[[User:Name Violation|Name Violation]] 02:56, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

:::Thats what I was thinking after I asked the question, but just wanted to make sure I wasnt missing anything.

::::If I remember correctly it was Races of Dragon, but you could always check the date of the comment and the publication dates. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:15, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

::::: [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060420a Races of Dragon Excerpt]. It gives Kobolds Slight Build (opposite of Half-Giant's Powerful Build), natural weapons and weapon proficiencies. --[[User:TK-Squared|TK-Squared]] 12:00, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

== Couple questions ==

Just a couple things I'd like to ask you about. You mentioned that my class wasn't original and that it's been created before, yet if you search on this web site it's the only one that comes up. Umm? Just wondering about that, cuz I wouldn't know it's unoriginal if nothing else like it is on here. Another question, you mentioned that the Sith aren't all dark users. I took the definition of what a Sith was directly off of the star wars database, so take them up on it if you're really confused about what a Sith is. {{unsigned|Tmblake09}}

:Urm, Green Dragon didn't say any of those things. [[User:Vrail|Vrail]] said it was unoriginal (and unless you are George Lucas, ''any'' Sith class is by definition unoriginal), and he was also the one who suggested there were good and evil Sith. Generally if you have a problem with a specific article, it's best to take it up on that talk page and not a user talk page -- otherwise, people who look at your class later won't see this discussion.

:You are correct, by the way, that there aren't any other Sith classes on the wiki (btw GD, [http://media.dandwiki.com/wiki/Sith this] is another Sith class, but it's posted on MW? I didn't even know that was possible), but there are many, many other Star-Wars related entries. [[Jedi Knight (3.5e Class)]], [[Jedi Healer (DnD Class)]], [[Jedi Guardian (D20 Modern Base Class)]], [[Jedi Dualist (Not Duelist) (DnD Prestige Class)]], [[Jedi Consular (D20 Modern Base Class)]] and [[Jedi Sentinel (D20 Modern Base Class)]] all come up with a quick search. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 16:25, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

== Candidates for Deletion ==

I finished my first-brush pass at candidates for deletion category. All-in-all I deleted or removed the deletion tag from over 200 articles! I skipped the campaign settings for now because they have so many sub pages, but that will be my next project.

One thing I noticed when clearing out all those pages was that a lot of them had talk pages by new users asking why we wanted to delete their page. In many cases, I'm guessing that it turned users away from the wiki, because they are trying to learn all these new things then all of the sudden somebody threatens to take it all away. I don't think the use of the deletion template is fully explained anywhere, so I created [[Template:Delete/why|this]] to help new users understand that we aren't delete-hungry monsters. If you approve, I can add a link to it within the deletion template.

Another thing I saw is pages that had enough information to be completed, they just weren't completed yet. They aren't usable as is, but I don't think it's right to delete them since there's enough there that someone else could finish it with a little gruntwork. I've started a discussion (so far it's just me) about a possible solution [[Category_talk:Candidates_for_Deletion#Idea_for_half-completed_pages|here]]. (While you're there, I had some ideas on the discussion just above it as well.) [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 05:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

== Censorship ==

You've edited a comment I've left on a page. on PokeDM's [[User_talk:PokeDM|Talk]] page. You cropped it down, citing solicitation. I'm forced to say "Not Cool". I went out of my way to not solicit any other websites. I didn't drop a name. I didn't provide a link. Furthermore, I read through the behavioral policy just now and didn't see anything banning solicitation. I was trying to be helpful to a new user, letting him know that other people have tried similar endeavors, and there is help for him if he needs it. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 06:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

:I have never said we do not edit comments. Comments are edited when needed. What you are doing is spam ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_spam Article Spam]), links to D&D resources can be found on [[DnD Links]]; no where else. Partial censorship is something D&D Wiki has — to keep spam and non-relevant things at bay. All the recent spam from IP's (see the barnstars some have received) is not allowed — I think you would understand. It could become a serious problem.
:For example (not notice if you saw it) there was some spam advertising a certain boots company. If I recall correctly they supplied no links. Do you see the problem? It's very simple to understand. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:03, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

::I think he was just confused and dismayed at why you modified his post and never explained why. Poor communication on both sides resulted in a misunderstanding, but I don't think either side was intentionally being aggressive or anything like that. Anyways, no need to start a feud over a misunderstanding. ''':)'''. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 04:17, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

:::Right, but you should also mention that no reason needs to be given in text format (maybe in the edit summary). I see what you mean when you mention this, and for the most part the IP (when violating this) knows though his or her ban. Since this user is not getting banned as a result of his or her solicitation (implicit or explicit), you should notice that just the censorship was hinting at this. Since he or she did not, and actually took this kind gesture the wrong way, now he or she knows is all we can say. As a general rule one should always read the edit summaries, and I hope we can say that if something gets censored with such a reason in the edit summary that is the reason. Seems very simple to understand, but I guess not. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:28, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

::::To be fair Vrail, I was much more aggressive (intentionally) at the end of my comment up there. You just aren't seeing it because it was censored... Anyway, yeah, I was angry because my comment was edited. I don't see how a useful, on-topic, offer of help from an external resource (which was not linked or named) from a registered, contributing user on a fellow user's Talk page should be compared to spam about cheap boots on SRD talk pages. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 04:39, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

:::::Why was it solicitation? Because it did not say something like "I would like to tell you that other resources exist dealing with Pokémon in D&D. A simple Google search should give you some results." --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

::::::I suppose I assumed anyone attempting to make Pokemon monsters for DnD has probably already done a simple Google search. I was trying to provide more specific help with material. Can I leave something akin to "Hey, I noticed you're working on Pokemon for DnD. Leave me a message on my [[User_Talk:Badger|Talk Page]] if you want some help with creation, I know other resources exist that you may find helpful."? --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 20:44, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

:::::::Email would be the correct option. If someone wanted a possibility for such things then there is the possibility they would not mind recieving an email about such things. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

:::::::: The best part of this oppression is that you keep using the verb 'to solicit'. Let us take the most humourous meaning of the word and put it into context; Badger was attempting to bribe PokeDM for sex with name-dropping of Frank (of Frank and K)! How... dastardly. It's not solicitation, it's advertising. Unless, of course, you think that people finding other sites that have D&D information on is an 'evil action', which wouldn't be too much of a step, to be honest. I mean, Badger doesn't want anything from his actions, except to help, and isn't really persuading the person in anyway nor was he persistent in his name-dropping of Frank (of Frank and K). Also amusing is how Green Dragon is trying to say that what Badger did is on the same level as spambots. Because what he said had no relevance to the matter at hand for a person called PokeDM! Who'd think he'd want to find pokemon for D&D that other people had made to draw inspiration from. Also, I'll probably be banned for this. After all, I'm some kind of crazy anarchist or something and have totally name-dropped Frank (of Frank and K) three times now. SOLICITATION, YES PLZ. --[[User:TK-Squared|TK-Squared]] 11:58, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

== Hello ==

Good evening Admin.
i have a question.

What would you say for a LA+0 Race to have +3 STR, +6 DEX, +3 CON, -6 WIS, -4 INT, -2 CHA() Size= Large. Would you say that would be fair? im considering on making a race thats not too over powered but just right. I would love to make a Na'Vi race. From the movie Avatar. i love that movie and i think it would just be awesome to bring it into D&D Wiki. {{unsigned|Powershart}}

:I'm not Green Dragon, but I saw this and thought I'd respond anyway. LA +0 seems low for a large creature, especially one that gets a total of +12 to physical stats. Plus you have exactly offset the physical bonuses with mental penalties, and if we use the orc as a precedent, physical stats are more valuable than mental. (By the way, odd numbered stat increases are generally frowned upon, because they don't add a static bonus/penalty.) I'm not sure that Na'Vi would have low Int or Cha, and they ''definitely'' don't have low Wis. They are very spiritual, insightful creatures; if anything, they should get a Wis bonus. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 14:54, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

::First racial changes should always be even. Second, large size normally means LA 1-2. With the bonus' to dex it could get very overpowered, for example with ranged fighting. I would recommend upping the LA and tonning down the ability score changes and then it could be LA 1. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:49, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Green Dragon

2010-04-29T11:58:25Z

TK-Squared: /* Censorship */

{{:User:Green Dragon/Top Template}}
{{Messages of Interest|messages=
{{MoI-Row
|page=Category_talk:Candidates_for_Deletion
|section=Idea_for_half-completed_pages
|notifier=Jazzman831
|date_time=21:09, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=LA_7_Races&oldid=397215
|section=
|notifier=Green Dragon
|date_time=22:09, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Green_Dragon
|section=Taking Author Information off Pages
|notifier=Jwguy
|date_time=01:40, 6 November 2009 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Detect_Disease_(3.5e_Spell)
|section=Author Template
|notifier=Daniel Draco
|date_time=13:55, 6 October 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Detect_Disease_(3.5e_Spell)
|section=Author Template
|notifier=Daniel Draco
|date_time=03:15, 4 October 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:SRD3e:System_Reference_Document
|section=Basic Character Classes
|notifier=Hooper
|date_time=16:45, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Hooper/Banned_Material
|section=Hugh?
|notifier=Lord Dhazriel
|date_time=17:57, 18 September 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Jason_Bagby
|section=Deletion Template on User Page
|notifier=Hooper
|date_time=17:05, 5 September 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Admin
|section=Transcribed Wizards of the Coast Online Archives
|notifier=TheWarforgedArtificer
|date_time=16:15, 5 September 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Admin
|section=Transcribed Wizards of the Coast Online Archives
|notifier=TheWarforgedArtificer
|date_time=16:01, 5 September 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Deviant_(3.5e_Class)
|section=Author Template
|notifier=Sulacu
|date_time=13:58, 28 August 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Knightwarrior_(3.5e_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Lord Dhazriel
|date_time=21:57, 27 August 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Calidore_Chase
|section=No longer an Admin?
|notifier=Calidore Chase
|date_time=12:51, 15 August 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:Spell
|section=
|notifier=TheWarforgedArtificer
|date_time=00:12, 8 August 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:Spell
|section=
|notifier=TheWarforgedArtificer
|date_time=23:58, 7 August 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Half-Troll_(4e_Race)
|section=Formatting
|notifier=Sepsis
|date_time=14:57, 3 August 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:4e_Power
|section=Strangeness
|notifier=Taritus
|date_time=13:40, 22 July 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:4e_Power
|section=Strangeness
|notifier=Taritus
|date_time=13:39, 22 July 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Ironbound_(DnD_Prestige_Class)
|section=locked
|notifier=GaaaaaH
|date_time=04:59, 12 July 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Dungeons_and_Dragons
|section=DPL?
|notifier=Daniel Draco
|date_time=22:13, 24 June 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:4e_Artifact_Part_1
|section=
|notifier=Sabreheim
|date_time=21:34, 11 June 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Rod_of_Orcus_(4e_Artifact)
|section=Template Issues
|notifier=Sepsis
|date_time=16:08, 11 June 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=User_talk:Green_Dragon
|section=Harassment
|notifier=Sepsis
|date_time=07:45, 31 May 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Giant_(4e_Race)
|section=Response
|notifier=Sepsis
|date_time=07:37, 31 May 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Category_talk:Martial_Adept
|section=
|notifier=Daniel Draco
|date_time=19:57, 28 May 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Nature_Bound_(DnD_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Sabreheim
|date_time=15:26, 28 May 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Daunting_Assailant_(DnD_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Daniel Draco
|date_time=15:46, 8 April 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Regiment_(3.5e_Template)
|section=Can't Access the Page Anymore
|notifier=Aarnott
|date_time=15:27, 6 April 2009 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:Weapon_Desc
|section=
|notifier=Sabre070
|date_time=21:52, 7 November 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Main_Page
|section=Moving to new MediaWiki version
|notifier=Blue Dragon
|date_time=13:36, 28 October 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Bodily_Relics
|section=Talk:Bodily Relics?
|notifier=Rithaniel
|date_time=10:28, 16 October 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:DnD_Abyssal_Heritor_Feats
|section=DPL
|notifier=Aarnott
|date_time=11:08, 28 July 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Soul-Mate_(DnD_Feat)
|section=
|notifier=Xdeletedx
|date_time=23:03, 19 July 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Snake-Sword_(DnD_Equipment)
|section=
|notifier=Eiji
|date_time=02:07, 30 June 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Main_Page
|section=WYSIWYG extension
|notifier=Aarnott
|date_time=10:35, 20 June 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Snow_Silver_(3.5e_Equipment)
|section=
|notifier=Ice Paul the III
|date_time=13:21, 6 June 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Myrmidon_(DnD_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Kisame93
|date_time=08:16, 26 May 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=UA_talk:Variant_Rules
|section=Two Complete Chapters
|notifier=OptimizationFanatic
|date_time=15:15, 11 May 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Expanded_Religions_(DnD_Variant_Rule)
|section=Featured Article Nomination
|notifier=Hawk
|date_time=07:23, 28 March 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Regiment_(DnD_Template)
|section=Call out for help!
|notifier=Aarnott
|date_time=16:58, 17 March 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Template_talk:Main_Page_FA
|section=
|notifier=Sam Kay
|date_time=13:21, 16 March 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Publishers_of_d20_and_D&D_Products
|section=
|notifier=Ramses IV
|date_time=11:15, 16 March 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Mesoamerican_Gods_and_Goddessess_(DnD_Pantheon)
|section=
|notifier=Ramses IV
|date_time=09:59, 16 March 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Marksman_(DnD_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Eiji
|date_time=02:30, 15 March 2008 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Form_talk:DnD_Equipment/Preload
|section=Problems
|notifier=Hawk
|date_time=22:03, 29 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:DnD_Equipment
|section=Cost and Weight
|notifier=Hawk
|date_time=20:06, 29 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Form_talk:DnD_Equipment
|section=Date
|notifier=Hawk
|date_time=19:42, 29 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Catgirl/Nekomusume/Nekomimi_(DnD_Race)
|section=Dogs
|notifier=Xdeletedx
|date_time=16:28, 26 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Brawling_(DnD_Variant_Rule)
|section=Sooo tired...
|notifier=Eiji
|date_time=00:04, 26 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Marksman_(DnD_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Eiji
|date_time=13:11, 24 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:User_Base_Classes
|section=
|notifier=Sledged
|date_time=14:27, 19 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Vest_of_the_Bold_(DnD_Equipment)
|section=
|notifier=Cronocke
|date_time=05:17, 18 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Pedistal_of_Truth_(DnD_Equipment)
|section=Format Format
|notifier=Green Dragon
|date_time=09:40, 16 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Performer_(DnD_Prestige_Class)
|section=
|notifier=Cerin616
|date_time=18:22, 11 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Main_Page
|section=
|notifier=Sam Kay
|date_time=07:20, 5 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Paladin_Mount_from_first_level_(DnD_Variant_Rule)
|section=
|notifier=Sam Kay
|date_time=09:35, 4 February 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Myrmidon_(DnD_Class)
|section=all of it
|notifier=Tetsurga
|date_time=17:54, 31 January 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:DnD_Maps
|section=Maybe this should be in environments after all?
|notifier=EldritchNumen
|date_time=12:32, 3 January 2008 (MST)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Talk:Chromatic_Dwarf_(DnD_Creature)
|section=Race
|notifier=Green Dragon
|date_time=23:45, 1 June 2007 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=Combat_School_(3.5e_Variant_Rule)
|section=
|notifier=Green Dragon
|date_time=23:57, 21 May 2007 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=MediaWiki:Sharedupload
|section=
|notifier=Green Dragon
|date_time=23:01, 14 May 2007 (MDT)
}}
{{MoI-Row
|page=dndmedia:D&D_Wiki_Media_talk:Copyrights
|section=Image documentation
|notifier=Cuthalion
|date_time=14:11, 11 May 2007 (MDT)
}}
}}

{{Archives
|label1= Archive 1 (Discussions 1 – 30)
|label2= Archive 2 (Discussions 31 – 60)
|label3= Archive 3 (Discussions 61 – 90)
|label4= Archive 4 (Discussions 91 – 120)
|label5= Archive 5 (Discussions 121 – 150)
|label6= Archive 6 (Discussions 151 – 180)
|label7= Archive 7 (Discussions 181 – 210)
|label8= Archive 8 (Discussions 211 – 240)
|label9= Archive 9 (Discussions 241 – 270)
|label10= Archive 10 (Discussions 271 – 300)
|label11= Archive 11 (Discussions 301 – 330)
|label12= Archive 12 (Discussions 331 – 360)
|label13= Archive 13 (Discussions 361 – 390)
|label14= Archive 14 (Discussions 391 – 420)
|label15= Archive 15 (Discussions 421 – 450)
}}

== Confusing Edit ==

On [[Snake (4e Creature)|one of my pages]] you recently added [[Template:Wikify]] with the following explanation (and I quote): ''The ":" should not be in the Encounter Groups (see preload or Books for reference). Instead an extra line should be added. ALso either a breadcrumb should be added or the current "Back To" footer condensed ("by Level" etc).'' I am not entirely sure what you're trying to say here. There is no colon anywhere in the Encounter Groups section, nor could I find anything else in that section that seemed off, much less something that warranted the template. The second part is also poorly worded, and all I pulled out of it is that you want me to change the Back To footers in some manner. Please clarify what you want changed, as I really am at a loss O.o --[[User:Dracomortis|Dracomortis]] 18:44, 9 September 2009 (MDT)

:I edited the page. If you look at my last edit does that clear up any confusion? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:56, 10 September 2009 (MDT)

::Oh, I see what happened. You mentioned the Encounter Groups section, but you actually meant the Lore sections. I feel I should point out, however, that the colons are part of the preload and not something that I specifically added. Might be worth removing them from the preload if it is preferred that they not be added. Also, on the issue of the Back To footer, did you mean that instead of this:
:::Back to [[Main Page]] → [[4e Homebrew|Homebrew]] → [[4e Creatures|Creatures]] → [[4e User Creatures by Level|User Creatures by Level]] → [[4e Level 3 Creatures|Level 3 Creatures]].
::It should be condensed to this:
:::Back to [[Main Page]] → [[4e Homebrew|Homebrew]] → [[4e Creatures|Creatures]] → [[4e User Creatures by Level|User Creatures by Level]]
::If so, that's another minor error you might want to look into, as the preload includes the former example and not the latter. Thanks for the clarification. -- [[User:Dracomortis|Dracomortis]] 12:46, 10 September 2009 (MDT)

:::Oh, your right. I meant the lore section instead, sorry. I must have not been thinking at the time. Although the colons have been removed from the preload for quite some while now ([http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=4e_Creature_Preload&diff=next&oldid=287610]). If you store a old copy of the preload on your computer you may want to update it (of course not using the old table and switching to the template (which needs to be updated on the preload sometime). And for the breadcrumb I would just use [[Template:4e Creatures Level 7 Breadcrumb]], etc. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:00, 10 September 2009 (MDT)

::::Ah, that would be the problem then - I've had my copy of the preload saved for several months now. I've added a breadcrumb for each CR on the page (something I normally do but must have forgotten on that page). Thanks again for taking the time to clarify what needed to be changed. -- [[User:Dracomortis|Dracomortis]] 22:17, 13 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::Ya, I know what you mean. I would imagine another main reason is because the template for the creatures is not added as well. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:33, 15 September 2009 (MDT)

== Userpage Gallery Clean Up ==

Noticed you hadn't gotten around to organizing the gallery on your user page. I will probably arrange them for you soon if you don't find the time. As a professional artist myself, a clean gallery is a must. Oh, and your talk page is super long and has a million MOI's on it. Time to clean your room GD. Hehe. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 17:50, 15 September 2009 (MDT)(The OCD guy.)

:Ya, I know. I always clean my userpage with time (see all the archives). Also, I find that the current layout of the pictures has a nice artistic touch; I find the placement to not only invoke thought and wonder but also stretch the images. Although, to be honest, they are slowly getting old on my userpage and I may remove them soon. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:48, 16 September 2009 (MDT)

::Sounds good. You da' boss. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 17:04, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

:::It's my userpage... You are in charge of your userpage. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:22, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

== Recent Tavern Changes ==

Hey, what happened to the tavern? It simply is not working, and the search doesn't seem to be working the same either. Changes? {{Unsigned|Dumai|17:52, 17 September 2009 (MDT)}}

:I need to get a bit more RAM to be able to get the Tavern back up and running with the servers. Most likely I will spend some of the google ads money on buying some more RAM. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:53, 17 September 2009 (MDT)

::What kind of funds need to be raised? Perhaps a fundraiser like years ago?  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 20:54, 17 September 2009 (MDT)

:::I was planning on using some google ads money for RAM but if people think that a little fundraiser should be organized as well I am more then willing. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:57, 17 September 2009 (MDT)

::::I'm sure every bit could help. $5 and $10 here and there can't hurt at least.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 20:59, 17 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::Maybe we could have a vote and see if more users like the tavern or not. Thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:22, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

::::::It could be a good idea. I like the ''idea'' of a wiki chat, but in practice it was nothing more than a distraction from the actual wiki. Voting would be good, especially if removing the tavern could assist in site performance.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 20:29, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::::It is my solemn opinion that the Tavern Chat system should be repaired and remain. My love for it is unconditional, despite the fact that it tends to be immature in many ways and attract the least virtuous of viewers it was a place I could always count on to give me some source of entertainment or conversation, however minimal. One of the greatest delights I had when I used to frequent this site, as I am beginning to do again presently, was popping onto the Tavern in the middle of looking through articles and thinking about what would be useful in a future campaign. I would always find a witty conversationalist or a helpful tinkerer out and about amidst all of the chaos, and it helped to know I was not alone. The Tavern, in my opinion, is a reinforcement of the comradeship of this Wiki, and can be utilized to go there for quick instant messaging communication instead of relatively sluggish editing of each others pages. My piece has been said for now, and my vote is for keeping the Tavern. --[[User:Harry Mason|Harry Mason]] 15:22, 25 September 2009 (MDT)

::::::::Taking the above, and giving it thought, The Tavern can be a great tool. Especially if the former abrasive temperaments are no longer present, it can be a really great way to bring in new wiki users. Combing through the old logs shows that many potential users were ran off because of the attitude within it. But as Harry shows above, even with that it did great things. Perhaps we should place this discussion on "hold" until the tavern is ready to come back online, and then hold it in a better place so all can discuss ways to make the tavern better and more manageable?  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 15:30, 25 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::::::Bullocks. The crowd that used the tavern (with a few notable exceptions) constantly strayed off-topic, and it came out as bunch of sentence fragments that tried to be witty and failed miserably. Especially TK's "Your mama" jokes, for instance.... I go on there looking for feedback on my work, and everybody would rather take cheap shots than actually offer constructive advice. Although I hate to say it, but for all his snide attitude, Surgo did point me toward Frank Trollman's material... --[[User:Mythos Specialist|Mythos]] 02:56, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

::::::::::Well do you guys think it helped more or hurt more? All we need to do is vote... It is all opinion; nothing to discuss. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:27, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::::::::It has been discontinued. See also [[Discussion:The Tavern: use, expansion, and availability.]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:17, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

== Recent Activity Lessening? ==

Do we even have anybody left who still posts here? Besides us three, that is... --[[User:Mythos Specialist|Mythos]] 10:59, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

:Yes, the site has been just as active lately as ever, only the 'tavern crowd' is gone. The site is improving on a daily basis and will continue to do so. In the last 30 days alone there have been over 42 active users (plus plenty of IP edits), so yes, yes we are very active considering.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 11:05, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

::Thank God. I hated having to go in there to ask for feedback and getting sarcastic commentary. Maybe it's funny to the younger users, but to an old-timer like myself it seemed pretty juvenile and pointless. -- [[User:Mythos Specialist|Mythos]] 13:09, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

:::Same here. I put up with it for years but recently started treating them the same way they treat others and they literally can not handle it. They freak out. Really pathetic actually. I hope this helps others learn how to be properly collaborative in the future.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 15:44, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

== Media's Mediawiki ==

In going through the media side of the site, I've noticed many users have basically used it as a personal storage unit. It is filled with images that are not used in any articles whatsoever (though unlike wikipedia our images don't always say what pages link to them, odd...). I was wondering if a purging of the mediawiki would help improve the server performance?  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 14:52, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

:I concur. Many of the images I uploaded, (as awesome as the are), are no longer linked to an article. It certainly sounds like a good idea. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 16:58, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

::No. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:20, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

== Possible Ban Circumvention ==

I think [[User:Ghostwheel|Ghostwheel]] has already paid enough and his ban is over in two day, amybe we could unblock him so he can actually tell his version of the facts? I don't want to do it myself in case you disagreed, it why I ask. --[[User:Lord Dhazriel|Dhazriel]] 18:42, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

:I strongly disagree with this. Firstly, there is no side of any story, as it was just a personal subpage note. Secondly, he showed his lack of respect to honor the ban when he broke policy and posted using his IP. If anything, his ban should be prolonged for that reason alone.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 18:47, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

::Your both mistaken. With Check User [[User:Ghostwheel|Ghostwheel]] has not been posting. Or which IP do you mean? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:53, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

:::He admitted to it on Surgo's page on the other wiki as well as on another user's page there. I would link, but don't want to spam, as I feel as though that may be.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 18:56, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

::::[http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=3258703 OBJECTION!] [http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=3258715 DURR...] [http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=3258720 PWNED!] [http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=3258730 UHOH...] [http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=3258734 2xPWNED!] [http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=3258738 WTFPWNED!] --[[User:208.90.100.111|208.90.100.111]] 11:41, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::All I would need is the IP... It's called "Chck User" (please use google at this moment if you are not positive as to what I am talking about). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:19, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

== Green Dragon and I ==

This may seem redundant to you ''(GD)'' and I, but I thought it would be good to note that we are not the same individual, do not always agree (nor even agree a lot of the times), nor do we even know each other offline. Before the rumors get started, even though some already have.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 18:56, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

:I don't know you... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:42, 18 September 2009 (MDT)

== Removing Template:Author ==

Would you please refrain from removing author templates from (my) articles? Whether or not they've priorly been marked for deletion, they should remain associated with their respective principal authors, as per article 4B of [[D&D Wiki:Copyrights|D&D Wiki:Copyrights]]. Thank you. --[[User:Sulacu|Sulacu]] 00:01, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

:History as well... As explained over and over again. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:17, 19 September 2009 (MDT)

::And I am asking you over and over again to refrain from removing the author templates. Being the person identified in the history of these particular pages as the first editor makes this request more than reasonable. --[[User:Sulacu|Sulacu]] 08:04, 20 September 2009 (MDT)

:::It seems you decided to respond to my aforementioned reasonable request by making [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Ghast%2C_Deathless_%283.5e_Creature%29&oldid=415512 this] and several other similar edits to my pages, in which you removed yet more author boxes and more references to my personal user category from my pages. What, are you just going to ignore me and merrily continue this scandalous behaviour instead without the courtesy of a direct response? I don't remotely care how much 'cleaner' you think the history is, I will not stand for seeing my work vandalized. ''Not even by site admins! Am I finally getting through to you?''
:::If you want to erase all evidence of my existence from this wiki for what happened back in August, then fine. Delete all my stuff. ''All of it.'' And I'll be happy to stay gone. If you're unwilling to do that, then don't touch it. I expected such sensible and gentlemanly conduct to go without saying, but apparently the word ethics does not mean a thing to you. This is the last time I will ask you this in a civil manner. --[[User:Sulacu|Sulacu]] 12:57, 26 September 2009 (MDT)

::::Usercontributions. Like how one looks at my contributions to some articles. History. This is to see who has done what to which article. One more non-logical response and I will issue a ban to you. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:41, 26 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::"''Usercontributions. Like how one looks at my contributions to some articles. History. This is to see who has done what to which article.''"
:::::... What are these sentence fragments even supposed to mean? The only responses I see that are incoherent and devoid of any logic are yours. Are you just being deliberately vague so you'd have a solid excuse to ban me when I respond? That's not to say that I ''ever'' saw ''anyone'' getting ''anything'' close to a ban for 'non-logic' back when I signed onto this wiki in May 2007. I never saw anyone getting their author box deleted from their articles back then either. Even omitting the fact that the author boxes disappear from my articles, what possible justification could you have for deleting my ''personal user-based category'' (<nowiki>[[Category:User Sulacu]]</nowiki>) from the article pages as well? That's like taking pages out of my user page's dpl lists. Isn't that like undermining the system of my pages on your wiki, as well as a form of 'orphaning pages' or whatever it is called (hence, 'vandalism', if you're too logic-deficient to see where I'm going)?
:::::Seriously, I've had more than enough of your stupid antics, and your pigheaded falling back upon your new favorite word, 'non-logic', which you seem to invoke primarily when people say something you don't like. As a faithful and dedicated contributor to your wiki for over two whole years, and the creator of over three hundred standing pages of homebrew articles currently displayed on the site, please honor my final request to leave those pages be, and stop being such a freaking bludger. A little admission on your side will make this whole affair a lot less smelly, and both our lives a lot easier. --[[User:Sulacu|Sulacu]] 14:27, 26 September 2009 (MDT)

::::::Banned. One needs to be understand civility and understand who is who on D&D Wiki. Stop just pestering people and making problems where none exist. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:25, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::::Out of curiosity, why was Sulacu banned? She was obviously upset that her name was being removed from the things that she had created, so it's not like she did anything wrong. I mean, I know I've not been here a long time, but Sulacu seems to have posted a high amount of quality homebrew, so shouldn't she be entitled to have her name on what she's made? I guess it may just be thinking aloud though. But really, consider if someone should be banned for voicing objections to losing the right to the things they made. I think a good example is if say someone took the Dandwiki from you Green, and removed every trace of you from it. Wouldn't you be upset and slightly protest against it? Obviously I'm not saying that that should happen, but I feel that it is a good example. Please reconsider this flurry of author removals, people merely just want to keep their name on what they've devoted time and effort into. --[[User:Dersius|Dersius]] 16:11, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

::::::::Although I won't comment on the ban, as far as comparing having a wiki that GD pays to maintain and content that a user freely posts online, it isn't really a good example.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 18:03, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::::::For the last time or your getting banned too; it's history and usercontributions. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:57, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

::::::::::What? Is this really what it's come to? I've never talked to you before and you are threatening to ban me for attempting to give my opinion and suggestions on something? Isn't this supposed to be a community-run site? I'm sorry, I'm just a little confused as to why it's suddenly everyone being banned for speaking. You didn't even answer my question, so obviously you are ignoring the average user, which isn't the path that any admin should take. If you feel like being a dictator and banning everyone, go ahead. Go ahead and ban every last person that brought quality work to this wiki. Go ahead and ban until there's no one left except for your butt-buddy troll Hooper and yourself. I'm through here. It used to be a nice place to come to and the community was friendly, and the few times you stopped in the tavern, it was nice to talk to you. What happened to you? Whatever. It doesn't matter. This wiki is going downhill in quality, I just think you are blind to it right now, but you'll realize it here soon. Hooper, I know you are probably reading this too. Stop instigating things over at the Wikia. If you leave us alone, we'll leave you alone. I know I personally just want this whole thing to end and for the separation to be finished quickly and painlessly. With that note, I fully expect to be banned by the dictatorship that this wiki has turned into. Just remember, the First Amendment is in place to protect the unpopular opinion, and you are crushing it beneath your heel by banning everyone who isn't Hooper. Just remember that you ruined your wiki by driving off those that kept it running smoothly. --[[User:Dersius|Dersius]] 20:12, 28 September 2009.

:::::::::<code>"''... butt-buddy troll Hooper ...''", and "''What happened to you?''" (direct rudeness: name-calling, ill-considered accusations of impropriety) (1:1).''</code> --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:17, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::::I have never said anything to anyone from wikia in my life. You don't know me — don't say that. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:17, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

::::::::::::He said that Hooper was instigating things at wikia.. Geez, if this is the way the administration of this site is I'm not going to put my homebrew on here, I'm going to make sure the people I know don't ruin their work by having it stolen by this wiki.

{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}

:As I haven't even visited the other in seemingly forever, and you guys are here still causing problems - well, you get the picture. Are you done calling people who don't know each other "butt buddys" while also calling them the trolls ''(??? - Irony?)'' so that we can get back to work? You state ''"If you leave us alone, we'll leave you alone."'' yet here you are, when no one is messing with you. Either contribute or stop starting problems. Thanks in advance for your cooperation.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 06:34, 29 September 2009 (MDT)

::I don't have any take on Sulacu or any other user on this site, really. I only came in and started editing recently, after all, myself. I have been thinking on this for a while, though. Why ''exactly'' is author information being taken off of pages? Watch and History are reasonably insufficient in accrediting the idea of a creature or idea to authors, even if not so terribly important. Since it's homebrew, anyways, I am sure it's not so bad to afford someone that little bit of pride in seeing their name in the author template of their articles. Also, which articles are subject to this? So far, I've only ever seen creatures having their templates removed, which I don't quite understand. [[User:Jwguy|Jwguy]] 01:42, 6 November 2009 (MST)

::::I never said anyone was doing anything on Wikia. I could care less about Wikia — people going to a different site is not a war in my mind. D&D Wiki (about now) averages 8,000 unique visitors a day — I don't care about you. A war is a war in my mind. Think about logically — why in hells name would I care? As long as you guys do not transfer any content from D&D Wiki to Wikia (all the content here is under the GNU FDL v1.2 - putting it under the CC is a violation of the law and liable to be sued) or doing anything related (please see the GNU FDL - I, as the owner of D&D Wiki have the rights, additionally I, as the owner, can invoke aspects of the GNU FDL v1.2 as I wish too).
::::And why is the author template being removed? It hinders reading, and hinders a wiki-structure (editing for improvement not just saying "mine mine mine", etc.) Most people, before editing, do check history and before use many do too (seeing something from an IP is less likely as something, say, which comes from an established user). It just hurts the wiki - removing it helps the overall structure. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:19, 6 November 2009 (MST)

:::::I personally feel as though the author template adds a bit of authenticity to articles of homebrew. Sure, while in some cases, items simply are corrupted or bettered by the many anonymous edits that are to be expected on the internet, but in other cases, it's a nice gesture of pride to find an idea or page that you're proud of, and have your name sitting at the top. All as well, while I may not agree, It's not important, and I suppose I can understand that as a sufficient reason. Thank you for answering. [[User:Jwguy|Jwguy]] 19:50, 6 November 2009 (MST)

::::::(Haha, Jwguy is editing in above me.) Hopefully the author box will be completely removed from all articles and preloads. This is a Wiki. No article submitted to the site is considered static and unchanging. Should you wish to keep your pet projects to yourself, do not submit them here. Under every edit box are the words "''If you don't want your writing to edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here.''" You have been warned and forewarned. Author boxes are a privilege, not a right. Again, hopefully they will be universally removed. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 15:54, 6 November 2009 (MST)

:::::::Okay, I agree that's it a kind of a gesture of pride to see ones username on a page... But it's also a wiki. However another reason for the removed I see is that it creates editing problems. For example sometimes when I am playing I print something out, correct it, however do not change it since I do not want to have to talk to that author about it. If I was not the owner (rather a standard user or IP) I imagine I would feel more inclined and accepted to change it freely. I feel it creates more freedom for the perfection of content. However I see both sides. Currently I removed them from 4e deities, 4e races, and the preload for 4e creatures (and a few their). Personally I would like to wait a matter of months and see how those sections respond. Already I have seen positive improvements from the 4e deities section by IP's - which is a good sign - however it is still to early to say. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:39, 6 November 2009 (MST)

::::::::Sorry, it was my understanding from most of the wikis that I've been that the colon indentation is used to identify who is replying to whom, as well as keep track of subject. I read your post, Jay, but simply had nothing to say about it, so I went ahead and continued to reply towards Green Dragon's last post, which is the reason for the way I posted. I had assumed this was normal.

::::::::That said, I don't mind, either way. I appreciate you taking the time to appease my curiousity on this matter, however, Green dragon. As said, I like the idea of the authenticity and author templates, but they don't matter so much as to fight over them, to me. If it comes down to it, I'll go around taking them down, myself; I just wanted to get the reasoning for it before I conjectured any of my own, which you've provided, certainly. I can realize what problems you see for it, and they are well based and reasonable for it's exclusion, so really it's just my opinion that differs. Functionality is more important when it comes to this kind of site, I believe, and pride, while a encouraging thing as well, is subservient to that. [[User:Jwguy|Jwguy]] 21:49, 6 November 2009 (MST)

:::::::::@ Jwguy. No problem bro. I figured you had a good reason anyway. Thanks for being so vocal about your opinions. Your not the only one who feels the way you do. Keep up the good work. Peace! --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 22:33, 6 November 2009 (MST)

== Why Did You Delete the Bloodline I Posted? ==

I'd like to know why you deleted the optional Bloodline (Brachyurus) I developed and posted.

The only comment I see, and its only a single line in the deletion log, is "This is not OGL".

I would appreciate ''some'' explanation. At the very least, the minimum courtesy of informing me. To top it off, you ''also'' deleted the Discussion topic I started in which I asked for any feedback.

If you don't want new people posting anything, just say so. --[[User:Reddir|reddir]] 21:29, 21 September 2009 (MDT).

:It is from the [[Epic Level Handbook]], right? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:00, 21 September 2009 (MDT)

::It is also, according to your [[SRD:Brachyurus|website]], in the SRD? And the Bloodline was entirely my own construction; I am not aware of anything similar that has been published. None of which explains why you would delete the Discussion where I ask for feedback - a perfect place, I would think, to have this discussion. --[[User:Reddir|reddir]] 23:58, 21 September 2009 (MDT)

:::That's ones not from the [[Epic Level Handbook]]... That's SRD (probably MM or who knows). If the bloodlines was your ''own'' creation ''DO NOT'' put "this is from the [[Epic Level Handbook]]" on the bottom of the page. Also [[DnD Discussion|Discussions]] are for ''questions'' (not like a forum...). If you want something reviewed, like always, post it on the damn talk page. Not their. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:19, 22 September 2009 (MDT)

::::You are saying that you really thought I copied the bloodline from the Epic Level Handbook? Have you seen the UA style Bloodlines ''anywhere'' but in UA? And does that mean you did not even bother reading what I had written on the Talk page before you deleted it all?
::::Anyway, are you saying you would be fine with me posting the Brachyurus Bloodline I designed if I make it clear that I was the one who put it together?
::::re: Discussions, ok, I hadn't realized it was not a forum. Still, I would have appreciated ''some'' information ''somewhere'' about why you deleted my work. --[[User:Reddir|reddir]] 16:48, 22 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::This is what I saw:
:::::<nowiki> ==== Brachyurus ====</nowiki>
:::::<nowiki> </nowiki>
:::::<nowiki> [[SRD:Brachyurus|Brachyurus]] is the Platonic wolf/canine from the Epic Level Handbook. </nowiki>
:::::<nowiki> {| class="{{d20}}" style="text-align: left;"</nowiki>
:::::<nowiki> |+ {{#anc:Brachyurus Bloodline Traits}}</nowiki>
:::::(from a deleted revisions preview). Or is that part just superficial? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:02, 23 September 2009 (MDT)

::::::Should I assume you noticed the "SRD:Brachyurus|Brachyurus" portion of what you quoted? --[[User:Reddir|reddir]] 23:11, 23 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::::That's called a piped link... Not sure if you have ever heard of formatting or not. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:33, 23 September 2009 (MDT)

::::::::It seems clear that you are taking the issues behind this discussion much less seriously than I am. Therefore I will stop wasting my time with you. --[[User:Reddir|reddir]] 23:52, 23 September 2009 (MDT)

:::::::::That is a PIPED link. Without the piped link it looks like: "Brachyurus is the Platonic wolf/canine from the Epic Level Handbook."... let's see... can that be here? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:23, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

== When do Unrated homebrew prestige classes become Rated? ==

My Void Knight prestige class now has 2 ratings (3 if my own counts), and I was just wondering how/when exactly the unrated classes were relisted as rated. Edit: Forgot to sign [[User:Desril|Desril]] 15:09, 30 September 2009 (MDT)

:Really it is just a matter of doing the switch. You can alter that yourself.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 18:46, 27 September 2009 (MDT)

::Once all the ratings have been added one can. Although one cannot just create rating; [[User:Hooper|Hooper]] should have said that one can correct the ratings from the talk page onto the articles page. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:41, 27 September 2009 (MDT)

:::Yes, after reading my post I should clarify that once rated you can add that information to the class page with the proper rating it was given shown.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 07:14, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

::::Also, if you want to help rate things, please feel free. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:21, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

== Spheres in relation to the Tome of Fiends ==

The sphere pages connected to the Tome of Fiends, namely the Bone, Venom, Carnage and Bubbles, I believe, that you have already reverted, are ''not'', to my knowledge thus far, User items, and are in the sourcebook. Adding the User Category, on that level, is not necessary, nor correct, and it also interferes with the function on the page for the [[Tome_of_Fiends_(3.5e_Sourcebook)/Spheres_and_Feats#Fiendish_Spheres|Spheres]] listing, which has been separated so that User-made Spheres and Official Spheres from the Sourcebook can be better recognized.

If you feel that you are undeniably correct in maintaining that the Spheres you are moving are User made and that perhaps I have been mistaken, please state so and proceed, but if not, and I believe they are not, they should be as they were before the reverting. [[User:Jwguy|Jwguy]] 23:17, 27 September 2009 (MDT)

:Tome Material is not official material from established publisers or OGL - it is just homebrew Frank & K stuff. Thus, it is User content. It is hard to define something as "official" when it is all entirely user homebrew - even if that user homebrew is well established.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 07:13, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

::Well could we use that Tome article as the rule source? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:21, 28 September 2009 (MDT)
::This is, admittedly, true, given the nature of the Tome of Fiends, itself. Even in that case, however, the Tome of Fiends has no user category, and as a sourcebook, I use 'official' to simply designate those spheres which were created along with the sourcebook. I feel it would be best to separate the Homebrew'd spheres, in respect to the Tome, from those included by the authors, if only to maintain that the standard provided by the author shouldn't be confused with the likely standards of added-in spheres.

::That all said and done, I could simply use another category, which I don't have much of a problem with; I'm rather delightfully partial to the Tome of Fiends, myself, and the Spheres even more. I just want to get it looking nice and neat, and without as much clutter and fully distinguishing their authors. So, that said, what is going to be used for the categories? [[User:Jwguy|Jwguy]] 21:10, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

== WikiRPS ==

I saw you had did some alterations to the navigation. I was wondering if a link to the WikiRPS site would help get some more activity over there? Or if you're even still interested in that. Just curious as to the goals/future of that project.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 10:36, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

:They have their own wiki since a while now; [http://www.wikirps.org/wiki/Main_Page WikiRPS] (although using the same things, etc). I don't understand what your question is (see also [[DnD Variant Rules]]). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:18, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

::Yes, I know they do. I guess my question is: "Do you think it would be beneficial to include a link to that wiki on our navigation here, perhaps near where we link to the media repository?"  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 13:48, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

:::We do. It's linked to from [[DnD Variant Rules]]; as discussed and implemented since a long time. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:50, 28 September 2009 (MDT)

== Incorrect Adoptionations ==

Y HALO THAR. Recently I adopted a dozen or so pages because I have some future plans with them, and the original owner, Sulacu, is gone and all. I noticed you reversed those adoptions. Is something the matter, we're permitted to adopt unnamed and user-less articles are we not? Even more so if we actually have permission from the original owner? If you could redo those adoptions for me, that sure would be swell, it makes it easier to find when I don't have to comb through the history and just look up "User Eiji". Domo arigato desu desu desu-chan, ie! -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 21:00, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

:Eiji, your recent discussions in the chat your splinter group is using showcases those adoptions as bad faith adoptions. However, even with that fact, I can't speak for GD's decision. I believe a previous editor said "just stay away and leave us alone" and that has been our wiki's attitude. I humbly request you follow suit. Thanks.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 21:02, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

::Hi Hooper-desu! ''':D''' Well, it's very good faith actually, but the lower caste aren't supposed to talk to the upper caste. Wink wink, joke joke, nudge nudge. Anyway, I'm actually still active here (out of necessity, but that's a discussion for another time), so I can't leave.
::Anyway, awaitin' the Green Drag-man. I'll just leave this 'ere. -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 21:11, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

:::As your most recent quote on the subject was the following: ''"the reason I'd adopt them is to keep GD's dirty mitts off them"'' as stated in your IRC channel, I'd say that clearly constitutes a bad faith adoption. Alas, however, GD shall tell us both how it went down, so I agree with your thoughts on waiting for him.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 21:14, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

::::Where'd I say that? That's silly Hooper. -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 21:16, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::If GD requests it he will be shown proof of that and other things you've said of recent regarding the adoption. Ever since that chat channel decided to bring up the idea of using pirate software against this site I've daily logged on and pulled that day's chats from it. Thankfully, nothing as vile as the pirate attack threats has been discussed since.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 21:18, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

::::::Of course not. You know, internet... it's full of people who talk for the hell of it, and talk is cheap. Why just yesterday I was claiming to be wearing a dress, when I was really wearing TWO dresses. :D But Hooper, we've gotten totally off the subject, so, for Green Dragon's sake I'm reseting the indent and reposting my point (I hope he doesn't mind). {{Unsigned|Eiji|20:23, 1 October 2009 (MDT)}}

:::::::Just placing my 2 cents Hooper but is it entirely ethical/legal to record and store chats without notifying those being recorded? Just wondering if perhaps playing secret agent in the chat room is the best use of your time which should be invested in this wiki, not in the wikia. Back on topic: if an article is up for adoption, what makes one user more or less worthy of adoption than another? One who has made as many contributions as Eiji is certainly able to competently handle an article, unless you are saying you trust a complete stranger to claim ownership of the article over an established contributor to this wiki. --[[User:Ehsteve|Ehsteve]] 21:34, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

::::::::You did it wrong... And D&D Wiki is fine; no malicious software should be able to do much of anything. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:49, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::::::Ah, I'm doing it wrong? Well then, how may I do it right so I can get them re-adopted? -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 22:51, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

::::::::::Just don't. Just edit the damn things; it makes much much more sense (your name is added, what you did is shown, and you can create a link repository at a usersubpage of pages which ''relate'' to you, one can look with ''my watchlist'' the pages as they change, etc etc. [[Template:Author]] is just more of a hassle then much else (history; when created; does not change). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:56, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::::::::Explain that second part to me again? I'm trying to get the pages to appear on my User: Eiji page so I don't have to search through recent changes (also, I'd like credit for adopting them too, but I haven't bothered yet to look/copy paste the ownership box/dunno how to go about that). Anyway, the link repository is what I'm currently doing with my pages right, having them appear in my User: Eiji page automatically instead of linking them one by one. -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 22:58, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

::::::::::::{{quote|...and you can create a link repository at a usersubpage of pages which ''relate'' to you...
|orig=--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:56, 1 October 2009 (MDT)
}}
::::::::::::--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:04, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::::::::::Sorry, might be a little slow but... uh, I don't get it. Can you rephrase it in a different way, as right now it seems like you're saying we can't put things on our User page we didn't originally make and just adopted. Or... something, I'm not really sure. Thanks in advance. -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 23:08, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}

:Right; for example I have nothing (theoretically) to do with the images on my userpage. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:16, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

::Oooh. Aww, that makes me sad... that means we aren't allowed to adopt anymore (at least, not in the normal sense of "I now own this", we can only edit... but then, so can everyone's else so it's a moot point). Well, there's nothing I can do. ''':(''' They were nice articles too.
::Oh well. /thread and all. -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 23:18, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

:::Ya, but I find that usercontributions are much better then [[Template:Author]] and I find that when using history everything is much more fair then under the [[Template:Author]] system (each edit is that edit; not under someone elses' name). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:22, 1 October 2009 (MDT)

::::Posting under an IP because I don't want Hooper to think that I am an active user of this wiki (GD, he is seriously retarded and I would avoid giving him adminship at any point unless you want this place crashing down even worse -- I can easily back up this claim with evidence, just look at 90% of his contribs on talk pages). Anyways... To clarify, are you saying that the Author template is pointless to have on articles? Should we remove it from every article? --[[User:208.90.101.99|208.90.101.99]] 06:23, 2 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::Personal attacks should be refrained from, and they make any point you think you have become lost in your antics "anonymous". This isn't a forum for insanity or attacks or opinions, take that to salin.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 07:15, 2 October 2009 (MDT)

::::::I apologize -- that comment was out of line and pretty immature. I'm still a little sore over what happened and when I do visit this wiki (in this case I was responding to a private email about an optimized build I wrote a while back), I do the stupid thing of looking at the recent changes and get bothered by what is going on. This was my "home" for a long time after all. I can take a conversation up privately with you if you want to discuss why I think many of your actions are bad for the wiki, but needless to say, I sincerely hope that [[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] does not make you an admin until your behavior changes. I say that out of my old dedication to this wiki, not my new found bitterness. But, as I said, this is something for a private conversation and doesn't belong here on GD's talk page.

:::::::Thank you. I'm not seeking adminship, nor do I personally feel I need to be anything close to an admin, so I doubt such a conversation is necessary. [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 07:57, 2 October 2009 (MDT)

::::::To restate my questions to GD: "Are you saying that the Author template is pointless to have on articles? Should we remove it from every article?" --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 07:53, 2 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::::They do seem to hinder articles at time; however that is a long process. I say we should work on things which are a little more handalable at the moment. Maybe with in the year or two; who knows. Or what are your opinions and thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:43, 2 October 2009 (MDT)

== Euhm.... ==

Well, something very strange is happening here... I'd say adopting things to keep them safe is in good faith, and it is my perhaps not very humble opinion that playing secret agent in a chatroom is quite unethical. Additionally, I think it's unethical to remove an author's name from the front of the page, since that's where the focus is, no matter where else information on the original author can be found. Furthermore, I agree with some arguments brought in against Green Dragon, seeing as he acts in a seemingly random manner, getting angry and threatening with bans for little reason.

I tried (much earlier) to reason with both parties, and GD didn't even answer. Not ever.

I'm taking my creations. I created them, so they are my property, and I do not care which laws you quote. According to some test and multiple real-life experiences, I turn out to be CG, and I cannot abide a regime like this. I shan't use guerilla tactics or whatever to negative effect for this wiki, because it is rather pointless; it will be dead by itself without my interference soon enough. To summarize, I take possession of my work, and I will not comply with any attempts to restore them.

Further reasons for abandoning this wiki include a disturbing lack of interest in discussion pages; no one has shown an interest in several things I pointed out in several different discussion pages, and rather few of my own things where commented upon (seeing as I mean to implement those things I find interesting or design myself, I'd like a little more discussion about things like balance and powerlevel). Another point is the apparent failure of internal consistency in at least some creatures of the animal type and a tendency not to do anything about it.

I bid you adieu. I expect my pages to remain gone when I have removed them, and I expect there will not be a problem with that. I have no need for either wiki laws or dictatorial outlashings (they should be mutually exclusive, but reality proves to be otherwise, ey?), and I shall not abide either. [[User:Deranged|Deranged]] 16:18, 2 October 2009 (MDT)

:Imitating behavior/harassment. Banned. Content is content, usercontributions are usercontributions, and history is history. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:43, 3 October 2009 (MDT)

== WTF ==

Why is the tavern not working, still?! It's been nearly three months? {{Unsigned|Zetsumeimaru|17:52, 3 October 2009 (MDT)}}

:I know... One the servers got changed around a bit and as such the tavern is not configured right; another is that, as a discussion, we are not positive if we want a chat room. It seems to be there are differing opinions about. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:40, 3 October 2009 (MDT)

== Elaboration ==

:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:Omniarcanist of Caladon (3.5e Prestige Class)#Epic]] --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:18, 13 October 2009 (MDT).''

== Just looking... ==

I was just looking through some history and can I ask what MW is in reference to here:

"I restored all of the deleted pages right after they were wrongly deleted. Please learn something about MW before posting here (it's comparable to '''clicking''' the links above and '''looking''' at them). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:52, 10 September 2009 (MDT)"

Thanks. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 15:15, 15 October 2009 (MDT)

:MW is always MediaWiki. Where was this response? If you source it or supply a link I can better let you know what I meant. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:06, 20 October 2009 (MDT)

::It is on [[Requests for Adminship/Surgo2|Surgo's nomination]] for adminship. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 01:44, 22 October 2009 (MDT)

:::Surgo was not following the deletion policy. I had to restore pages he/she wrongly deleted. For this to make more sense to you maybe [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=delete&user=Surgo&page=&pattern=&limit=500&offset=0 This (&limit=500)] is a better associated link (the blue links are restored - the red are deleted). If you see any other problems please let me know (where he/she deleted good content). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:49, 25 October 2009 (MDT)

::::With the current deletion policy (That on [[:Category:Candidates for Deletion]]) he did not break any rules. It states: "In most cases 14 days after a page is nominated for deletion it will be deleted." Hence, there was no reason for those not to be deleted. Either that or you use the argument that it also says: "When nominating an incomplete page for deletion please make sure that it is not being actively improved upon." Which implies that it must be an incomplete page, though on a wiki nothing is ever complete so that cannot be an argument against it. I would like to know how you think that Surgo wasn't following the deletion policy and then we can amend it to make it clearer. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 22:41, 25 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::The pages had zero reason to be deleted. Were nominated for deletion a day before and were deleted right after. That's breaking the rules. Watch out; or you'll get banned. I've explained this 100000 times. I'm done explaining it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:47, 25 October 2009 (MDT)

::::::Actually, you had never explained that on Surgo's nomination page (and I haven't seen it anywhere else). They were nominated for deletion at least two weeks before: Aug 13 2009 nomination and 4 September 2009 deletion for many of them. There reason for deletion was that the author did not want them on the wiki, in the past that has been accepted though after recent events it was decided un-officially that it would not be, this was not put on the deletion page. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 23:08, 25 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::::Oh, your right about the times. That's probably why I did not say that on the nomination. It's because it is good content - one should never delete good content. "''I restored all of the deleted pages right after they were wrongly deleted.''" --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:19, 25 October 2009 (MDT)

::::::::I still think we need to clarify the deletion policy. Though my thoughts on the articles on this wiki are that they should be owned by the contributers and can be deleted by them if they wish. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 05:03, 26 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::::::That's not how they are. They are under the GNU FDL "''If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here.''" for example. If one reads the the GNU FDL 1.2 then you will see more as to what I am talking about. And the deletion time frame is a little variable - the important part is that no playable, good, etc content gets deleted. That's the main idea. If you read the "Adminship" message it explains deletion a bit from an admin side and the category explains deletion from a wiki-side. Please keep in mind that was just Surgo's 2nd adminship - not the reason for (h)im/er being banned. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:03, 26 October 2009 (MDT)

== Edit Summary Question ==

You just told me what barnstars are, and I thank you, though I had guessed their purpose, 'twas a kind gesture. But I was wondering why you edited it with the summary "Discussions get archived not removed....". Would you care to elaborate on your reasoning, or was it not pertaining to me? --[[User:SgtLion|SgtLion]] 13:14, 20 October 2009 (MDT)

:Basically, don't just delete something from your page, archive it. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 15:09, 20 October 2009 (MDT)

::Yes, you may not have noticed, but if you look at the actual [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SgtLion&diff=420227&oldid=420152 diff] in question, he re-added the welcome message you had previously removed. That was what he was actually talking about in the summary.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 16:16, 20 October 2009 (MDT)

:::I replied and used the edit summary to explain my edit. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:05, 20 October 2009 (MDT)

::::Ah, right, that was a mistake on my part. Thank you, everyone. --[[User:SgtLion|SgtLion]] 23:59, 20 October 2009 (MDT)

== Talosoi ==

A few days ago, I created the talosoi, a race of apelike people who live in dense jungles and ride giant wasps around. I decided to put it here, to share it with everyone else. But, since I didn't know anything about wiki formatting then, I put all of the separate types of talosoi as its own creature. Before I could realize my mistake, I put 6 new creatures on here, each of them a different talosoi (eg Talosoi Archer, Talosoi Shaman, Talosoi Chieftan, etc.). I wanted to know if there was anyway I could move all of those creatures to a single page. If was not, I would want to know if I could delete these pages and start again with the same creatures, but just under a different name (instead of talosoi, then it would be toldosoi or something like that). Thanks! {{Unsigned|Breo sabre|20:50, 21 October 2009 (MDT)}}

:If you merge them all onto one page (save the ones you cannot - the mounts; wasps, etc.) and add [[Template:Delete]] to the now merged ones it should cover your problem. Although one ''can'' "merge" all the pages together with their respective revision histories it's a long process and complicated; it's easier this way. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:00, 21 October 2009 (MDT)

== D20 Modern Material ==

:''Discussion moved from [[User talk:Tabris#D20/4e Issues]]'' --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:42, 27 October 2009 (MDT)

Please do not move my weapon contributions (namely flashbang, phosphorus grenade and smoke bomb.) as they were not made for d20 modern but instead as homebrew weapons for the dnd 4e game which I DM for.

If there is a way to set my creations to private please let me know as I do not want my contributions to be edited at all. I like them as they are but I do not know how to change the editing options to locked/protected. {{Unsigned|Tabris|01:23, 27 October 2009 (MDT)}}

:Please read the warning when you are editing on the site. It reads as follows: ''"If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here."''.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 06:36, 27 October 2009 (MDT)

::Thats not helpful at all Hooper, I'm aware of this however my equipment is posted under 4e equipment for a reason: It's 4e equipment {{Unsigned|Tabris|15:27, 27 October 2009 (MDT)}}

:::I believe that the reasons some of the pages have been misappropriated is that they were not all originally coded the way fourth edition material should of been, giving the appearance of D&D or D20 equipment. Admins are busy so it is easy to see how that may have been the issue. Anyways, please note that the identifier on the pages should read "(4e Equipment)" not "(4E Equipment)" and in the future I wouldn't edit war with an admin, just make a nice and simple explanation and ask why they think something is not what it is ''(i.e. in this case just ask what is giving GD the impression it is D20 equipment and then fix that before doing all this reverting)''. Just usually not a good idea to remove admin edits.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 16:28, 27 October 2009 (MDT)

::::Please sign your posts using four tildes, like so: <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>. Please see your talk page for more info.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 16:29, 27 October 2009 (MDT)

:::::You can move them to a subuserpage of your userpage area; at most (keeping them 4e) and changing the templates around so they do not show up anywhere. Simply flashbang grenades, phosphorus grenades and smoke bombs do not fit into 4e. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:42, 27 October 2009 (MDT)

== Editing, Overdeity ==

Hey, I got a question about the deities. When making them, I'm confused about how to write the "What type of god is it" part. If you look Saran up, you see on the page, there is that error, I need help on that. Thanks! {{Unsigned|CelticHippie|20:17, 28 October 2009 (MDT)}}

:That should help. See the diff in question to see the edit change. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:52, 28 October 2009 (MDT)

== Canidates for Deletion ==

Hey GD. I was looking through some of the articles in the Deletion Catagory. There are more than a few that have been unedited and abandoned for many months. I say this because I have about 15 articles I made myself that need to be deleted. How often does this site clear out those pages? Thanks. (Wow, I just noticed their are 3 pages worth of stuff waiting to be deleted. Almost 500 articles.) --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 02:31, 29 October 2009 (MDT)

:It's getting worked on... Just keep adding them. A matter of weeks ago it was more then double the current amount (six or more pages) - so it's slowly getting cleared. Everything has to get by-hand looked at (since "What links here", talk pages, links, etc can be strange) so it's just a work in progress. They will get deleted though if need be (or authorship stripped). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:53, 29 October 2009 (MDT)

::Sounds good. Thanks for the update. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 20:19, 31 October 2009 (MDT)

== Arcane Archer ==

I rated the Arcane Archer class, but the number of ratings nor the overall ratings didnt change, why is this? --[[User:Zackrb|Zackrb]]

:You posted your rating on the talk page. But, that is only half of rating. You must edit the article itself to reflect your rating. Their are placeholders for ratings when editing the article itself. Updating these causes a overall rating to appear on the article when viewed. (Please remember to sign your posts.) --[[User:129.123.245.182|129.123.245.182]] 03:04, 2 November 2009 (MST)

== Thanks for helping me fix my format ==

--[[User:Frodo Goofball|Frodo Goofball]] 06:30, 9 November 2009 (MST)

== NEW ==

Her im kinda new here and a was gonna set up a page for my friends to use my Digimon and Pokemon races and classes i know that might sound stupid but hey to each his own, any way you put up my renamon page for deletion and a wasen't done with it yet i'm not sure wether it was because of that or the fact that it's a digimon, if you don't want digimon and stuff on there a will not put it on there :) just let me know.
(p.s.) i did'nt understand the way you set stuff up till now so i understand if the page was just in the way {{Unsigned|Corycodered|01:00, 12 November 2009 (MDT)}}

:Well what is it? A creature? It's not formatted like anything... If you follow a preload (go to a certain section and click the "add" button - that text) and update the current thing to fit that the delete template will be removed. If you don't want to do that of course you can move it to a subuserpage of yours (e.g. User:Corycodered/Renamon) then no formatting is needed. But one of those is needed for the delete template to be removed. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:17, 12 November 2009 (MST)

I'd like my user page deleted, if possible. Thanks
[[User:Palantini|Palantini]] 16:51, 14 November 2009 (MST)

== WikiRPS ==

Hello. I joined this wiki from the WikiRPS, and I've been trying to find out who is running that wiki. While I could and probably will eventually get active here, right now I'm more driven towards working on a more broad system, adapting historical, current, and sci-fi culture, weapons, and technology to an open RPS, not necessarily D&D. Thanks. --[[User:Madkcat|Madkcat]] 00:47, 18 November 2009 (MST)

:Pretty sure [[User:Cuthalion|Cuthalion]] is, although [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] may be as well (I am not sure), or DotHectate ([http://www.wikirps.org/wiki/Special:Listusers/sysop Special:Listadmins]). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:53, 18 November 2009 (MST)

::As far as I have been able to find, [[User:Cuthalion|Cuthalion]] hasn't been active since December '07, [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] June '09 and DotHectate ([http://www.wikirps.org/wiki/Special:Listusers/sysop Special:Listadmins]) since June '08 on WikiRPS.
::I have some ideas of what to do, and how I'd like to do it, but I don't want to start messing with the Wiki until I can talk with someone who was/is active in WikiRPS to make sure I'm not stepping on toes, or causing problems by jumping in running.
::--[[User:Madkcat|madkcat]] 01:18, 18 November 2009 (MST)

:::I'm not in charge on WikiRPS. This wiki, where I did the initial setup, I know what's going on. There I do not — I have maybe only gone there a matter of times. you would have to ask one of them what's going on. Sorry about that. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:21, 18 November 2009 (MST)

== Language Style ==

As a born British English man, I'm somewhat accustomed to the British language. But I only could assume that this D&D Wiki is American, so in my language fixing, I didn't change anything like "armor" to "Armour" or vica versa, because I was unaware of what to do about it. So now I ask you, do I correct spellings to American or British English? Or something else, if that's how you roll.--[[User:SgtLion|SgtLion]] 11:01, 22 November 2009 (MST)

:It's American English. I recommend taking a look at [[Help:Standards and Formatting (DnD Guideline)]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:51, 22 November 2009 (MST)

::Guessed as much. And thanks, I'll take a look at that. Your response and help is appreciated. --[[User:SgtLion|SgtLion]] 00:02, 23 November 2009 (MST)

:::Ya, no problem. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:36, 23 November 2009 (MST)

== Vacation ==

I am taking a short five day long vacation or so down to New Mexico. I will have limited computer access however if everyone could keep an eye out for malicious edits, vandalism, etc it would be much appreciated. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 08:23, 25 November 2009 (MST)

== could u help? ==

Hi i was trying to find out if a slam attack is like an unarmed strike for the perpose of feats?

If u could e-mail me what u think that would be great

wolffboy66@yahoo.ca

== Hey ==

Im the one that sent the recent 7 dollar through paypal, can you keep me updated when you guys run donation drives so i can donate what i can. Also if you dont mind can you look over some the contributions that i made since i signed up to see if you feel they are constructive. Mainly i feel in love with aura guardian but want some feedback before i keep at it.

Thanks!
Starcry/novabladex

I like the anime shadow skill and was wondering if you ever thought about making a class based on the sevaars, specifically on gau and elle. I liked your tenken class and the frost knight one, so I was just throwing the idea out there.

== A different sort of game ==

I have a roleplaying game known as World Tree which uses skill advancement instead of class advancement. A character in the game is given a number of skill points at creation with no restrictions as to where they may go. I was thinking of doing a variant of this and even eliminating such things as abilities (there would instead be a lift and carry skill, for instance). I'm not sure this is the right place to discuss such a different system but I was hoping to work with others on it. Can you make any suggestions? My e-mail is brenner.mike at gmail.com

Thank you for your time, -Michael Brenner. {{Unsigned|204.210.188.32|10:23, 12 December 2009 (MST)}}

:Well a few options exist. How different is it from D&D? One option is to make a "radical" variant rule out of it; keeping the structure on D&D Wiki in general. Another option is to make a self-contained wiki (like WikiRPS); hosting could be discussed if that is the desired option. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:01, 12 December 2009 (MST)

== Aura Guardian ==

Hey Green, I was wondering if you would mind looking over the Aura guardian and see if anything so far could be abused? Also let me know what direction I should focus in, Defense of adding some offensive choices. Ive considered a VERY restrictive spell list, like maybe only the healing domain up to 4 and protection up to 4. Not sure. Also I could use some help with the flavor for anyone else reading this! Thank you in advance. --[[User:Starcry|Starcry]] 12:30, 19 December 2009 (MST)

:I took a look at it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:03, 19 December 2009 (MST)

== Brawler, fair fight ==

heya, i've been using this web site for ages and it's awesome, a player notified me of the Brawler class.
At 7th level i think, he gets a special ability called fair fight, i was just looking at it and thought it was... well a little overpowered/little... silly (sorry if that offends btw.)

The feat basicly entails that people make a save or drop there weapons because it would be unfair otherwise... this gives a huge advantage to the brawler, as well as seeming silly as people who want him dead wouldn't think that they should kill him fairly (mostly) and those who would can normally be persuaded/ goaded into it. The skill might be relevant if the brawler had any actual arcane/divine powers but other then that he does not.

Anyway, asides from that it is an awesome class, a monk without the code of laws and from what I've seen of it a very balanced class except that.

Constructive criticisms ahoy! (Btw, i let my player have a feat rather then the ability)

== Talk page is really long/Review too ==

Your talk page is really long. Might be time to archive. Hehe. Peace. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 14:50, 20 December 2009 (MST)

:GD, can you do me a big favor when you get a chance. I read your review of the Aura Guardian 3.5e Class. It was a flawless review. I was hoping you could give the Freerunner 3.5e Class a similar review. Currently the class is rated 20/20 and could really benefit from your perspective in particular. Thanks a million. (Just if you get a free moment.) --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 15:09, 20 December 2009 (MST)

== Leader of the Hunt ==

Really good article. Could also be the deity Cernunnos the Horned God, Leader of the Hunt.

== My article ==

how do i know when its ready to be used?

Just noticed the new Media Wiki version! Awesome! just having some issues, not sure if they are new or what but there is no more autoconfirmation group. so whenever I edit a page it is asking for a key code. Is this intentional? - 06:04, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

== MSRD cleanup ==

Hey Green Dragon: I think [[user:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] is the "official" go-to guy for the MSRD, but I think he's (semi)retired, so here I am. I use the MSRD all the time, and think it could benefit from some changes, namely wikilinks to other MSRD articles, especially the skills and feats. I wouldn't mind working on this project, but obviously all of the pages are locked. Where do you think I should go to start/discuss this project? [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 19:24, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

:Is there anyone left who's in control of the d20 Modern side of things anymore? I posted [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=MSRD_Talk:Treat_Injury_%28Skill%29&oldid=455659 this] almost a week ago, but I don't think anyone noticed. There are some things that need cleaned up, and I would love to help out but 95% of it is locked. I see no reason why we shouldn't be able to turn [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User:Jazzman831/workspace&oldid=451096 this] into [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User:Jazzman831/workspace&oldid=451102 this]. Or at a minimum, clear out all the typos. If there's anything I can do to help, or if there's someone else I should talk to, let me know. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:54, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

::Well that would need to be discussed before changing with someone who knows D20 Modern better. Or if you would not mind explaining it a bit more (since both the links you supplied are from a subpage of your username - or do you mean just adding links to the article?). Do you see what I mean?
::And, if you want to go through and add a few things throughout the MSRD and clean things up I would be more then willing to give you temporary admin rights for you to work a bit on that. Let me know please. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 06:29, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

:::First of all, thanks for fixing those other links.
:::Second, sorry about the confusion. I'm not trying to change wording or anything, just clean up some typos and make the pages more navigable. That page in my subspace is just a random page from the MSRD that I copy/pasted there to give you an example of what I want to do. If you look at the [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User%3AJazzman831%2Fworkspace&diff=451102&oldid=451096 diffs], you can see that the only thing I did was add wikilinks. (I had to do it in my userspace because I couldn't actually edit the article in question). As it is now, none of the pages have interwiki links, so if you are reading, for example, a class description and it references a feat, you have to go back up to the main MSRD page then navigate to the feat page then find your feat. I would just like to make the feat a link so all you'd have to do is just click it.
:::If you're comfortable giving me temporary admin rights then I'm more than willing to help out. It might take a while, though, since there are a lot of pages![[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 13:48, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

== Pooka Race ==

Sir, the rituals available for Wild Soul have always been listed there:
"You can use any of the following rituals as if they were at-will powers, with no component requirements and without a ritual book: Animal Friendship, Animal Messenger, Commune with Nature, or Speak with Nature."

==Access==

Hi there, for some reason my username doesn't want to co-operate with me. I try putting in my password and I get a message saying that it's invalid. I try to get a new one sent and nothing ever shows up in my inbox. I want to get on here and post some more stuff and because of this, I can't. Can you help me out? -- Mythos Specialist

:Actually, never mind. I didn't have anthing fully finished anyway, so I made a new account. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 04:28, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

::Oh don't. As long as your email is correct it is not a problem. I just have to wait a few days to do it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:35, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

:::I already posted a full core class to the new profile. But, if you can get my old account running, it'd make it a lot easier to do the transfer. Besides, I like the new name... -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 13:58, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

== Sorry if I am spamming you, I am trying to see what is stopping my submission from showing up. ==

Thanks for the help in advance.

BTW the submission is (Thrillseeker) base class submission.

:It's called a cache. It takes time. -- [[User:Jota|Jota]] 17:40, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

== Been away for a while ==

Hi GD,
Ive been gone for a while - one of those who left during the 'great admin dispute'
I have come back tho, and was just curious what happened to the tavern?
Thx - --[[User:Sabreheim|Sabreheim]] 10:21, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

:You'll find that after the 'great admin dispute,' as you call it, [[User_talk:Green_Dragon#What_Happened_to_the_Tavern.3F.21|the general consensus among those who were active before said incident seemed to be that the Tavern was superfluous and unproductive]], although I believe cost-engineering may be playing some part in its continued absence (inferred from the section above). -- [[User:Jota|Jota]] 12:22, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

:: first of all - thats what it was 'a huge dispute amongst the admins' that seemed to threaten the well being of the wiki (why i left) - but bygones be bygones
:: personally i think that the tavern was a good thing - it allowed for more person to person feedback on content --[[User:Sabreheim|Sabreheim]] 16:33, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

:::I wasn't disagreeing with your phrasing (though I have my own thoughts on said incident and subsequent changes), I was just using the same terminology to affirm that we were referring to the same event(s). -- [[User:Jota|Jota]] 17:05, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

::::See also [[Discussion:The Tavern: use, expansion, and availability.]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:13, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

== Repeatedly adding a stat to ac. ==

One of my friends in my D&D group has been planning to add wisdom at least 3 times to his ac by taking various classes that allow wisdom to be added to ac. Is doing something like this allowed?
BTW, the campaign we are doing is a gestalt, if that makes a difference.
--[[User:Cyte|Cyte]]

NO. It doesn't stack. Period. -- Mythos

Thanks much.
--[[User:Cyte|Cyte]]

Also there is an argument going on in my group about bloodline levels. Some of my group is saying that bloodline levels raise class abilities such as sneak attack and other things that are simply made more powerful at regular intervals. The regular interval thing is the key to their argument since they say that means it is calculated by class level. I don't believe them. But do bloodline levels do what they say?
--[[User:Cyte|Cyte]]

------

Hello I am with the above user. Do you have anywhere in any book where it specifically says that Mythos?

Thanks for the reply.

--[[User:Zachrb|Zachrb]] 21:22, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Mythos here...
I'm pretty sure in the SRD (I don't have time to look it up) when it comes to modifiers, that you can only apply ability score modifiers once, like for instance bonuses to AC from a high DEX or WIS score. I think untyped bonuses do stack, however. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 04:13, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Furthermore, as for gestalt (which I categorically despise), even under that, you can only, for instance, use one class' hit die at a time, in this case the higher. Ability modifiers work in much the same way. As for bloodlines, features such as spell save DCs, maximum skill ranks, caster level, those things are calculated using bloodline levels. Sneak Attack and such are only raised by actually having levels in said classes. Sorry to burst their power-gaming bubble. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 04:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply Mythos, only 1 of the classes actually have a type for the AC bonus thus the stat can be added 3 times. Also thanks for the reply regarding bloodlines!
--[[User:Zachrb|Zachrb]] 06:13, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Hold up. Which classes allow this to stack? Ability modifiers, as I've said, do not stack. By "untyped bonus" I mean bonuses granted by the class, or certain other factors, not including ability bonuses. This is done so as not to totally unbalance the game with class dips. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 08:01, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Many of the classes the player has allows you to add wisdom to AC. One of them is a deflection bonus, the other are just wisdom bonus to AC without any type. So what does this mean for the player? Can he add his wisdom once, or once as a deflection bonus and another as a regular bonus? --[[User:Zachrb|Zachrb]] 16:05, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I would think once as untyped and once as deflection, but which class is it that adds it as a deflection?
--[[User:Cyte|Cyte]]

I'm pretty sure you can add your ability modifier only ONCE. It doesn't matter what the type is. As for adding ability modifiers from different ability scores, I know you can, 'cos the Duelist does it. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 17:17, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

:While your interpretation is logical from a balance perspective, I'm pretty sure the reigning methodology is that while other types do not, untyped bonuses stack. -- [[User:Jota|Jota]] 17:25, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree that untyped bonuses stack, but not with themselves. eg adding wisdom twice to ac as an untyped modifier.
--[[User:Cyte|Cyte]]

That's what I'm trying to explain here. Otherwise with a few clever prestige class dips, or worse, misusing gestalt rules, whilst doing same, you have a build that becomes utterly broken. Any bonus derived from ability score bonuses can only be applied once, right? -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 20:27, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Logically yes, but I can't seem to find a rule that states this. --[[User:Zachrb|Zachrb]] 22:54, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

It's out there, but I don't know where. I know I saw it, and it clearly said stacking the bonus for the same ability score doesn't happen. Here's a thought, though. In lieu of finding the rule, why not err on the side of common sense and not allow the bonus to stack? I mean, it works that way with magic spells that have the same effect as each other, so I'd be willing to bet ability modifiers don't stack either. It's just more logical. Otherwise, as I've said before, you can end up with something that completely wrecks the system. Also, has this player considered taking these 3 classes for the assumed triple-stacked Wisdom modifier as being incredibly munchkined? Because this kind of approach to a build is almost always about "Oooh, pluses!!" more than "Oooh, compelling character.." -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 03:49, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

== My new class ==

For anybody that pays attention to new material going up, I present to you the [[Battlemage (3.5e Class)|Battlemage]]. Enjoy. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 08:43, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

== Mirror mephit ==

Hello I have a question about : [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Talk:Pun-Pun_(3.5e_Optimized_Character_Build)]
'''Alternate first level trick'''

Aristocrat 1 (race independent) Feat 1: Magical training (player's guide to faerun) Feat 2: Precocious Apprentice: Summon Mirror Mephit (Expedition to the Demonweb Pits) Starting gold goes into purchasing a single vial of liquid pain.

Rounds 1->a Attempt to cast Summon Mirror Mephit until you can make the check. Optimization could allow this to autosucceed the first round, but it isn't needed Round b: toss your mirror mephit a vial of liquid pain, and have him use it with his spell-like Simulacrum ability As per the monster manual (which supercedes the SRD), a spell-like ability defaults to a standard action. With the vial, we have CL 9, sufficient to duplicate a 18 HD advanced efreeti (simulacrum is allowed to duplicate specific creatures). Divide the level by two, and we have a 9HD copy. Which is just as many hit dice as a normal efreet. Order the mirror mephit to order the efreeti to obey you completely before he vanishes.

You now have three free wishes. Start from step 4 of the above streategy.

The mirror mephit has 8th level for the caster level for simulacrum.

Did the liquid pain use as optional material component to improve the caster level by + 2 ?
But simulacrum is a spell like ability, not a spell. Or use an other rule ? If yes, what page from book of evil darkness, please ?

The normal efreet has 10 HD, not 9. So, the caster level required is 10th level, no ?

Why do you choose aristocrast as class ? For the skills ? The starting money to buy liquid pain ?

Thanks for your future anwser.

:Once again, I fail to see the point in all this. Someone's misusing the rules for sure. Why not just be Pun-pun? -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 19:20, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

::Oh wait, this IS Pun-pun. Listen, feedback loops are not supposed to work. Maybe as a glitch in video games, but in D&D, no. -- [[User:Danzig Nyttafjell|Danzig]] 19:23, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

== Necromancer editing and advancement ==

Mr. Green Dragon:

Thank you for taking a look at my "necromancer" 4e base class. I developed it in conjunction with a colleague with whom I am playing a long-form campaign.

I seek your advice in improving the necromancer with two primary goals: I wish to, over time, produce a class whose quality ranks it among the best 4e homebrew classes on the site; and I want to make sure that the necromancer conforms ''in extremis'' to the D&D Wiki formatting standards.

As it stands now, I do not possess the proper knowledge to achieve those goals. So, to solve a few formatting problems immediately, I wish to clarify:

*Which powers listed on the necromancer main page need to be moved to another page? If any, which other page?
*Which necromancer powers listed elsewhere need to be moved to another page? Which other page?
*Which creatures are listed on the necromancer main page that need to be moved to another page? If any, which other page?
*Given that worship of a specific deity confers a class feature power or bonus upon the necromancer character, why does the list of deities and their related class feature benefit need to be moved up to the "Overview: Religion" section?
*Given that you can see clearly which information is currently in tables which use HTML instead of the wikimedia editing format ("Phantom level/damage", "Phantom potential actions", "deity/benefit"; I assume that the "level/maximum Phantoms" table is satisfactory already), how can I change those tables into wikimedia format within those power and creature templates? The reason I used an unorthodox "HTML splice" technique to insert those tables is because I could not use the wikimedia format to add the tables within the templates (as it was apparently beyond my coding abilities).
*How can I cause the "Contents" list to show separate sections within the Necromancer Class Features section? I believe that that section has become long enough to merit separate sections within the Contents.

I think that with your help and the assistance of the other users we should be able to clear up these formatting issues relatively quickly.

--[[User:Ofidian|Ofidian]] 21:20, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Furthermore, I have discovered an issue with the "Add or edit" radio button under "Add New 4e Power". When you replace "MyPower" in the text box with the name of your new power (for example, "Frigid Cyclone") and click the radio button, you are not directed to a text form to write the wikitext of the power. Instead, you are directed to a page that says "Add Form:4e Power: Frigid Cyclone (4e Power)" (again, "Frigid Cyclone" is the example power to be created) with a preexisting power box already below it, called "Blast of the Ancestors" (a "'vorgal' racial power"). If a user truly wants to create a new power, they must first click the "Show preview" radio button, which redirects to the appropriate text field.

What is the method by which we can alter the form so that it works properly? The origin of the "Blast of the Ancestors" power is the [[Vorgal (4e Race)]] page, where a link to the "Blast of the Ancestors" racial power is found under '''Racial Traits'''. (If you click on ''that'' link, which oddly says "1", you come to a page called "Form:Form:4e Power" which ''again'' shows the "Blast of the Ancestors" power box.) I don't know what happened, and until I get your input I don't want to touch it because I don't know the proper method for fixing the system (blank the form? Delete the form and recreate?). I ''suspect'' that the creator of the "vorgal" race somehow accidentally altered the very power creation form itself, instead of creating a new power.

I'm going to use the workaround for now.

--[[User:Ofidian|Ofidian]] 02:00, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

== New Class ==

Hey Green Dragon. I'm creating a new class for my D&d campaign and thought you might want to add it to your site and perhaps help me refine it as well. I call it the Summoner Class. Apparently, you already deleted an entry for it because it wasn't done too well. I can assure you, I put a lot of work into it so far, and will continue to do so till perfected.

Anyway, this normally wouldn't concern you except that I'm not too good at HTML code and was hoping that you could help make the page for me? I can email you the Word File that I've been working on so far. I have everything I think I need for the first page and I have all the way to level 7 powers (for now).

== Creative Commons ==

I was trying to add some content in the D&D Wiki Media and the only CC license there was the Attribution-Share Alike. The content I'm trying to add is under Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative license. Can that be added to the licenses? Thanks in advance. --[[User:ElfsMaster|ElfsMaster]] 16:05, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

:Of course. In the license template just add it. For example <nowiki>{{license|Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative}}</nowiki>. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

::Ok, did it. However, when I added the image I forgot to put some characters and the link ended kinda weird. Now, when I try to edit it, the following messenge shows up:
::out of captcha images; this shouldn't happen
::I guess that that shouldn't happen (great insightful conclusion, I know...)--[[User:ElfsMaster|ElfsMaster]] 00:00, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

== archanist class ==

I was looking at your article on the archanist pretige class. I am curious as to why a class who's description refers to magic being deschooled and organized into one group, requires the player to give up nearly half of the available spells he can cast. This seems like a contradiction in the very nature of the prestige class.

you can contact me at kingdork5ooo@hotmail.com

== Ganteka RfA ==

I understand where you were coming from when you deleted my post, and I'd like to take a second to explain to you how I saw what happened: I posted a reminder to keep things courteous, as in the heat of the discussion everyone was beginning to get snippy (as you well know, from the number of warnings you gave out). You edited your post to make it seem less offensive, then deleted mine. My first reaction, I'm sorry to say, was "That jerk, he's deleting my comments and covering his own ass" (forgive my language, I'm being honest here, and this is, as far as I know, private. We're grown up, we have seen these words before). So you can see why I was upset, you made no mention that you were going to delete my post because the discussion was over. However, I have now understood what happened, and that's fine. I'm over it. I don't care that you edited your post so it seems better to you. I don't even care that you closed any and all discussion of the matter early. Whatever, I can live with that too. I don't care that you feel what you wrote was a "suggestion" or a "suggestion-like command", and not a breach of etiquette rules. Just, in the future, when you feel it necessary to delete one of my posts, I'd like to hear about it. That's why talk pages exist. Even if you didn't want to drop me a note on my talk page, you could have written in the summary of the page something to the effect of "Discussion has ended, edit has been deleted". I think as a fellow editor of this wiki, you owe me (and everyone else) that same courtesy. However, like I said, I'm moving on. I'm fine if we don't discuss this matter any further. Ganteka turned in his letter of resignation; I don't fully understand why we even went through this charade. Some semblance of cloture, I suppose. Thanks for your time, [[User:Badger|Badger]] 05:51, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

:The RfA is not over (when the RfA is it will be) just that discussion part was just so off-topic that it was over (it did not relate to Ganteka's2 RfA at all). Why was your comment after I stated "''This discussion is over from my post out.''" deleted? That is your answer. It was just too off-topic. Is that a breach of civility - recommending him to see a psychiatrist (which you asked to be addressed)? One, the correct place to discuss that is on [[Talk:Warning Policy]]. Two, I don't think so, I was just worried that that user was not thinking clearly (not meaning of less intellect - defiantly intelligent since he or she was able to respond completely). To me it is an honest worry since this user seemed to be contradicting him or herself and not noticing it. Although I could see of some which think that psychiatrists are not helpful to all in all regards (or I do not understand) who find it uncivil. I don't know, Your thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:23, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

::If you were genuinely concerned with someone's mental state, it'd be best to confront them privately about it, not on a random webpage. That's more tactless than uncivil I suppose, though. And if you truly believe that everyone is equal in all ways, there shouldn't be any admins at all. I understand that you want to have people assigned to take care of certain things (making sure pages are formatted, redirecting things, fixing errors and the like), but this is creating distinctions between people on the wiki. Furthermore, things like "Maybe you like begging? Who knows. Irrelevant." and "This site is not "risky" for me, I don't need to step around on tiptoes. I don't care. I own the damn thing." do come off as hostile, even if that isn't your intent. Continuing, "having a blatant bias" sounds like something everyone on this wiki is guilty of. Do you suppose we can get a psychiatrist on a group rate? Continuing on, you are also guilty of that last bit. Take, for example, this quote "I suggest you take a look at Requests for Adminship/Aarnott2. These people only contributed to about 7% of the activity of D&D Wiki. That's not "prime" and "perfection" that's 7%. Please, once again, do research before presenting things." You wrote that on Ganteka's RfA. If you took the time to look back you might come across one of my posts. You were simply denying my math. I know what you want to say. You wanted to say that those 9 people accounted for 7% of the total wiki edits. That is correct. However, that was not the point of the argument. The point was that 10% of the wiki's registered users account for 90% of the wiki's edits. So take those 9 names, add in you and Hooper, and about 390 other top editors and you'll see that their total contributions will total about 90% of the edits. I am not going to make that any clearer, I don't think. That is a prime example of you ignoring facts and "having a blatant bias". And as for your systematic warning policy that "govern[s] all", it doesn't. No one would dare warn you. You are above that law, it would seem. You know darn well that if Surgo had posted a comment telling someone to see a psychiatrist that you would have warned him. "Discussions are not deleted on D&D Wiki." That's another gem of a quote of yours from the Ganteka RfA page of yours. Or how about " Have I ever sworn on D&D Wiki? Yes, like 2938 times. No, not once. Yes, in a revision history and in a few edit summaries (User Talk: Eiji#Farmer revisions, and see edit contributions for edit summaries - "damn" was used, although not derogatory). Which are you going to trust?" I suppose you mean you swore on the farmer page. You also swore about the wiki 3 lines down. Does that count as proof? Taking a second to check out the farmer page (A really fun class, if I say so myself) you began the page with "Actually you can't move your things on D&D Wiki their - it's illegal. It's the CC and the GNU FDL v1.2. --Green Dragon 23:17, 11 November 2009 (MST)" and ended the page with "AND FOR THE LAST TIME ANYONE CAN REPUBLISH ANYTHING AS LONG AS IT IS UNDER THE GNU FDL v1.2 I HAVE SAID THAT ABOUT A MILLION TIMES AND SOURCED THE GNU FDL v1.2 IN THOSE PARTS AS WELL SO STOP REPEATING THAT WHICH I NEVER EVEN HINTED AT! --Green Dragon 14:26, 14 November 2009 (MST)". Just another example of contradictory statements that we all hate so much.One final note, check out the votes for RfA of people you stripped of admin rights. None passed. Not a single one. What's the point of having an election if we all already know the outcome? Feel free to say they could have been approved and kept their admin rights, but we both know that was never a possibility. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 01:19, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

:::Badger, when I read this I was forced to ask: where are you getting your stats that those 7% of users account for 90% of the contributions on the wiki? Or am I misunderstanding what you are saying. I know GD has 50k+ edits, I've got slightly over 10k, and a couple of those that left had 8k or more. But for the most part they only had a couple hundred (if that) edits. I'd really like to understand where you're getting your figures from.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 01:30, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

::::I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. Those 11 users account for less than 10% of the users(something like .2%, in truth). A collection of the true 10% would be like 400 users. I've not actually found the top 400 contributors to the wiki. However, considering 11 have something along the lines of 30% of the edits, I assumed we could find another 390 that would get an approximation of 90% of the total edits. Not to sound rude, but I've got better things to do than to track down the top 400 contributors of the wiki (I'm sure most of us do). It's certainly possible that I'm wrong, but given the data I did collect, I'm pretty confident that the 90/10 theory applies to this wiki about as well as it applies to most every other wiki. However, feel free to ignore that tangent if you feel it is incorrect. Honestly, I've not done enough research to really defend that point. Like I said, I think it works but you're more than welcome to prove me wrong. I'll accept any data you're willing to provide.--[[User:Badger|Badger]] 02:06, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::Proof is needed; a theory does not suffice. Another theory is that the entire world is only that which ''you'' can look around and see, touch, and in other ways influence. The rest does not exist. I don't exist. This wiki does not exist. Nothing exists except when ''you'' will it to. Is that then the case? Maybe, right?
:::::Therefore 90% is not the case - proof is needed. Those edits accounted for under 7% (less now) of the activity. That's under 7%.
:::::Your right about the tactlessness, sorry about that. Could we get a physicist at a group rate? Who knows, right.
:::::"''No one would dare warn you. You are above that law, it would seem. You know darn well that if Surgo had posted a comment telling someone to see a psychiatrist that you would have warned him.''" you could be right, I do not know. It's very hard sometimes to analyze oneself the exact same - one's own biases and ideas make it much more complicated, I find. In any case I did not mean it in any way to make him feel belittled, I said it out of (although tactless) concern.
:::::"''Have I ever sworn on D&D Wiki?''" right, but damn is not a "gross profanity" word and it's not used referring to someone. I think (I could be wrong - let me know if I am please) that damn, in the English language, has a number of uses and word types and therefore it is permitted in some uses and instances.
:::::About [[User Talk:Eiji#Farmer]] those are ''different'' licenses. That is not contradictory in the least.
:::::''Users are equal'' does not mean that ''users should be treated the same''. Admins are granted those abilities by users by way of a nomination but that does not mean they should be treated the same.
:::::And the systematic [[Warning Policy|warning policy]] ''should'' govern all. Am I above it? No... Do I want to be? Irrelevant. All conspicuous areas should be posted to [[Talk:Warning Policy]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:31, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::"Users are equal does not mean that users should be treated the same" What does that mean? They are equal, but should be treated differently? How are they equal then? If you're treating something differently, it's not equal! --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 03:38, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::"''Users are equal'' does not mean that ''users should be treated the same''" means a few things. One is that if one commits an act against a policy, policies being systematic in nature (e.g. the [[Warning Policy]], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_policy], etc etc, one just has to look at bit) they are not necessarily treated the same. For example one cannot vote on nominations. One cannot edit the wiki, etc.
:::::::Or, since admins are elected by users they are not "''treated the same''" although they are still users they can now also delete things, do things users cannot, etc, and as such held in different a different light. Do you understand what I mean kinda? I can explain more if you want. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::I think I'm done with this discussion. It's clearly going nowhere, and it doesn't even seem you're taking it seriously. You're making less and less sense, and I fear it's only a matter of time before one of us tries to ban the other (and I already know how that would turn out). So I'm going to leave you with this tip: Fix the description of the Warning Policy page. "When one does not edit with civility and etiquette one becomes a warning for each time" --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 04:41, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::I do not understand. What do you mean exactly? The wording seems fine to me and all this is implied. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 05:13, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::As far as the wording, GD...It should be "when one does not edit with civility and etiquette one '''gets''' a warning for each time," they don't become a warning. --[[User:Harry Mason|Harry Mason]] 12:24, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::: He also swore [[User talk:Surgo#Wikia]], which, I'm assured, is much worse than the word 'damn', according to certain civil servants. Just thought I'd chime in for you guys. --[[User:TK-Squared|TK-Squared]] 15:21, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

== GNU FDL ==

After watching the discussions over the past few months I have done extensive research into the GNU FDL. Any page without an updated author box is in void of the licence and no-longer licensed under the GNU FDL according to section 4B:

4. MODIFICATIONS
You may copy and distribute a Modified Version of the Document under
the conditions of sections 2 and 3 above, provided that you release
the Modified Version under precisely this License, with the Modified
Version filling the role of the Document, thus licensing distribution
and modification of the Modified Version to whoever possesses a copy
of it. In addition, you must do these things in the Modified Version:

B. List on the '''Title''' Page, as authors, one or more persons or entities
responsible for authorship of the modifications in the Modified
Version, together with at least five of the principal authors of the
Document (all of its principal authors, if it has fewer than five),
unless they release you from this requirement.

Before you say it is able to be in the history page:

For works in formats which do not have any title page as such, "Title Page" means
the text near the most prominent appearance of the work's title,
preceding the beginning of the body of the text.

And termination note:

9. TERMINATION
You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Document except
as expressly provided for under this License. Any other attempt to
copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Document is void, and will
automatically terminate your rights under this License. However,
parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under this
License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such
parties remain in full compliance.

In conclusion: Any authors will have to post their own authorship at the top of the page labeling the top 5 contributers (with each of their permission, as you are re-applying a licence) and also their name as publisher of the page. This means that any pages that do not currently meet these requirements (or any of the other requirements) can be removed by the author, as the licence requires permission from the copyright holder (the initial creator). If this licence is "re-applied" without the copyright holder's permission it is in breach of copyright laws and legal action may be taken.

I hope you understand fully and notify users correctly. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 13:09, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

:The bad thing about the license is it has never been upheld in a court of law, so really, no matter how much people may disagree, '''it really doesn't matter'''. Find a lawyer and sue, or shut up about it. If you win, then you'll be making a precedence that other sites can follow.
:Finally, go over to wikipedia - the largest website in existence using the license. Do you see any author spots on the pages? '''NO'''. Now, does that mean all of wikipedia and the lawyers they hired to look into the subject are wrong and you few are oh-so-smarter? '''No again'''. It means that it has been deemed that in a wiki format, as long as each edit is cataloged in the history, then attribution has been made. If you guys think we're doing it wrong, then you must also by the same logic think that Wikipedia is doing it wrong. Please, go tell them, I'd love to see the responses you get for a such a brazen statement.
:The following is a great quote to keep in mind: ''"...are (1) the five principal author listing (all the authors must be listed in 1.1; this is clearly not problem with Wikipedia as the history pages list all the authors of a particular GFDL work) and..."''. Additionally, ''"...The GFDL requires that the names of authors are preserved, and we keep a full record of exactly who wrote what in the history of each article...."''. It have even been said ''"...Editors are collaborators, not authors, and therefore have no rights (except for the right granted to them to reuse their contributions elsewhere). The rights are held by the individual projects, as publishers, and the foundation can act on their behalf....". Now, I'm not a lawyer, but I believe that last one would also need to be upheld in court before we could say it is 100% true.
:The best quote to keep in mind is a simple one: ''"..The "authors" are explicitly mentioned in the history log of every article. :I think you need to show evidence of why the history log is invalid as a record of authorship...."''.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 14:34, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

::Wikipedia ''did'' use the GNU FDL. They changed recently. If, theoretically, you are right what do you say about "''List on the Title Page, as authors, one or more persons or entities responsible for authorship of the modifications in the Modified Version''"? Therefore, why are my edits not displayed alongside (for example)? This conundrum in your logic (which makes it not work) has been discussed at length on [[Talk:Detect Disease (3.5e Spell)#Author Template]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:04, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

:::Under the license the fact that you edited must be shown, as you are an author. Also, you cannot compare wikipedia to this wiki, wikipedia is sourcing facts while this wiki are users creations. Also in that case wikipedia is the entity itself that holds the copyright for the information on the site, not the individual editors. Plus, the fact that they removed the GFDL is a sign that they came to a problem and had to remove it. Also, under the GNU FDL you cannot prevent someone from reverting your edits and history is not on the title page, it is a separate page. Also Hooper, if the licence "doesn't matter" and has never been upheld in a court of law does that mean we shouldn't follow it? We shouldn't give users their rights? --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 00:42, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::::No, I think Wikipedia just wanted to use a newer license. I could be wrong though. And you are incorrect. Wikipedia licenses everything therefore the same things do (well, did) apply.
::::"''Also, under the GNU FDL you cannot prevent someone from reverting your edits and history is not on the title page, it is a separate page.''" No. Anyone can revert anyones edits. That's silly to say. It's all part of the modified version. And, as I was saying, I think the "Title Page" is actually the line with the tabs on it (fulfills all the requirements) or maybe all the surrounding MW information. Why? The publisher, D&D Wiki, does need to be specific somewhere as well (maybe that is the logo - since it does not direct to an image). For example "''For works in formats which do not have any title page as such, "Title Page" means the text near the most prominent appearance of the work's title, preceding the beginning of the body of the text.''"
::::Let me know if this answers your copyright questions.
::::{{quote|
D. Preserve all the copyright notices of the Document.

E. Add an appropriate copyright notice for your modifications adjacent to the other copyright notices.
|orig=[[GNU Free Documentation License 1.2]]
}}
::::--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:14, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::Yes, we can compare this wiki to wikipedia and we are. If you are saying we are doing it wrong, then you are also claiming that wikipedia was doing it wrong during their time using this license. I suggest you seek legal counsel if you truly feel that way. We have the GNU FDL for many reasons, and I will not devolve into a straw man argument. If you do not agree, then do not hit submit - ever. Simple as that. In the meantime, either call your bluff of legal action or drop the issue.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 01:24, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::"If you do not agree, then do not hit submit - ever." So how am I supposed to take away the "hitting submit" that I have already done, how is anyone that thought there was going to be the author template meant to? "Anyone can revert anyones edits." So why can users not have the author template if they chose? And why would you refuse to change [[Detect Disease (3.5e Spell)]] back to the way Daniel Draco requested? Also, "Actually I think Template:Author is forbidden under this license." That's silly to say. It would be part of the document, having no effect on the licence itself. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 01:49, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::Because that template is being removed... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 02:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::Sabre, why don't we agree to disagree on how the license is properly applied in a wiki format. You go get a lawyer to prove your point, and that would sway my thoughts.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 02:45, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::Ignoring fulfilling the licence (lets assume that history does cover it) is there any reason why people can't say "I made this"? Most articles on this wiki aren't a collaborative effort. Also, I don't need to get a lawyer, I don't care about your liabilities though I thought I would warn you seeing I was doing the research anyway (this wiki seemed as good as any for a practical example). --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 02:53, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::When you first brought the subject back up it just came across as if you were threatening to seek legal action. That is why I said that. I know sometimes with type it is hard to come across appropriately, so I am sorry if I misunderstood. The simple fact is, if wikipedia did it - we can do it. And yes it is a valid example. Wikipedia's contributors are writing in their own words using a system or information already available. Our contributors are creating content using a system and rules already available. If wikipedia says that history is fine, then history is fine. The mere fact that the largest supporter of GNU FDL in a wiki format does that would be a huge point in any legal defense of the action ''(I don't remember the legal term they have for that, but basically it is when something is unsure at first but then through practice becomes reality)''.
::::::::::All that being said, I never cared for the author template. It's best feature to me was actually the "status" field where you can let a user know if something is still being figured out. I made a quick Article Status template and have used it instead for a bit. That is really all the information the average surfer needs. If someone wants to know who is the author, they can simply go to the history or any messages on the talk page about the article. It doesn't hurt anyone, and helps the average surfer have the content right up front. I really don't understand all the fuss. If someone ever added something to this wiki thinking that it would either be published and they could revert to sole ownership or that it would never change and be altered ''(which requires ignoring the warning every edit)'' then that was foolish.
::::::::::Additionally, I know that you said you have researched it. So have I, and I believe TK back before he was banned. What I discovered since was simple. Since it hasn't been brought to legal court, you can basically research it and take with it what you want. If you want it to come across a certain way, you read it that way. In short: it's vague.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 03:05, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::::I prefer that someone may take ownership, as the primary creator then people may go onto the history page to see who has contributed. On an open contribution site there should still be a way for the user to keep their own work as it is, even if it is under the GNU FDL. It can still be copied and edited on another website (with the history) though on this website would be their final creation. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 03:13, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}

:You may indeed prefer that, but that goes against the very nature of a '''collaborative''' site. Short of vandalism or spam, and that means that you wish to retroactively not have to accept the warning that has been in place for every edit since the site began, which reads: ''If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here''. This isn't a personal database for any of us to "dump" or "store" our ideas. It is a collaborative and dynamic site.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 03:18, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::I understand that, though each creation needs a form of leadership. Collaboration is only good if you have a goal, in creativity each persons goals may be different and you will get members editing the pages to their liking. A author box provides the creator (presumably the primary contributor) to lead the project, taking in others ideas (as it has previously done through giving ideas on talk pages. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 03:27, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

:::See, now I like what you're saying. Let me say that in our case, an Author template could theoretically never be correct. Yes, it may just be by happenchance that a user puts up an article and other than formatting or spelling no one else changes it. But for some of the big articles, we may have 50 users and IP and at least one chuck norris vandal over years of it being online and at that point the author template would either be huge and obstructive or it wouldn't be able to give everyone due - invalidating it. I made a quick Article Status template that I personally like because it allows someone to say where they are in their own process on an article and gives other users an idea to work with. Because we are different in our content in that degree than say, my above example of wikipedia, I do believe that we could utilize some sort of Article Status/Goal template. This would allow people to assist each other and improve articles, without getting into the author debate. But maybe that is another talk for another day.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 03:31, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

::::Am I misunderstanding what is happening here? Hooper and Green Dragon seem to be arguing against having an Author template on a page. I don't see any problem with Author Templates. I think DnD Wiki is collaborative on the whole, meaning while each page has a unique author (or team of authors), the entire site's content is free for all and collaboratively edited. If I write a class (and I have), I want it to be my own. While I'm not going to pretend to understand the legal mumbo-jumbo, I would expect to be the next to last word on all edits (final word being an admin can choose to delete it if it is offensive or something and doesn't comply with policy, but that's it). If I've written a class I want my name on it; partly for credit, partly as a way for people to contact me, and partly because it makes me proud. We're going to take my name off my page because some random IP thinks I should get Power Attack as a bonus feat at level 2, and suddenly he becomes the author? No, that's just foolish.--[[User:Badger|Badger]] 07:50, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::Not Exactly Badger. This discussion mostly is about the legal mumbo jumbo. The GNU FDL is vague in regards to it's implementations of author and title in a wiki format. Reading it one way, the Author Template would never ever be enough to give all the proper credit. Reading it the other way ''(the way wikipedia does)'', the Author Template is invalid and should be removed but history can never be deleted.
:::::As far as "final word", we all have to keep in mind that there has always been a warning (which I quoted above) that once we submit content, it can be edited mercilessly.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 13:55, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

== Am I violating copyright? ==

Hello, GreenDragon, and thank you for your time. I am currently working on a page (Drevanius campaign setting) and I am wondering if including statistics of creatures (nothing else) from another DND source is violating copyright. The section is Creatures of Drevanius.

== Hello ==

You seem like a Very Knowledgable person, im currently working on designing an Epic level 3.5 Campaign, ive been designing NPCs Main chars and what not, and one of the main chars ive built diesnt have a name, as ironic as it is, it is a 15th Age Cat. Advanced Paragon White Great Wyrm of Legends, Leader of the Dragon council, and by far the strongest dragon among them, he is very unique and i just dont know what to call him, if you have the chance i would really appriciate it if you could shoot come good names at me, im just drawing a blank

Thanks - [[User:Envoyof aGod|Envoyof_aGod]] 19:22, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

==Something interesting...==

I noticed that your RfA was mysteriously and unexplainably deleted, Greeny. I was just curious what that meant for your re-nomination of adminship. --[[User:Bunnie|Bunnie]] 03:48, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:Read the subscript on [[RfA]] and this post will be removed. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:09, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::You mean the part where you belatedly added that you and Blue were exceptions to the RfA policy? Why yes, I did happen to read that. And the part where you said (and then removed) that if you were voted against, you'd demote yourself. Why taunt people with stuff you'll never do? --[[User:Bunnie|Bunnie]] 04:31, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::I changed my mind, and the policy as such, relating to adminship about [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]]'s and my admin status. It wasn't a "taunt". --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:35, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::'Changing your mind' about something while a process is already being implemented (especially in regards to yourself when you're about to 'lose' because of the policy) is just low. Why the change of heart anyways? If you think you might 'change your mind' anyways, why bother having policies in the first place? Just 'change your mind' about anything you don't like, even if other people like it. Sure, sounds fair, reasonable and perfectly acceptable. Right. --[[User:Bunnie|Bunnie]] 04:42, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::Not really fair huh. Oh well. D&D Wiki ''is'' also a physical thing (takes bytes, bandwidth, etc). Those physical aspects make it so the people relating to hosting and upkeep are not going to lose adminship (or bureaucratship; transparent in the case of [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]]). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::Incidentally since it was mentioned, , whatever happened to Blue Dragon? He vanished from everywhere a few months before the big smash-up, and I've not seen hide nor hair of him since. Would be great to get in contact with him again (contacting him on the Wiki has been all but impossible, so, I suppose I'd need some alternate method.). -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 04:53, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::He's been around. He came around me during the winter holidays. He actually was the one who updated MW and the extensions, although he is not done. You want to contact him? I'll tell him to add back the "hosted by" part and when he does you can click it and contact him. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 05:05, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::Well hosting has been changed. But he checks his user talk page. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:31, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

== Admin Resignation ==

This is a notice to say that I will not be coming back to this wiki again. The issues you obviously have with control has caused me to lose faith in you and lose interest in the wiki. You have changed so much since I became admin, in more than one way. I would also like to point out that even though you own the physical server doesn't mean you have to be an admin here, you are only the host. Your attitude towards policies (and your need for power) were proven in you deleting your nomination for admin, when it was first posted you had began to fill it out and comply with the existing policy, then when the votes turned against you the policy was changed and the page deleted. You should go back and think about your actions, think about them from another point of view and see why those members left. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 10:31, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:I will RfA you in a bit (with resignation as the reason or somesuch). I, as [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] (with bureaucratship), are not going to host something for people who got banned, and get annoyed as result, and then came back with just the intent to remove the person who banned them, based off their wrong actions, from adminship. Do you really not see how that is petty? One: This is not a democracy, although it has democratic influences. I don't care about all the democratic ways which things can be. It's not fair. Fairness, to me, is more important. On a different note they would no longer even edit, they may have just found it humorous to remove adminship from one who banned them for wrong actions. Look at it like this: Some people go to prison for committing crimes, they serve their time, they get out. After they are out they go to the town hall and try to impeach the mayor. Although in democracy that ''does'' work, I don't care. This is not going to be like that. Do you understand where I am coming from? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:33, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::When you say "Fairness, to me, is more important" do you mean "In my opinion, fairness is more important" or "It's more important for everyone to be fair to me, Green Dragon"?
::''EDIT'': He means the first one.
::Let me try and work through your analogy now:
::*Some people go to prison for committing crimes
::**Sabre070 <s>violated policy and was banned</s> was banned permanently <s>because of an inappropriate username</s> <s>without reason</s> with the implied reason that [[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] was banned, without reason (see his edits during the time), and was worried something was going on.
::**<s>Later others disregard policies and get banned as a result (spamming the FA, unwarranted deletion, etc etc).</s> While true, it's irrelevant. We're talking about Sabre070 right now. If he did that we can include that in his "crimes". Otherwise, let's try to focus on the important issues.
::*They serve their time, they get out.
::**Then Sabre070's ban <s>expired</s> was undone 2 days later and he was allowed back into our open hearts once again, born anew, like a mighty Phoenix
::*After they are out they go to the town hall and try to impeach the mayor.
::**Sabre070 doesn't like how you lead, and tried to change that, by removing you from office (with an RfA).
::*Although in democracy that ''does'' work, I don't care.
::** I don't care about what you think is fair, my word is <s>unimpeachable law</s> open to discussion, as long as we use logic. I, as Green Dragon, will delete that RfA, make new laws prohibiting future RfAs, and <s>pretend nothing happened</s> those are the results of the happenece. The deleted RfA's date and the revision history of [[RfA]] can be seen as evidence. This is my wiki, I own the damned thing.
::--[[User:Badger|Badger]] 22:14, 16 February 2010 (UTC), with Green Dragon contributing.

:::I don't think [[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] was banned though (save the small time right after I was banned). See also [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3ASabre070].
:::Only the first way works, and not fully at that. I mean that fairness, as the idea relating to ownership and hosting with regards to inherent userrights is an important concept for me and how this site it run.
:::"''my word is unimpeachable law''" - no. Things are discussed. Logic is used. I do not always get my way. It's just the idea relating to ownership and hosting with regards to inherent userrights. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:21, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::Allow me to amend my previous comment to reflect this new information. Until you reveal the true reason he was banned I'm leaving it as "without reason" because we both know there is nothing wrong with the username he'd been editing as since March of 2008.--[[User:Badger|Badger]] 22:41, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::I amended it as well, if you do not mind. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:55, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::Oh, '''''"...I, as [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] (with bureaucratship), are not going to host something for people who got banned, and get annoyed as result, and then came back with just the intent to remove the person who banned them, based off their wrong actions, from adminship...."'''''. Best cliffnotes ever.
:::::::Related note: Should it be required that a person RfAing and the person being RfA's be '''X''' amount active on the wiki? I.e. so many edits, meeting a certain edit-per-month count, etc. etc.? I've always thought so. I also don't believe that votes from new or IPs should be counted in RfAs (Wikipedia doesn't count them - arguing that they may very well be single-purpose accounts).  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 22:59, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::I don't mind at all, facts are important! I think we are approaching the best approximation of the actual events. Can you fact check as to whether or not Sabre070 was involved in the goings on? I don't recall if he was, but he was unblocked 2 days later, so I assume he wasn't involved.
::::::::Hooper, to address your question I always thought IPs were allowed to comment and such, but you had to be a registered user to actually vote (newly made voters subject inspection for meat puppetry).--[[User:Badger|Badger]] 23:14, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::That is a great question [[User:Hooper|Hooper]]. It needs to be discussed on [[Talk:Requests for Adminship]] though; this is not the place.
:::::::::Was [[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] involved? Who knows. If you look at [[Requests for Adminship/Aarnott2]] you can see a list of this so-called "RC Committee" - but not everyone on their was banned. E.g. [[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]]. People were banned for doing actions against policy and/or violating their positions of authority. Bans are not given out for any other reason. The policy comes from Wikipedia. This committee was never implemented since it was illogical compared to alternatives, which are now in place. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:19, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::The so called "RC Committee"? If you had've looked I am not mentioned on that page once. Also, the reason for my blocking was that Aarnott had blocked Green Dragon for 3 days for "Intimidating behaviour/harassment: You are acting out of line right now. Perhaps you should clear your head and come back to this later... Otherwise, this site will lose a lot of its users." and he explains other reasons on his RfA. If I am looking at the block list correctly, you are saying that you are free to intimidate and harass anyone, though others aren't? Also, I like how you always say "we use logic here" (Green Dragon Logic) and also say that it is a wiki and not a dictatorship, yet also say that it is your wiki and you cannot get banned, un-nominated, or treated like any other user.
::::::::::Also, I was not involved, the only edits I have done can be seen here: [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?limit=50&tagfilter=&title=Special:Contributions&contribs=user&target=Sabre070&namespace=&year=2009&month=8 Contributions]. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 01:53, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::

::::::::::::I don't know where you guys all grew up or worked, but the person footing the bills makes the rules. You are free to disagree, but in the end it comes down to the owner makes the calls. It is obvious from months of the transientwiki crowd and it's fallout's attempts that you will get nowhere, so just save yourself the trouble and leave. The owner has the final say, whether we agree with it or not. To think otherwise is insane.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 03:25, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::::::Ya, you can trust [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] fully, or you can look at my edit contributions during those days. Normal. A policy, which was not agreed upon, was implemented. As such it was removed. Next?
:::::::::::::The rest of what you said is not true. Well, I guess that means all of it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 05:09, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

== Oh Boy... ==
You may want to have a look at [[Talk:3.5e Open Game Content]]. Seems another wiki is having some issues with us. Two users just signed on and I believe wish to discuss the issue with you.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 01:38, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

== Hi Green Dragon ==

It appears that a recent edit of the 3.5e Open Game Content page appears to be taken whole or in part from my site (http://grandwiki.wikidot.com/publication-list).
The reason I suspect this is because

Steve Russell Presents…

appears on your page. Steve Russell owns Rite Publishing and personally sent me that material to upload on the Grand OGL Wiki. So I think one of your users may have
copy/paste that material.

If the DnDWiki intends to replicate the Open Game Content from my site on this site can you make sure that the section 15 for that material appears in your sites open game license.

If you wish to contact me about this matter feel free to email me at gedakm@gmail.com. I can put you in contact with Steve Russell if you like as well.

- Mark Gedak
DM Sketchpad/Grand OGL Wiki

:On closer inspection of the similarities of our page, [[3.5e_Open_Game_Content]], and theirs, linked above - it seems like we have most of the bigger names where they go a bit more in depth, and that the random Steve Russell Presents is the only shared link that shows a common history of edit. However, I am really confused as to the request to alter our Section 15 of the OGL. In that same sense, we could argue that the entire website Grand OGL Wiki should change theirs as we existed before them. I just don't understand the real problem here. An OGC game is listed on an OGC page, and that is absolutely fine imho, but then ianal.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 01:53, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

== My Campaign Settings ==

I know that I havent made a great edit in quite a long while, but, I feel that my campaigns should be left up for people to edit. My addition, the Fallout setting has come under an attack of sorts and I feel that more can be done with it, just because one user starts something doesnt mean others can help pitch in, I have helped edit a few pages, even added some weapons. So please, if possible, help me keep my Fallout setting from getting deleted, I put a lot of time into adding the building blocks for it. The Mighty Boosh.

PS - I forgot how to add my name at the bottom, the one with the time posted and all, sincere apologies.

:Wow it's not an attack, I just added at delete tag to start a discussion. There's no content and the two or three pages that are there are not very good. If you're going to fix it then that's fine, but there's no real way for anyone else to add it since only you know what's in your head. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:05, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

The only thing that I need to have done is basic stats for weapons, vehicles, creatures, etc. I will, slowly but surely, put up descriptions of weapons, creatures and vehicles. And I will also do my best to come up with detailed backgrounds of environments and adventures, all I need is some help coming up with stats then the Fallout setting should get rolling along. [[User:The Mighty Boosh|The Mighty Boosh]] 04:26, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

== SEARCHING ==

When I am trying to search by keywords, sometimes the search engine is not coming back with any results.

For example I am searching for HAWK for 3.5. There are no search results.

== Error while searching. ==

Hello all,

Congrats on the great job on the D&D wiki.

I was searching with keyword: ''Samurai'' and ''samurai'' and the result I got was:
''Query failed: connection to localhost:3312 failed (errno=111, msg=Connection refused). ''

I know there were pages resulting from this same search since I have been browsing them the past week.

Hope it helps.

Dervell.

:I had problems with this yesterday as well. But then it mysteriously started working again so I figured you were working on the problem while I was online. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 19:59, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

== Move Errors ==

Hey Green. It appears that since the server issue some of us are experiencing problems when we try to move pages. It doesn't happen every single time, but seems to be at least 3/4ths. The page will stay in a loading status for quite some time and then it'll pop up a database error. Just FYI.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 14:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

:So you don't have to, this is a quote of the error I'm getting: ''"A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was:

(SQL query hidden)

from within function "Title::deleteTitleProtection". MySQL returned error "2006: MySQL server has gone away (internal-db.s89449.gridserver.com)".''"  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 17:57, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

:I know. [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] said he has time to look at it tomorrow so that should be the case. Same with the sword, delete. Do you know of more things? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:03, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

::Not so far. Jazz above mentions some search problem but I haven't been able to duplicate that.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 03:20, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

:::It's hit or miss. I tried it just now and got the error again. Along with the error message, the "search in namespaces" list is misformatted. But then other times it will just work, so it seems to be an intermittent problem. The only other thing I noticed was yesterday every now and then after editing a page it would give me an error that made it look like my edit wasn't saved, but when I went back to check, it was saved. Again, it's nothing repeatable, it just happens off and on. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 05:08, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
:::I seemed to have found a pattern to the searching error: If you type in an exact page name (SRD:Fighter) into the search box then hit "go" (or hit enter), it works fine. If you type in a page name that doesn't exist ("test") you get the error. Also, if you type in a name that does exist but hit "search" instead of "go", you also get the error, so I'm guessing that something went wrong with the search function itself, and not the search box. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 16:39, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

::::Hopefully this weekend all the problems should be dealt with. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:42, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

== Featured Article ==

GD, I would like to recommend an article of mine for a featured article. [[Black Lion (4e Optimized Character Build)]]. I created an entire 4e Class, all of its Class Powers, an entire 4e Paragon Path, and built this Optimized Build just for it. Not only does it include all the prerequisites of a good article, it includes User-generated Tables by Tier, Class Summaries every 10 levels, explanations of unique items and their strategies for use, and an expanded information section which expounds upon the Classes Role in general. I even included a designers guidelines for enemy and character progression by level and a Compare/Contrast section with this builds biggest competing build. Everything you need all in one spot. Tell me what you think? --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 09:26, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

:I am curious as to what you say to the following. When ones makes their own content and then makes a Optimized Character Build from that content it normally is not an "optimization" but rather a "specific 'hole-in-the-game' optimization" specifically created by themselves to optimize an already exploited idea. E.g. natural weapons and natural fighting in this case.
:Of course this may not be the case, I have not throughly looked. I'm just asking for your opinion. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:36, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

::I noticed you used the words "Hole" and "Exploited". Words that rhyme with "Loop-hole", "Broken", and "Cheating". If that is what you mean, then no. This is not that kind of optimization.
::This is a what some people refer to as a "Build". A specific construction of levels, items, and powers that accomplishes a pre-defined purpose. That purpose being: "Maximizing Damage-per-Round during Combat". This also fulfills the Striker Role within 4th Edition as well. See.., the Black Lion Class is currently a working Striker Class within 4e, and this optimization is a fulfillment of it's ultimate potential. However, the Black Lion Class was not created with this specific optimization in mind. The class came ''before'' the optimization and not the other way around.
::I hope that helps. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 07:14, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

== Another post-server fail error ==

Looks like over on the Media Repository, any time I try to see anyones (even my own) contributions there it pulls up an error. Minor, but just fyi.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 05:00, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

== Media Fail ==

Everytime I try to log in to upload a pic, I get this. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 18:04, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was:
(SQL query hidden)
from within function "User::idFromName". MySQL returned error "1142: SELECT command denied to user 'db89449'@'205.186.184.15' for table 'wdd_user' (internal-db.s89449.gridserver.com)".

== Formatting Help ==

i would like to know how to reformat my submitted setting. i am pretty new to this whole thing...

P.S.~ sorry about completely over-riding your touch-ups, i meant to only make minor corrections, but you see i was in th emiddle of adding a lot of information on the playable races at the time, and i was getting very frustrated at the fact that every time i had an editing conlict, i had to pretty much write everything again. leastways the equivalent amount of work on it, what with taking out the dashes and spaces, and putting in the HTML... {{Unsigned|ChieftainTwilight|15:06, 28 February 2010 (MST)}}

:First if you press the back button it will retrieve the information you had been typing. Just Copy+Paste into the new version (with some minor editing if needed) and continue posting. Edit conflicts are not really a problem as such except for minor formatting or minor changes which deal with the other user's changes. What do I think of [[Mysteries of Andor (3.5e Campaign Setting)|Mysteries of Andor]]? I find that nothing is really fluffed out. I recommend that you make the deities and then link to them from that page. Although you say many names, what I mean is, what are they? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:41, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

== Mediawiki is unavailable? ==

I'm sure you've already been alerted, but just in case, the Mediawiki pictures are not showing up, and Mediawiki comes up saying there is an "Exception caught in Exception Handler". It's not working at all. [[User:Jwguy|Jwguy]] 05:41, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

== Captcha ==

Would it be possible to have only IP and non-autoconfirmed users have to fill out the captcha when inserting external links? There are a butt-ton of d20 Modern stubs, but since the "edit this page" is treated as an external link, I have to fill out a captcha for every stub template. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 02:24, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

== More post-crash problems ==

I'm sure you're aware, but I'm just letting you know of some other problems I'm finding since the server crash. First of all, the site is sllllloooooooowww. Sometimes it will be zippy, sometimes you will wait 10 seconds and get a "something went wrong" message, but other times, like right now, it will take literally minutes (sometimes up to 5) to open up a page. Which is just an eternity when you are trying to add a class.

Secondly, no pictures from mediawiki are being loaded correctly. They all just give the name of the image with a link, instead of actually showing the image.

Keep up the good work! [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 02:53, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

:I know. I have been told that the current MW install has many problems with it and lead to slowing down the site sometimes. Media will be dealt with. Another thing too, to make this even better (time wise), is that I just heard that MW has serious security flaws and needs to be upgraded. Maybe upgrading will fix many of the problems which are slowing it down sometimes too. And then if it keeps being slow sometimes then I will think of something else. Hopefully wednesday things will get better (this weekend did not happpen). Sometime though, I can promise. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:06, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

::Ah, that sucks. At least you've got a culprit and a likely fix, though. The worst thing about misbehaving technology is when you don't know what's going wrong. Maybe having a slow wiki will give me time to catch up on some of the things I'm ignoring while I'm spending too much time here ''':)''' [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 05:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

:::That's not what I said, but sure. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 05:17, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

== problems ==

the site takes forever to load. and i cant search.

== Spam ==

I think I might know why the spam problem has exploded lately: the Captcha doesn't seem to be working. When you add external links there's no captcha prompt at all. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:38, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

:That's because, as was said above, ReCaptcha's were showing up for stub, etc templates for users and external links for users. With MW one cannot just say "IP's have them" anymore, it is now for edit types or somesuch for all but users but those in the admin group. In any case they have been removed as such. Maybe if it continues to be a problem. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:20, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

::Gotcha. It's too bad they don't have more useful options. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 05:24, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

== Degradation without renewal? ==

I can't help but notice the large drop in admins, as of late, for whatever reasons be it. And though I hardly have any standing, nor say in the matter, I suggest some sort of action should be taken to renew the community on this wiki, before its community dies down too much to have any hope of revival. And still, I have little idea as to how to do so, I've seen many great communities fall and shrivel. So I'm convinced that unless someone gets out there and attracts some people into the community, not just general traffic into the site, the community will break down, maintenence and upkeep will fall, and I fear this great wiki could fall into a bad state.

Well, just my thoughts, I thought you should know. I could be terribly wrong and there's a constant amount of community and I'm totally paranoid and pessimistic. But this is how I see it, seeing the constant destruction of admins with no new ones does worry me. --[[User:SgtLion|SgtLion]] 21:19, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

:What are admins? Do they help? Although I have done no research into the subject I almost feel that ones editing decreases once attaining adminship. Do we need more admins? Yes. Of the top of my head I can maybe think of two or more people who need to be RfA'ed. Know someone? Ask them and then, depending on the result, RfA them please. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:20, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

::Makes sense. I don't know anyone, but your point is very much valid. --[[User:SgtLion|SgtLion]] 06:13, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

== Errata ==

Hey Peter Gabert,

I just had a discussion on the WotC board about all the absence of errata for a lot of the previous editions books. For most of these unofficial errata were collected by players.

My thoughts were that a wiki would be a good place to maintain such unofficial errata, given the transient nature of the WotC boards (most of the older errata threads have been purged). Your DnD wiki seems the most natural place to start such an endeavour.

Is this something you would be willing to accommodate, as I'm not sure it fits entirely with your current content?

I don't think I've ever contributed to your wiki, but I'm a regular at several other wiki's and would try to gather as many unofficial errata as possible if you'd give a green light to such an undertaking.

I will try to check back at this page for an answer every now and then, other options like e-mail, I can post if you want to.

Cheers.

Adriaan Renting.

:Yes, it would work. Is errata for OGC OGC? I would imagine so. In any case, a good place to start, (especially if it is unofficial errata) is to just make the page and link to it from the publication. Start by taking a look at [[Publication List]] and finding the book (or adding it if it is not added) and then placing a link on the page. For example [[Exemplars of Evil/Unofficial Errata]]. Does that make sense? Do you think that would work? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:29, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

== Title ==

Heh, sorry about that. For some reason I'm very set in the habit of not creating titles for the first post on a talk page. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 23:04, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

:It's the correct way to do it. No worries, of course, though. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:09, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

== Down for the count... ==

Hey, I didn't see any 'Contact us' options, and I noticed that you were the owner, so I decided to stop by and ask a quick question :). Recently this site has been experiencing more and more problems (i.e. not being able to load properly or going down for short periods of time). I just thought I would point this out and wonder if anything could be done?

Oh, and I just want to add, I love this site! Be proud! Thanks! --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 05:33, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

:First we need to clean up this site. For example, at this moment, [[3.5e Sorcerer/Wizard Spells]] spells is not able to load. Why is this? The code is not properly done (SMW and so), I think. In any case it returns a database error and eats up a lot of the server. Once all the code problems have been ironed out then we can see if this is still a problem.
:This should happen slowly. Soon D&D Wiki's MW will be upgraded (the current version has a few security problems) and that should make a difference. Then other areas need to be worked on. I hope this helps answer your question, and I look forward to seeing some of your content. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:39, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

::Well D&D Wiki has been upgraded to MW 1.15.2. Pages like [[3.5e Sorcerer/Wizard Spells]] work now. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:38, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

== MoI (of sorts) ==

Hi GD, I've got a couple of things to tell you about:

#First of all, I've finished adding PL categories to all the d20 Modern homebrew equipment, so Phase 1 is complete!
#[http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User:Jazzman831/workspace&oldid=461878 Here] is my current progress on Phase 2. Let me know what you think before I continue creating the rest of the pages.
#Three items ([[Flashbang (D20 Modern Equipment)|Flashbang]], [[Phosphorus Grenade (D20 Modern Equipment)|Phosphorus Grenade]] and [[Smoke Bomb (D20 Modern Equipment)|Smoke Bomb]]) are created for D&D 4e, not d20 Modern, so I don't know what to do with them. See my opinion on the matter [[Talk:Flashbang (D20 Modern Equipment)|here]].
#MoI: [[Talk:Grenades (D20 Modern Equipment)]]
#MoI: [[Talk:Halo (D20 Modern Campaign Setting)#Rating (again)]]
#What do you think of [[User:Jazzman831/preloads#Ranged Weapon Preload|this]] preload/template as a way to standardize ranged weapons? It's the format used in Weapons Locker, and the most useful format I've seen.
#MoI: [[Category talk:Rifle]] (Note also that [[:Category:Longarm]] actually exists; possibly my next project should be standardizing the categorization of the Modern side of things? Where should such discussion take place?)

Sorry about the long list, but I think that should get us caught up to date. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 17:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

:I copy-pasted your prototype page for [[D20 Modern Equipment]] onto that page. I changed a few things. Do you think the changes make sense? I modernized the subpages. Once all the subpages are created (so called Phase 2) then [[D20 Modern Equipment]] can be cleaned up. I will deal with the rest of your comment above soon... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:17, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

::The changes make sense, though in a perfect world the last two categories (not categorized by age or type) should always be empty, correct? Perhaps this is a good way to make sure that everything gets labeled. For the "all" category (I thought about something similar myself), do you want to create a separate page with every PL X item, or just link to the PL X category, which is effectively the same thing? While we're on the subject of the "all" category, I notice some of the totals (PL 2 and 5) don't add up right. I'll try to figure out what's happened; probably something isn't categorized correctly.

::The only things I really don't like are adding "equipment" to all the pages, because it gets wordy, and removing the PL number from each line of the table. The former isn't really a huge deal, since users probably won't ever type that anyway, but the second is bigger. All of the books (as well as the MSRD) refer to PL primarily by number, not by name, so I think it's better to have the number actually there instead of counting up or down.

::I hope to get to adding the subpages sometime soon. It'll be a function of how much my carpal tunnel is flaring up and how bored I get... [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 00:37, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

:::Alright, subpages are finished, though as I said before, I'm not sure what to do with some of the pages.
:::Have any comments on the rest of my points yet? [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 19:08, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
:::Also, I think a database has crashed. Every time I try to move a page or use the search I get the following error: <code>145: Table './ddwikidb/wdd_searchindex' is marked as crashed and should be repaired (localhost)</code> [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 19:17, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

== Protect Page ==

I'd like to request a Protection from IP's be placed on my [[White Guard (3.5e Class)]] article. Thanks GD. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 04:26, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

:You actually don't have to request this, just find a page that has it and look at the source code. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 05:26, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

::Oh, good idea. Hehe. --[[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 06:02, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

:::There isn't a source code for protection, it's an additional tab that only certain users (on this wiki, I imagine only admins) have access to. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 17:06, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

::::I protected it from IP edits. And yes, only admins have access to the tab. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:58, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

::::: Ummm..... GD, I don't know whats going on, I may be mistaken as to what you were asking, however I just tried getting it from the source code of another page for IP protection and it worked... [[Orion (3.5e Campaign Setting)]]--[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 22:52, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

:::::: I'm pretty sure that's just a template to let IPs know they are unable to edit the page. They still can edit it, unless an admin has actually protected a page. Think of that source code (the template you copied) as a sign saying "road flooded", but you need an admin to actually add the flood water. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 22:17, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

::::::: Ahhh. Ok, thanks for the clarification. However this can still be useful. If a sign reads 'road flooded 10 km ahead', most cars wouldn't test it. :) --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 22:52, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

== Uploading an Adult Picture ==

I was hoping to place a certain picture on one of the pages that I'm going to design for my camapign setting. However, this picture has nudity in it. It's not pornographic, a female witch is simply naked. I was wondering if I would be allowed to post this? Or should I send it to you first for clearing? --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 05:29, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

:It should be okay. Just make sure to add [[Template:Adult Theme]] to the top of the page. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:27, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

== Kobold buffs? ==

Hey, I was just looking at the negitive level adjustment page, and looked at the discussion page.
And someone said that they didnt think that kobolds were -2 la, cause of the "buffs" they been getting.
You said that the "last few books that wizards published" made them more of a -1 la.

I was wondering what are these buffs/books?

::he probably means Races of Dragon and possible Dragon Magic. RoD actually made kobolds kinda cool--[[User:Name Violation|Name Violation]] 02:56, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

:::Thats what I was thinking after I asked the question, but just wanted to make sure I wasnt missing anything.

::::If I remember correctly it was Races of Dragon, but you could always check the date of the comment and the publication dates. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:15, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

== Couple questions ==

Just a couple things I'd like to ask you about. You mentioned that my class wasn't original and that it's been created before, yet if you search on this web site it's the only one that comes up. Umm? Just wondering about that, cuz I wouldn't know it's unoriginal if nothing else like it is on here. Another question, you mentioned that the Sith aren't all dark users. I took the definition of what a Sith was directly off of the star wars database, so take them up on it if you're really confused about what a Sith is. {{unsigned|Tmblake09}}

:Urm, Green Dragon didn't say any of those things. [[User:Vrail|Vrail]] said it was unoriginal (and unless you are George Lucas, ''any'' Sith class is by definition unoriginal), and he was also the one who suggested there were good and evil Sith. Generally if you have a problem with a specific article, it's best to take it up on that talk page and not a user talk page -- otherwise, people who look at your class later won't see this discussion.

:You are correct, by the way, that there aren't any other Sith classes on the wiki (btw GD, [http://media.dandwiki.com/wiki/Sith this] is another Sith class, but it's posted on MW? I didn't even know that was possible), but there are many, many other Star-Wars related entries. [[Jedi Knight (3.5e Class)]], [[Jedi Healer (DnD Class)]], [[Jedi Guardian (D20 Modern Base Class)]], [[Jedi Dualist (Not Duelist) (DnD Prestige Class)]], [[Jedi Consular (D20 Modern Base Class)]] and [[Jedi Sentinel (D20 Modern Base Class)]] all come up with a quick search. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 16:25, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

== Candidates for Deletion ==

I finished my first-brush pass at candidates for deletion category. All-in-all I deleted or removed the deletion tag from over 200 articles! I skipped the campaign settings for now because they have so many sub pages, but that will be my next project.

One thing I noticed when clearing out all those pages was that a lot of them had talk pages by new users asking why we wanted to delete their page. In many cases, I'm guessing that it turned users away from the wiki, because they are trying to learn all these new things then all of the sudden somebody threatens to take it all away. I don't think the use of the deletion template is fully explained anywhere, so I created [[Template:Delete/why|this]] to help new users understand that we aren't delete-hungry monsters. If you approve, I can add a link to it within the deletion template.

Another thing I saw is pages that had enough information to be completed, they just weren't completed yet. They aren't usable as is, but I don't think it's right to delete them since there's enough there that someone else could finish it with a little gruntwork. I've started a discussion (so far it's just me) about a possible solution [[Category_talk:Candidates_for_Deletion#Idea_for_half-completed_pages|here]]. (While you're there, I had some ideas on the discussion just above it as well.) [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 05:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

== Censorship ==

You've edited a comment I've left on a page. on PokeDM's [[User_talk:PokeDM|Talk]] page. You cropped it down, citing solicitation. I'm forced to say "Not Cool". I went out of my way to not solicit any other websites. I didn't drop a name. I didn't provide a link. Furthermore, I read through the behavioral policy just now and didn't see anything banning solicitation. I was trying to be helpful to a new user, letting him know that other people have tried similar endeavors, and there is help for him if he needs it. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 06:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

:I have never said we do not edit comments. Comments are edited when needed. What you are doing is spam ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_spam Article Spam]), links to D&D resources can be found on [[DnD Links]]; no where else. Partial censorship is something D&D Wiki has — to keep spam and non-relevant things at bay. All the recent spam from IP's (see the barnstars some have received) is not allowed — I think you would understand. It could become a serious problem.
:For example (not notice if you saw it) there was some spam advertising a certain boots company. If I recall correctly they supplied no links. Do you see the problem? It's very simple to understand. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 03:03, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

::I think he was just confused and dismayed at why you modified his post and never explained why. Poor communication on both sides resulted in a misunderstanding, but I don't think either side was intentionally being aggressive or anything like that. Anyways, no need to start a feud over a misunderstanding. ''':)'''. --[[User:Vrail|Vrail]] 04:17, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

:::Right, but you should also mention that no reason needs to be given in text format (maybe in the edit summary). I see what you mean when you mention this, and for the most part the IP (when violating this) knows though his or her ban. Since this user is not getting banned as a result of his or her solicitation (implicit or explicit), you should notice that just the censorship was hinting at this. Since he or she did not, and actually took this kind gesture the wrong way, now he or she knows is all we can say. As a general rule one should always read the edit summaries, and I hope we can say that if something gets censored with such a reason in the edit summary that is the reason. Seems very simple to understand, but I guess not. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:28, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

::::To be fair Vrail, I was much more aggressive (intentionally) at the end of my comment up there. You just aren't seeing it because it was censored... Anyway, yeah, I was angry because my comment was edited. I don't see how a useful, on-topic, offer of help from an external resource (which was not linked or named) from a registered, contributing user on a fellow user's Talk page should be compared to spam about cheap boots on SRD talk pages. --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 04:39, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

:::::Why was it solicitation? Because it did not say something like "I would like to tell you that other resources exist dealing with Pokémon in D&D. A simple Google search should give you some results." --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

::::::I suppose I assumed anyone attempting to make Pokemon monsters for DnD has probably already done a simple Google search. I was trying to provide more specific help with material. Can I leave something akin to "Hey, I noticed you're working on Pokemon for DnD. Leave me a message on my [[User_Talk:Badger|Talk Page]] if you want some help with creation, I know other resources exist that you may find helpful."? --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 20:44, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

:::::::Email would be the correct option. If someone wanted a possibility for such things then there is the possibility they would not mind recieving an email about such things. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

:::::::: The best part of this oppression is that you keep using the verb 'to solicit'. Let us take the most humourous meaning of the word and put it into context; Badger was attempting to bribe PokeDM for sex with name-dropping of Frank (of Frank and K)! How... dastardly. It's not solicitation, it's advertising. Unless, of course, you think that people finding other sites that have D&D information on is an 'evil action', which wouldn't be too much of a step, to be honest. I mean, Badger doesn't want anything from his actions, except to help, and isn't really persuading the person in anyway nor was he persistent in his name-dropping of Frank (of Frank and K). Also amusing is how Green Dragon is trying to say that what Badger did is on the same level as spambots. Because what he said had no relevance to the matter at hand for a person called PokeDM! Who'd think he'd want to find pokemon for D&D that other people had made to draw inspiration from. Also, I'll probably be banned for this. After all, I'm some kind of crazy anarchist or something and have totally name-dropped Frank (of Frank and K) three times now. SOLICITATION, YES PLZ. --[[User:TK-Squared|TK-Squared]] 11:58, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

== Hello ==

Good evening Admin.
i have a question.

What would you say for a LA+0 Race to have +3 STR, +6 DEX, +3 CON, -6 WIS, -4 INT, -2 CHA() Size= Large. Would you say that would be fair? im considering on making a race thats not too over powered but just right. I would love to make a Na'Vi race. From the movie Avatar. i love that movie and i think it would just be awesome to bring it into D&D Wiki. {{unsigned|Powershart}}

:I'm not Green Dragon, but I saw this and thought I'd respond anyway. LA +0 seems low for a large creature, especially one that gets a total of +12 to physical stats. Plus you have exactly offset the physical bonuses with mental penalties, and if we use the orc as a precedent, physical stats are more valuable than mental. (By the way, odd numbered stat increases are generally frowned upon, because they don't add a static bonus/penalty.) I'm not sure that Na'Vi would have low Int or Cha, and they ''definitely'' don't have low Wis. They are very spiritual, insightful creatures; if anything, they should get a Wis bonus. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 14:54, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

::First racial changes should always be even. Second, large size normally means LA 1-2. With the bonus' to dex it could get very overpowered, for example with ranged fighting. I would recommend upping the LA and tonning down the ability score changes and then it could be LA 1. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:49, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Melissa Travoris (3.5e NPC)

2010-04-15T14:24:10Z

TK-Squared: Shoo.

<dplc>
|{{NPC Description
|Melissa Travoris|Gray Elf
|[[Wizard]] 5 / [[Artificer]] 8
|A wizard who uses the practicality of creating her own magic items.
}}</dplc>
{{Stat Block 2
|name=Melissa Travoris|cr=13
|al=Neutral Good |size=Medium |type=[[Humanoid]] ([[Elf]])
|clvl=[[Wizard]] 5 / [[Artificer]] 8
|init=+7 |listen=+0 |spot=+0
|ac=17 |touch=17 |flat=10 |acmods=+7 [[Dex]]
|hp=71 |hd=13d4
|fort=+6 |ref=+10 |will=+10
|spd=30ft
|bab=+13 |grp=+13
|lang=Common, Elven, Auran, Ignan, Abyssal, Terran, Aquan

|melee1=
|melee2=

|sa=
|sq=Efficient Progress 40%, Magical Crafting +2, Disenchant, Familiar

|skills=[[Craft]] (Leatherworking) +24, [[Knowledge]] (Arcana) +24, [[Knowledge]] (Architecture and Engineering) +24, [[Knowledge]] (The Planes) +13, [[Spellcraft]] +24

|str=8
|dex=''24''
|con=''16''
|int=''29''
|wis=10
|cha=10

|favcls=[[Wizard]]

|cg=[[#Serpent's Staff|Serpent's Staff]], [[#Ruin's Armguards|Ruin's Armguards]]

|poss=[[#Dragon's Eyes|Dragon's Eyes]], [[#Spider's Feet|Spider's Feet]], [[#Vurcar's Wings|Vurcar's Wings]], [[#Stalker's Cloak|Stalker's Cloak]], Headband of Intellect +6, Amulet of Health +6, Gloves of Dexterity +6

|feats=Collegiated Wizard, [[Scribe Scroll]], Faerie's Mysteriy Initiate (Passions), Extraordinary Artisan, [[Still Spell]], [[Maximize Spell]],[[Craft Wondrous Item]], Legendary Artisan, Legendary Artisan
}}





Melissa Travoris is one of the five adventurers that comprise a famous adventuring band. She is the spellcaster of the group and the most intelligent of them. As a gray elf, she's a very pale skinned female and quite slender in her body type. She's about five and a half feet tall, with all her gear on. Her hair is short and auburn, well kempt most probably via use of magic; her hair bringing out the brightness of her sheer emerald eyes. Although they are oft covered by a pair of glasses with a variety of different and shifting lenses. She has a wirely jawline and thin lips, that are slightly tinted redder than normal. Her ears are pointed at the end, but otherwise very little is different from normal ears.

Melissa wears soft clothing, tailored together finely by elven fingers. A delicate green shirt over her torso with short sleeves and just long enough to be tucked into a pair of black trousers, loosely fitted with a black belt with a silver winged buckle.

'''{{#anc:Serpent's Staff}}:''' This five foot long staff is made of a very fine wood and has a variety of strange wiring inlaid throughout it. A small power-source is positioned as a crystal in the middle of the staff and two leather grips are positioned strategically on the length of the staff to aid grip. The head opens into a bulb-like that opens when two hands are positioned specifically on the grips. When activated by specific hand movements, the staff fires out a bolt of energy through the opened end.

As a standard action, the Serpent's Staff allows the user to fire an ''orb of force'' (CL 10) at a single target. This can be used at will.

'''{{#anc:Ruin's Armguards}}:''' A pair of armguards made from leather and a signel gem in the middle of each, with a variety of wires that appear to have energy pulsing through them. They are activated by a mental command word and a thrust of the arm, firing a beam of pure destructive energy. Each gem requires a day to collect enough energy for it to recharge.

Twice per day, as a standard action, the Ruin's Armguards allows the user to use ''[[disintegrate]]'' 2/day (CL 11).

'''{{#anc:Dragon's Eyes}}:''' A pair of goggles that appear to be slightly irregular. They have a variety of different lenses that switch randomly between each other. Otherwise, they have the appearance of regular glasses. The lenses appear to have different shades on them, for different modes of viewing.

Continuously, the wearer of the Dragon's Eyes has the ''dragonsight'' spell on them.

'''{{#anc:Spider's Feet}}:''' Soft and silky boots, they have a mithral-like metal sole. The soles have small hooks in them capable of digging into walls or other surfaces easily, allowing for easy climbing. The Spider's Feet also comes with a pair of palm-sized leather straps (that meld into other gloves or straps), that also have the same hooks to allow for climbing.

Continuously, the wearer of the Spider's Feet has the ''[[spider climb]]'' spell on them.

'''{{#anc:Vurcar's Wings}}:''' A brown leather belt with a silver buckle is rather unremarkable, save for the buckle itself. The buckle has a pair of wings upon either side. Behind the buckle is a little gem in the middle of the wings, slightly throbs with arcane energy.

Continuously, the wearer of the Vurcar's Wings has the ''[[fly]]'' spell on them.

'''{{#anc:Stalker's Cloak}}:''' A black and ever-so shadowy cloak, it shifts uneasily even when left alone. It has a hood and is spacious enough to enwrap the wearer in it's confides. In doing so, they become completely translucent; their items too.

Continuously, the wearer of the Mad Stalker's Cloak has the ''[[greater invisibility]]'' spell on them. This is dismissable and usable as a free action.

<noinclude>
----
Back to [[Main Page]] → [[Dungeons and Dragons]] → [[DnD NPCs|NPCs]] → [[DnD CR 13 NPCs|CR 13]] 
Back to [[Main Page]] → [[Dungeons and Dragons]] → [[DnD NPCs|NPCs]] → [[DnD ECL 13 NPCs|ECL 13]]
[[Category:DnD]]
[[Category:3.5e]]
[[Category:User]]
[[Category:NPC]]
[[Category:CR13]]
[[Category:ECL13]]
[[Category:Humanoid Type]]
[[Category:Human Subtype]]
[[Category:Chaotic Alignment]]
[[Category:Good (Good-Evil) Alignment]]
</noinclude>

Talk:Jarate (3.5e Equipment)

2010-04-01T10:48:52Z

TK-Squared:

If this is an alchemical process, how does it increase damage received by only your enemies? How does it differentiate? For that matter, how does it increase damage in the first place? [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 05:54, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

: From embarrassment of being covered in piss. --[[User:TK-Squared|TK-Squared]] 10:48, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

What is the best way to get the highest critical chance?

2010-04-01T10:47:37Z

TK-Squared:

== What is the best way to get the highest critical chance? ==
=== [[User:Jamesja12|James]] 18:13, 17 March 2010 (UTC) ===
I would like to know what the highest critical chance possible. Please help me out.

=== [[User:Name Violation|Name Violation]] 19:03, 17 March 2010 (UTC) ===
Thers a prestige class in Vile Darkness that lets you triple your threat range with an iron weapon. and it stacks with improved crit, but not keen. so with a scimitar you end up with a crit threat on 9 or better. add 2 weapon fighting and a few levels of dervish and you have a blender. theres also a metal (i think its called godsteel or something)in some 3rd party splat book that gives a beter crit range, but most dm's I know dont like 3rd party splat books.

=== [[User:Regulus|Regulus]] 21:49, 24 March 2010 (UTC) ===

You'd also have to be evil to take the Vile Darkness class, and I'd probably call you out on being a damn twink, because that's exactly what you would be doing. --[[User:Regulus|Regulus]] 21:49, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

=== [[User:Name Violation|Name Violation]] 21:56, 24 March 2010 (UTC) ===

its ALL the character can really do tho. granted its a melee blender of awesome proportions, but its also not versatile and easily shut down. Granted, its not suited for every campaign, but its not the worst way to twink a character. the biggest thing is t slows things down by rolling, since you have to confirm so many times.

=== [[User:Regulus|Regulus]] 23:15, 24 March 2010 (UTC) ===

Couldn't that be said of almost any melee build? If you're going with the "crit means auto-hit" rule, at the very least you've nullified any threat a high AC monster presents (And with some of the dex-based monsters being hard to hit is offset by having crap hp). I'd probably rule on it by whether it's for awesome or "for the plus." That, and an evil character is pretty hard to work with when the party is supposed to be saving the world.

And I'd actually suggest picking up a scythe instead of leveling in dervish if you're going for a power build. With a X4 crit multiplier the scariest thing you can do to a scythe-wielder is give him a bigger crit range. --[[User:Regulus|Regulus]] 23:15, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

=== [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 00:22, 25 March 2010 (UTC) ===
(First of all, this discussion format is pretty silly). If the question is "what is the best way to get the highest critical chance", what's wrong with giving "damn twink" answers? That's the whole point of the thread. Secondly, I don't see how it's being a damn twink to use one class. It's one thing if you are mixing and matching one level from many different classes, but I don't think any build which consists of one base class and one prestige class fulfills any definition of twink. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 00:22, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

=== [[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 03:26, 25 March 2010 (UTC) ===
...unless your trying to twink. Haha. (Er... nevermind.)

=== [[User:Name Violation|Name Violation]] 05:07, 25 March 2010 (UTC) ===
even if you don't have to confirm crits, if you miss on a 13 you miss on a 13, crit or not. cust because you crit on a low number doesn't mean that number hits. only 20's are auto hits. and you could be a dervish with a scythe. thats just rude. but overall you're better off with burst weapons and 2 scimitars. your crit range with a scythe is 16-20/x4 vs 9-20/x2 with scimitars. or get the maiming enchantment from mini's handbook, which changes a x2 crit to a d4, or changes a x4 crit to a d8.

:Only on a natural 20? I guess my group's been doing crits wrong for a lot of campaigns, then. That actually lessens the impact of a higher crit range on a character. Maybe it's not so bad after all. --[[User:Regulus|Regulus]] 22:30, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

::"even if you don't have to confirm crits, if you miss on a 13 you miss on a 13, crit or not." Either what your saying is wrong, or strangely worded, in my opinion. If my crit range is 9-20x2 and I roll a natural 9(to hit a AC 18 monster, for example), then confirm is as hit (by rolling again and adding bonuses to a sum greater than or equal to the monster's AC) I get to deal crit damage. However, if I roll a natural 9 (again, against an AC 18 monster), and then fail to confirm the crit (by rolling a number, that with bonuses, is less than the monster's AC), I do no damage (unless my initial roll, with bonuses, met or exceeded the monster's AC, in which case I deal regular damage). So the only way to guarantee damage is to roll a 20. I think maybe that is what you were trying to say, and I just was not understanding you. One last note, I don't know of anything that let's you not have to confirm a crit. Does such a feat/class ability exist, or is this some house rule? --[[User:Badger|Badger]] 00:11, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

:::house rule. my groups have never done crit threat. if you roll in your crit range, you crit. there may be an ability or 2 (in some homebrew?)that gives you the ability. ANd yes, BAdger explained it a lot better than I did. My group did the "if it crits, it hits" thing, but we discovered HOW broken that was--[[User:Name Violation|Name Violation]] 01:27, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

=== [[Special:Contributions/71.114.210.152|71.114.210.152]] 01:01, 26 March 2010 (UTC) ===

This thread's topic is: "''What is the best way to get the highest critical chance?''"

This thread's topic is '''NOT:''' concerns over how easily "shut down" crits are, or the consequences of playing an evil character, or clarification on how critical hits work, or accusations that the thread-starter is [http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=twink gay] (What are you, homophobic? How is such prejudice permitted?), or ''anything'' that '''does NOT ''directly correlate''''' with ''getting the highest critical chance possible''. Anything that doesn't have anything to do with getting the highest critical chance possible should have no place in a thread whose topic getting the highest critical chance possible. This is not a difficult concept to grasp.

This thread is about character optimization. There is nothing wrong with character optimization. It is no less "legitimate" or a part of the fun of gaming than role-playing. How many times must the '''''Stormwind Fallacy''''' be invoked before you people get it? How many times? ''It is written in commoner's English, people''. If you can learn how to operate a computer, you have no excuse for being completely incapable of understanding the very basic concept that role-playing and roll-playing are '''NOT''' [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutually_exclusive_events mutually exclusive] (definition linked because trolls likely lack the education to know "big words").

If you're so offended by roll-playing, why are you here? This is our house, not yours. Therefore if you don't like how we run things here, it is ''your'' problem, '''not''' ours. If it bothers so you so much, '''go elsewhere'''.

I humbly request that all off-topic posts be removed and stricken from the records so that anyone who wants to know about getting the highest critical chance possible can have their questions answered. This wiki is not yet another launching pad for yet another attack initiated upon roll-players by role-players. ''This isn't your livejournal''.

I know I've gone off-topic as well, but '''this needed to be said'''. I'm ''sick and tired'' of trying to find character optimization information, and instead being besieged by you role-player '''TROLLS''' who like to ''kick our dog'' for ''no reason whatsoever'' -- perhaps you all are '''role-playing''' Neutral Evil? I'd mention the deeply-seeded rage issues common with the social outcasts who are drawn to gaming, but playing Internet psychiatrist is so blasé.

And you know what? I know I'm not the only one tired of it.

We don't troll your discussions on role-playing so kindly return the favor by not trolling our discussions. Thank you and please go away.

Dear god, people are so rude these days. No one should have to explicitly tell you how to behave in a discussion. Why aren't you cognizant enough to think of them on your own? No really, I want to know. How can anyone smart enough to know how to type... no, no, I'm done stooping to your level.

=== [[User:Jay Freedman|Jay Freedman]] 02:10, 26 March 2010 (UTC) ===

...Nice rant. Haha. How long did it take you to write all that? Don't answer that, we don't care. Haha.

=== [[User:Regulus|Regulus]] 17:38, 31 March 2010 (UTC) ===

"No one should have to explicitly tell you how to behave in a discussion." <-- The cruel irony of this topic.

Me calling him a twink was merely a snarky add-on to clarifying that he would have to be evil in order to take that class, which should be important to all you "roll-players" because the rules would dictate that a lawful good party-member (say, the team cleric or paladin) would be inclined to kill you, and being specifically geared towards smiting evil, would probably succeed. I won't even bother with how twinking turns an otherwise fun campaign into a ten-level long pissing match because, as our anonymous friend so pointedly pointed out, the topic is not about such things, and would only be a superfluous debate detracting from the original intent of the poster (Big words haven't been impressive since they made the thesaurus, mate). --[[User:Regulus|Regulus]] 17:38, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
:Again, you are missing the point. What if someone is in an all-evil campaign? Are they still twinking by taking an evil class? No. And who are you to say that it's impossible to have fun if you take a few levels in one class from one sourcebook? That seems a little presumptuous. The question is not "what is the best way to get the most powerful character ever so that I can pwn all my co-players in an otherwise normal, laid-back, low power campaign", the question was "what is the best way to get the highest critical chance". It's a thought experiment. If you don't like people trying to get the most out of the rules, then don't participate in these discussions solely to rain on people's parades. If your answer to this question has no bearing on the subject of increasing critical chance, then it's irrelevant to the discussion.

:And at a minimum, one would hope you possess a modicum of respect for other posters. Even if you think the whole debate is stupid (and to reiterate: if this is the case then there's no need to participate at all), one would hope you could at least do it respectfully, without ridiculing other users for their opinions. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 18:11, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

=== [[User:TK-Squared|TK-Squared]] 10:47, 1 April 2010 (UTC) ===

Ignoring the silly, and rather uninformed, outburst from one user, it's quite simple really to get a high critical strike chance (and critical modifier); we can also ignore the whole 'oh no, you're evil and therefore blahblahblah' rubbish because that's counter-productive to the optimization request.

As noted, the Disciple of Dispater (BoVD) gets double crit modifier at level 4 and triple crit modifier at level 8. I do believe the requirements of DoD means you need to be Character Level 6 at least before you can enter. This crit modifier stacks with the Improved Critical feat, but not the Keen weapon enhancement. Currently, the best crit range weapons are Kukri, Jovar (Planar Handbook) and Rapier, I'm sure there are more but these three are the 'best'. The Jovar is a two-handed weapon, Rapier is a one-handed weapon and Kukri is a light weapon. They all have a base of 18-20 crit (Range: 3). Improved Critical doubles the range (18-20 -> 15-20, Range: 6), DoD 4 will triple it (as per multiplier stacking) (15-20 -> 12-20, Range: 9) and DoD 8, finally, will quadruple it (12-20 -> 9-20).

Now, for further optimization (just in case Regulus' zealot comes after you for your beliefs), you need one level in Warblade (Tome of Battle) for the stance 'Blood in the Water' (+1 attack, +1 damage on a crit, stacking, lasts x rounds), the Aptitude weapon enhancement (ToB, the enchanted weapon counts as other weapons for specific weapon feats), Lightning Maces (when you score a threat with a mace, you gain an extra attack), TWF tree and Snap Kick (whenever you make a critical hit, you gain an extra attack). I think that's it; but it basically boils down to; whenever you attack, there's a 55% chance that you will make a threat, 5% chance you will make natural 20 and 35% chance you will not roll a threat. Therefore, there's about a 60% chance you'll get an extra attack. Every time you make a critical hit, you gain a +1 to attack and +1 to damage, therefore after you 'charge it up', possibly with a Bag of Rats, there's little chance that you will ever miss, making the chance to threat also have a 95% chance to crit as well (another attack).

The only way to stop this when it gets going is, pretty much, a long string of natural 1s, which statistically will occur.



{{Forumfooter|Discussion}}
__NOTOC__

Talk:Whirling Eater of Souls (3.5e Optimized Character Build)

2010-02-11T15:50:48Z

TK-Squared: Removed comment; I do not wish to speak ill of the departed.

== 3.0 Conversion ==

The linked material (or what was linked) has conversions for the Monster Manual and Fiend Folio, but none of the other 3.0 books listed in the build (some of which, such as the Book of Vile Darkness, have never been updated). Furthermore, those books for which conversions are given were cited for the Improved Natural Attack feat and the Soul Eater prestige class, respectively, both of which are unaffected by 3.0 to 3.5 conversion, which deals primarily with skill points and feats for monsters and damage reduction. As such, Hooper, you may stop adding the needs balance template, because you're wrong. Escalation of commitment, fail, all that jazz, don't be retarded. -- [[User:Jota|Jota]] 08:34, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

:Jota, this isn't GhostwheelWiki where we pretend we're the know all be all of Gaming, so just stop it. If you had read the history of the edits, you would of known why the link wasn't used (trying to stick to core, not ENworld copies, and WotC site is horrible to navigate). Furthermore, even if in the end conversion may be little or none, this article still needs that highlighted in bold at the top as few gaming groups do cross-edition gaming. That isn't just a homebrew change, its game changing. No one needs to waste time with an article just to learn they may not be able to play it for huge reasons like that. Until the article has that bolded up top, the template is appropriate. Period. End of discussion.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 13:10, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

::Nevermind, I did it myself as no one else seems capable of actually working together instead of being internet tough guys. Now you can run back and tell GW that his precious doesn't have a template. Though it still has other very valid ones.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 13:13, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

:::I will direct you to the linked material you provided, where it says, one paragraph in, and I quote:

{{quote|Do you need to make the changes? No.|orig=D&D 3.5 Update Booklet, page 3}}

:::Furthermore, this is a policy decision, and I'm pretty sure you don't decide what is policy. If Green Dragon says that such a disclaimer is necessary, I will refrain from further removal of said item, or if it is put to site-wide vote that concludes in the necessity and desirability of said disclaimer. That said, it does not take a genius to look at the References section, the first section with real content, and see 3.0 material. The redundant department of redundancy might value your contributions, but otherwise, totally superfluous. You'll also note I left the other templates alone, as they are correct, this one, however, is not. So, go troll on the WotC boards or whatever, but stop presuming to be more than you are. -- [[User:Jota|Jota]] 17:29, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

::::It has been brought up before on other articles, where items that are unusually homebrew should be mentioned at the beginning of the article. It is going back up, and that is that. Maybe once the wikifying is done and the references section isn't an eyesore of spaces that people will ignore, will I say its worth removing. Policy states that when a template is places, the problem the template brings up should be addressed on the talk page BEFORE the removal of the template. If you feel that the template is unnecessary, ask an admin to chime in on the subject. Stop edit warring, let an admin decide. Until that time, for the sake of the viewer's ease, it will remain.
::::Also, your quote is taken out of context for this discussion, but nice try. Tell GW hi.
::::'''Edit''': I removed it for the time being until an Admin says so as a way to end the edit warring, because I know you people love to edit war and I don't have the time to deal with that. I can be nice from time to time. In the meantime, if you're only here as GW's errand boy to "protect his work" you could actually fix the article, instead of just blindly try to prevent it from being improved for the general user. That is all I have to say on the matter. Goodbye. Yawn.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 18:22, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

:::::Like you fixed the [[Reflexman (3.5e Optimized Character Build)|Reflexman]]? You're such a hypocrite. I'm here on my own prerogative because you're a troll, not because of any affiliation I have with anyone else. Blindly trying to prevent improvement? Sounds like an 'oh, let's playtest it' redux to me. -- [[User:Jota|Jota]] 18:54, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

::::<code>"''You're a troll''" is not civil (direct rudeness: name-calling) (2:1).</code> --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:35, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

::::::Oh wow, thanks for bringing that up. I have playtesting notes to put on it when I get to the house. Thanks. Back to the transientwiki you can go now. You've been helpful.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 18:58, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

:::::::So, how's being a hypocrite like, Hooper? I mean, I've seen some people just be uncivil and malicious. I've been a bit mean to people myself. But it amazes me that you're tolerated here where, apparently the Wiki's own guidelines ([[Meta Pages]]) read:
:::::::*''When one does not edit with [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Civility civility] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Etiquette etiquette] one becomes a warning for each time (posted in the discussion; kept in tab with a per user (maybe templated?) system of warnings and bans combined). Warnings are given by admins; an admin should post one indent earlier then the post which is not civil with <nowiki><code><!-Written reason for warning.-> (#1:#2).</code> --~~~~</nowiki>. Where #1 is the users warning number and #2 is the users warning ban number. After that post it should continue along the same post thread as before (two later). The ban length starts with one week at three warnings and then increases exponentially from the sixth warning (2 weeks) for each three warnings received. ''
:::::::You aren't being civil or polite. You're not nice, and definitely not kind. You're just dishonest. I have no problem with someone getting sharp or acidic or abrasive. But pretending they're not is hypocrisy. That 'transientwiki' you refer to has users who are more honest and kinder than you are. Even ''Frank Trollman'' is better than '''you'''. He can be amazingly vitriolic and insulting, but doesn't pretend he's otherwise, when someone asks him for help, he supplies it, and he doesn't pretend that he ''isn't'' an abrasive person in an argument. Here? Apparently, passive-aggressive condescension, denial of wrongdoing, and looking the other way during a violation of policies (when it's certain people who violate policies) is the style here. --[[User:Genowhirl|Genowhirl]] 02:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

::::::<code>"''You're not nice ... [you're] definitely not kind .. You're just dishonest ... honest and kinder than you are... is better than '''you''' ... [you're] an abrasive person''" is not civil (direct rudeness: rudeness) (1:1).</code> --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:35, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

::::::::TL;DR, and off-topic. See [http://pix.motivatedphotos.com/2008/6/16/633492346461806528-no-one-cares.jpg here] for response.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 03:43, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::Actually, a lot of people care. You're one of the things holding this Wiki back. Just to check, I showed a few pretty much neutral, reasonable people with no prior experience with this wiki how you treat people. They independently arrived at a similar opinion to my own (which contains several words which, while accurate, violate this 'no swearing' policy). Also, ye gods, you can't even ''attempt'' to answer or attempt to justify yourself in any way? I ''do'' feel sorry for your kid, though. --[[User:Genowhirl|Genowhirl]] 03:56, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

::::::::<code>"''You're one of the things holding this Wiki back''" is not civil (direct rudeness: belittling) (2:1).</code> --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:44, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::Did you show these "people" the years of putting up with the attitude of ''(what I've personally called:)'' the "Tavern Gang" and trying to be nice, only to be treated rudely? I said long ago I would treat individuals the way they treated others for all those years. That is not hypocrisy, it is just being honest. I've kept that promise, and don't really care at all what you or your "people" think. Once again, you can go back to the transientwiki or help with the article.
::::::::::Back to the real topic. Is anyone planning on actually trying to salvage this?  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 04:00, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::::Yes, I did. I showed them the quotes they put up. The little bits and the like. The Tavern Gang still came out looking better than you do. Fairly normal, rational, uninvolved people think you're the dregs of the Internet. And, heck, this looked pretty salvaged when it was made. All the problems with it are in your own mind, which is being pretty unreasonable right now. --[[User:Genowhirl|Genowhirl]] 04:09, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::<code>"''you're the dregs of the Internet''" is not civil (direct rudeness: rudeness) (3:1).</code> --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:47, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::::Yawn. Could really care less. Idiots agreeing with idiots. I'll start fixing the article.  [[User:Hooper|''' Hooper ''']][[User talk:Hooper|  talk  ]][[Special:Contributions/Hooper|  contribs  ]][[Special:Emailuser/Hooper|  email  ]] 04:14, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::::<code>"''... [You're] [i]diots agreeing with idiots''" is not civil (direct rudeness: name-calling) (1:1).</code> --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:32, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

:::::::::::::How about this: improve the article. This is a ''3.5e'' CO (see the section and the name). This uses 3e material. Problem. Needs to be remedied; who cares if something says 3e works with 3.5e. Unfortunately it does not; that's why there are two editions.
:::::::::::::"''The Tavern Gang still came out looking better than you do. Fairly normal, rational, uninvolved people think you're the dregs of the Internet.''" — The blocked users broke rules. The blocked users got punished as a result. Other then that nothing happened. I think you have a skewed idea of reality. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 04:35, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Discussion:What is the hp of, oooh, a mountain?

2010-02-11T15:23:40Z

TK-Squared: /* Badger 03:30, 11 February 2010 (UTC) */

== How much hp would an average mountain have? ==

=== [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 11:35, 11 December 2007 (MST) ===

For the purpose of showing off the ridiculous power of a plot device, I was going to have it destroy a mountain, and for effect, come with dice rolls en masse. But how much hp would a mountain have anyway? What is the break DC?

=== [[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 12:34, 11 December 2007 (MST) ===

Well that all depends on the size of the mountain, both in height and width. How big are you thinking? Smallest possible? Everest? Olympus mons?

=== [[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:09, 11 December 2007 (MST) ===

According to the DMG, "unworked stone" (i.e. the stuff a mountain would be made of) has a Break DC of 65, Hardness of 8, and 900 hp per 10ft by 10ft section. So, how big is your mountain?

Lets say you have one that is 1500 meters tall (from the ground, not sea level), and 1000 by 1000 metres on it's base. The profile is an isoscelese triangle. The area of a cone (which is simular to a mountain) is:

<math>\frac{\pi r^2 h}{3}</math>.

First, we need to convert meters to feet. 4921 ft tall, 3280 ft wide. R=1640.

<math>\frac{\pi \times 1640^2 \times 4921}{3} = \frac{4.158061742 \times 10^{10}}{3} = 1.386020581 \times 10^{10}</math>.

To get the number of <math>10 \text{ft}^3</math>:

<math>\frac{1.386020581 \times 10^{10}}{10} = 1386020581</math>.

To get the approximate number of Hp for the mountain, <math>1386020581 \times 900</math> is <math>1.247418523 \times 10^{12}</math>.

Converted from standard form, that is <math>1000000000000 \times 1.247418523 = 1247418523000 \text{Hp}</math>.

<big><big><big><big>1247418523000 Hp.</big></big></big></big>

That means that you have to deal 1247418523000+(8xnumber of attacks used to destroy a mountain)= 1247418523008 for a single blow (which I assume is the point).

<big><big><big><big>1247418523008</big></big></big></big>

That is one mean creature...

Although this is all in approximations.

=== [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 21:31, 11 December 2007 (MST) ===

Sweeeeeet jesus!

Sound good to me. I'll round it off to 1,200,000,000,000 and proceed from there. You guys are a great help! ''':D'''

=== [[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:26, 12 December 2007 (MST) ===

Although that is a mountain that is 1500 meters tallm and 1000 by 1000 meters base.

=== [[Special:Contributions/84.108.164.233|84.108.164.233]] 06:10, 21 February 2008 (MST) ===

actually, unworked stone has 900hp per 5x10x10 [[SRD:Epic Obstacles]] which means 1800hp per 10 feet cubed. 10 feet cubed is roughly 3.1 meters cubed or roughly 30 cubic meters. this means that one cubic meter has 1800/30=60hp. the volume of a 1000 meters high mountain with a cone shape is (height times area of base)/3. height is 1000. area of base is pi times 500 squared which is roughly 785,000 hence the volume of the mountain is 261,666,666 cubic meters. say 260,000,000 cubic meters. hence the hp of the mountain is 15,600,000,000. say for simplicity sake 15,000,000,000 hp. this result has 2 less digits then the one quoted above and is "only" 15 billion hp. now, that would take roughly 430,000,000 fireballs (more if caster is less than 10th level). more actually since i did not take into account hardness. does hardness count? anyway, at, say, 100 spells a day that will take, oh, 4,300,000 days or 11,780 years. it would take even more using magic missile! or 'mage hand' to remove the dirt by "hand". dammit! just dig! you lazy bastard!

:Only in epic. In non epic it's 900 per 10 by 10 by 10. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:05, 30 March 2008 (MDT)

=== [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 14:19, 21 February 2008 (MST) ===

This just keeps getting more awesome. ''':D''' And Fireball would do half damage since its rock, but no hardness. Use Sonic Fireballs instead.

Even better, let's give a Warforged (since he doesn't sleep or tire) an Adamantine Greatsword and assume Str 18 and no Enchantment bonus. On average he rolls a total of 6 damage and +4 Str, so 10 damage a round. That means for 15 billion hp it will take him 1,500,000,000 rounds. A round is six seconds so it will take him 150,000,000 minutes, or 2,500,000 hours, or 104167 days, or 14881 weeks, or 286 years to destroy the mountain. So we just need 286 very bored warforged to cleave apart a mountain in a year. And if we had 14,872 bored warforged we could wreck it in a week.

Get to work!

=== [[User:Penske|Penske]] 18:21, 21 February 2008 (MST) ===

H.O.L.Y. C.R.A.P.

=== [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 19:39, 21 February 2008 (MST) ===

Never challenge D&D players to figure out something that doesn't seem to be in the rules. They will find rules for it. And math. Lots of math.

===[[User:TK-Squared|TK-Squared]] 20:12, 20 March 2008 (MDT) ===

To interject at a rather later point, there is a flaw in Eiji's math. The flaw resides in his average damage. The average damage of a greatsword is 7 (1d6 average = 3.5, 2d6 average = 7). That means you're doing a total of 11 damage per hit. That's 1,363,636,364 rounds (rounded up) to destroy it rather than your crazed 1.5 billion (My 1.36 billion is much cooler). Obviously, now it'll take less time. HA!

(Let's not mention that he misses every 1 in 20 rounds)
=== [[User:Ramses IV|Ramses IV]] 06:31, 21 March 2008 (MDT) ===

I don'y know about that last 1/20 statement, TK. Walls, stone, doors, etc. have an AC of 0. All you have to bypass is the hardness to start doing damage, which you've done with the Adamantine sword. I know that rolling a 1 is normally an automatic miss, but I take the AC of 0 to mean automatic hit. I don't know if that's a houserule or not, but that's the way I was taught and the way I play today. Am I right, or does the "1 is a miss rule" still apply even to that?

=== [[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:55, 21 March 2008 (MDT) ===

Applying the "1 I miss rule" to a mountain is just silly (unless you are a long way away). It's not particulaly hard to hit a mountain, just hard to hurt it. Which is where hardness comes in.

===[[User:Kisame93|Kisame93]] 06:37, 30 March 2008 ===

When i read this i cracked up!....
I hope i see the day when the mountian fall!......

Also this gave me an idea of a army of warforeged that destroys a mountian base! YAY! any1 wanna do the math for a Keep with mountains all around it.......??????

=== Shadowfax 15:45, 3 April 2008 ===

Seems like a stupid question.

If you could summon a Warforged you should be able or be close to being able to cast Wish or Limited Wish just wish it was gone. "I wish this mountain was immediatly removed from time and space." Ta Da wow I just broke a sweat.

=== [[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:53, 3 April 2008 (MDT) ===

What, and risk the DM removing it from time and space, and placing it back in again above your head? SQUISH! DMs can do that, you know, and many would. It's not sensible to just use wish like that, whenever you feel like it. You could end up dead. Destroying a mountain with wish is a poor plot device when used to emphasize the power of an NPC, which is what Eiji wanted to do.

=== [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 15:02, 3 April 2008 (MDT) ===

Another way to have some fun with math... According to some very brief research I did (so this might not be accurate), the average mass of rock has a density 2.7 times that of water. So... It weighs 168 pounds per cubic foot.

That would mean that we have:
<math>weight (lbs) = 1386020581 ft.^{3} \times 168 lbs</math>

'''weight = 232,851,457,608 lbs'''

So... Now for the fun. How much strength does a [[colossal]] quadruped need to move a mountain? Well, it has a 120x multiplier to that of a human for pushing it, 24x to carry it. Every 10 strength quadruples its carrying capacity. As I write this I have no idea how large the Strength score is going to be by the way.

This table summarizes it's base lifting power:

{| class="d20"
|+
=====Table: Carrying Capacity=====
|-
![[SRD:Strength|Strength]] Score !! Heavy Load !! Push
|- class="even"
|20 || 9,600 lb. || 48,000 lb.
|-
|21 || 11,040 lb. || 55,200 lb.
|- class="even"
|22 || 12,480 lb. || 62,400 lb.
|-
|23 || 14,400 lb. || 72,000 lb.
|- class="even"
|24 || 16,800 lb. || 84,000 lb.
|-
|25 || 19,200 lb. || 96,000 lb.
|- class="even"
|26 || 22,080 lb. || 110,400 lb.
|-
|27 || 24,960 lb. || 124,800 lb.
|- class="even"
|28 || 28,800 lb. || 144,000 lb.
|-
|29 || 33,600 lb. || 168,000 lb.
|- class="even"
|+10 ||×4 ||×4 ||×4
|}

So... Let's figure out what Strength "bracket" the mountain is in to push:

'''nsi:''' Number of 10 point Strength Increases

<math>\mbox {Weight of the mountain} = 168,000 \mbox {lb.} \times 4^{nsi}</math> 
<math>232,851,457,608 \mbox {lb.} = 168,000 \mbox {lb.} \times 4^{nsi}</math> 
<math>1,386,020.58 \mbox {lb.} = 4^{nsi}</math> 
<math>\log _4(1,386,020.58) = \log _4(4^{nsi})</math> 
<math>nsi = \frac{\log (1,386,020.58)}{\log (4)}</math> 

nsi = 10.2

Rounding up: nsi = 11

So it needs approximately 139 strength to push a mountain (possibly up to 9 less, I'm not going to calculate that).

Now to carry it!

<math>\mbox {Weight of the mountain} = 33,600 \mbox {lb.} \times 4^{nsi}</math> 
<math>232,851,457,608 \mbox {lb.} = 33,600 \mbox {lb.} \times 4^{nsi}</math> 
<math>6,930,102.9 \mbox {lb.} = 4^{nsi}</math> 
<math>\log _4(6,930,102.9) = \log _4(4^{nsi})</math> 
<math>nsi = \frac{\log (6,930,102.9)}{\log (4)}</math> 

nsi = 11.3

Rounding up: nsi = 12

So it needs approximately 149 strength to carry a mountain (possibly up to 9 less, I'm not going to calculate that).

Using the [[SRD:Transform (Epic Spell Seed)|Transform spell seed]] it is a DC 50 to turn a human into a [[colossal]] sized quadruped permanently. That is without any mitigation (I would usually advise damage for a permanent spell).

Assuming a starting strength of 20 (15 +5 from wishes) before the transform, the character will have a +32 strength from growing colossal. this means we need to gain +97 strength.

Using the [[SRD:Fortify (Epic Spell Seed)|Fortify spell seed]] it will be a DC of 384 to increase the strength by +97. Now we mitigate it and we can realize why epic spells are stupid... Fortify lasts 20 hours. We don't need nearly that long to whip a mountain. Burn 20,000 XP → -200. Target: personal → -2. Increase casting time by 10 minutes → -20. Increase casting time by 56 days → -112. Final DC: 50.

There you go. You can now pick up mountains for the next 20 hours. Yes it takes 56 days to cast, but it is worth it! Get some levels of hulking hurler and up your strength by 10 more (+40 DC on the fortify spell, burn an extra 20 days to offset it). Then you can whip mountains at people. Who doesn't want to do that?

=== [[User:TK-Squared|TK-Squared]] 20:01, 7 April 2008 (MDT) ===
Of course, for even better mitigating circumstances... Just start gating in a few solars...

=== [[User:Badger|Badger]] 03:30, 11 February 2010 (UTC) ===
Don't forget as the mountain breaks up it's still a bunch of big rocks. Conservation of Mass tells us that even when you pulverize a mountain you still have a mountain, just made of sand. You're going to need magic to explain away the dust and pebbles that are created.

=== [[User:TK-Squared|TK-Squared]] 15:23, 11 February 2010 (UTC) ===

Item casting Gust of Wind every round?



{{Forumfooter|Discussion}}
__NOTOC__

Why not just get multiple people casting the spell?

== And what about a planet????? ==

well a planet(for example, earth) if around 10,000 miles diameter. so for the radius you need a 5,000 to work with. that comes down to V=(4/3)P x 125,000,000,000. 125,000,000,000 miles=660,000,000,000,000 feet so now you now have V=4.188 x 660,000,000,000,000. so that comes out to be.....2,764,080,000,000,000 cubic feet, devide by ten(because of the 10x10x10 thingy) and you then get...276,408,000,000,000 now you multiply by 900(non-epic) to get 248,767,200,000,000,000. and if you are in epic then it would be....497,534,400,000,000,000
so non-epic would have 248,767,200,000,000,000 HP(that is one hell of a hit) and epic is 497,534,400,000,000,000 hp(even harder =D) and if you do decide to do this, you must(if DM wants their playing feild to stay intact that is...) consider all the goodie-goodie clerics around the world(with a world of this size and stuff you would have 6,802,000,000 people, 90% of which are normal weaklings...75577777 not so normal people, devide it equaly between the classes(base only) and you have.....5,038,518 of each class so you have 5,038,518 clerics alone... minus about 25%(not all evil want the world gone...)201,540 people that would try to repair the earth. not to mention the fact that druids & rangers can heal too. so you now have clerics + druids + rangers(of which i will half, because they arnet as good at it.) or in simplerer (and not so nerdy terms :D) 705392people all casting cure serious wounds on earth, and then you have the same amount of wizards, sorcerers, and bards all casting repair object and stuff so basicly i think that earth would turn to dust, all PC's trying to destroy earth are sucks in by gravity(like quicksand :D) and the NPC magic uses repair it, killing anyone inside instantly, and technicly they could heal the earth allot faster and easyer that a person could destroy it(as each would now only have to heal 352,665,129,197.64562782969094100387 hp and such over the course it takes you to recharge this weapon and such.) and if you really want to know if chuck noris can push the world...calculate the frickin carrying capacity thing yourself....

hey if anyone knows how...to..um...make this look like it took less work...and make it look more like Sam Kay's then go ahead...im not gonna stop you...