Talk:4e Race Preload

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Race Creation Instructions[edit]

Hey admins who know 4e, would one of you kindly write up instructions to go on the top of the page for users when they make new races (like the DnD Race Editing Instructions version)? --Ganteka 22:48, 7 May 2009 (MDT)

Add Instructions as well as this page. --Green Dragon 21:37, 30 October 2009 (MDT)

Make the Template 4e-Appropriate[edit]

4e doesn't have level adjustment or CR. This template is completely inappropriate for making a race for 4e. --Wrecan 07:14, 4 September 2009 (MDT)

I think that's just a carry over from the 3.5e title page. The actual template itself (were you to click the button and add a new race) is fine (I think). *knows nothing about 4e* -- Jota 07:19, 4 September 2009 (MDT)
It does not have those parameters. --Green Dragon 21:37, 30 October 2009 (MDT)

Racial Options[edit]

Discussion moved from User talk:Green Dragon#4e Race Preload. --Green Dragon 12:16, 21 December 2011 (MST)

Hey Green Dragon,

Should I go into the race preload and add in the Racial Options section below the adventurers? --Axl 21:36, 10 November 2011 (MST)

What do you mean by racial options? Like the feats, etc? --Green Dragon 23:14, 10 November 2011 (MST)
Yeah. Like on the Dark Spike Hylian. Should I just edit and put that section in the preload (can I even edit the preload or does an admin do that?)? --Axl 15:16, 19 November 2011 (MST)
Preloads are protected in the instance of vandalism. You think it is a good idea to include something like "remove this if no racial options have been added" or something? --Green Dragon 13:35, 22 November 2011 (MST)
Yeah, sure, we can do that. Would the racial options include backgrounds as well as feats? --Axl 17:27, 2 December 2011 (MST)
I added a section. Does it look alright? --Green Dragon 12:27, 21 December 2011 (MST)

4e Race Standards[edit]

Discussion moved from User talk:Green Dragon#4e Race Standards. --Green Dragon (talk) 10:05, 14 June 2014 (MDT)

Should we be using the most up-to-date formatting for 4e Races? The latest books don't have the "three adventurers" section. It goes:

  • Statblock
  • Encounter power
  • Lead text
  • Physical Qualities
  • Attitudes and Beliefs
  • Communities
  • Adventurers (this describes the race's favoured classes)
  • Roleplaying (Characteristics and Names go here)
  • Utility powers (optional: Heroes of the Feywild / Shadow have them, but they're not in Forgotten Kingdoms / Fallen Lands) Marasmusine (talk) 08:31, 14 June 2014 (MDT)
That would make sense. I have worked on Aaenshi (4e Race), how is it?
I can work on the races, but the exact formatting should be resolved before we do an overhaul. --Green Dragon (talk) 08:54, 14 June 2014 (MDT)
That's more or less it. The new format doesn't have the "Play a <race> if you want..." section in the lead, and the Adventurers section describes favoured classes instead of the "three sample adventurers". Marasmusine (talk) 01:31, 17 June 2014 (MDT)
The newly added races can be "fully" updated, but the current ones need to be updated to a certain stage since it is unfair if we hang up all the pages on a few sentences here and there which we have not asked for until this standard change.
Does the Aaenshi (4e Race) seem fair now after moving a few things around? In particular the "to be..." has been related to the roleplaying points to consider, but without the detailed descriptions. The adventurers, though, are a part that I think the new races can have fully correct, but that we can accept the older format in this section still. --Green Dragon (talk) 04:55, 19 June 2014 (MDT)
Looks okay, and I agree.
The help text for Adventurers can read something like "For each favored class, describe what members of your race of that class are like. Alternatively provide succinct descriptions for three sample adventurers."
The favored classes have their own tier-4 sub-heading.
The roleplaying section does have bold text - for example a half-elf has bold text for "You are a child of two worlds", "You have natural leadership ability" and so on - and these are the lead sentences for a paragraphs that go into further detail. They went crazy with descriptive text in the Essentials books! Marasmusine (talk) 07:18, 19 June 2014 (MDT)
Do the descriptions seem sufficient now? Are there any mistakes from the standard that I did not catch? --Green Dragon (talk) 06:04, 22 June 2014 (MDT)
A note about race standards. Race do not need an image or feats to be "complete". We cannot ask for more than the base requirements otherwise we are setting our own standards which means that the reasons behind the improving, reviewing, and removing templates are not "binding" and/or their use is debatable to the degree of useless [1]. --Green Dragon (talk) 12:24, 22 June 2014 (MDT)
It's never been clear to me what the "base standards" are. It's apparently not what is presented in the PHB, since those races have supporting images and feats in addition to huge amounts of flavour text. But at the same time we shouldn't be "setting our own standards"? I take it now that the intended "base standards" is some amount of text in each section, but not a supporting image or feats section. On the other hand, Stub has been added to pages that have had two adventurer descriptions rather than three. It's a bit arbitrary.
In addition, Help:Improving, Reviewing, and Removing Templates says that the stub template can be added to request that a page have flavour added, and that "discussion about it's completeness/flavor should take place on it's talk page." Alu-Fiend (4e Race) has missing flavour text, but you removed the stub without a discussion. Marasmusine (talk) 01:35, 23 June 2014 (MDT)
Oh and the preload text is good, thankyou! The real test is how new editors interpret it. Marasmusine (talk) 01:36, 23 June 2014 (MDT)
I am pleased that you find that the preload text will be useful.
As I mentioned on User talk:Marasmusine#Deity Completeness we are asking for the preload standard. Although races in 4e books have lots of feats attached to them– not all of them do, so I do not feel that we can require a feat section to be considered complete. --Green Dragon (talk) 04:07, 24 June 2014 (MDT)
Personal tools
Home of user-generated,
homebrew, pages!
d20M
miscellaneous
admin area
Terms and Conditions for Non-Human Visitors