Talk:4e Races

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

dpl[edit]

I few things I think would be very helpful to be added to the dpl

  • Made it so one can pipe |category= (e.g. |notcategory=Needs Balance|Wording Issues|Formatting Issues|Stub|Delete) (using recursive templates Template:Reviewing Template and then "What Links Here"). Tricky, eh?
  • Made the entire dpl be able to be added to a table with the dpl being able to define a rowspan and a colspan.

Just two things which would help make this organizational structure work leaps and leaps better. --Green Dragon 14:27, 31 July 2009 (MDT)

On the old DPL I got the pipes working pretty well. On the new dpl it is not showing up right. --Green Dragon 22:16, 30 October 2009 (MDT)
On the old DPL's I did not know that replace works however, as evidenced by D20 Modern Campaign Settings ([1]) it seems to. I cannot get it to work on this page however if possible it would help with making this page look nicer (or of course if one can figure out why the dpl displays incorrectly). --Green Dragon 15:50, 6 December 2009 (MST)
I can only view source so I can't really assist, but I do notice that there is an additional space on the new line of code on this page that I did not include on the D20 Modern page. That additional space may be nothing, or it may be something - with wiki code it is hard to tell. Try removing it. (It is the space found within this portion of the code: format=,* [[%PAGE%).   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   22:01, 6 December 2009 (MST)
I unlocked it for a bit. Feel free to give it a go. --Green Dragon 23:02, 6 December 2009 (MST)
I got it to work. Stupidly I was using the standard pipe (|) instead of the ¦. Works now! Maybe now if only columns could span somehow. Maybe I'll just table it; I'll see. --Green Dragon 01:29, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Ways to get approved?[edit]

Are we supposed ask, make a statement on the discussion page or just wait? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.97.173.11 (talkcontribs) . Please sign your posts!

Are you asking about creating a new 4e race? All you have to do is type the name of your race into the input box on this page, and click "Create new race". Then fill out the pre-loaded form and save. You don't need to ask first, though people will probably discuss your race with you on the associated talk page. If you need help editing wiki code, the easiest thing to do is to find another page you like and copy the code from there. If you need more help, this is a pretty good guide, or you can ask one of the many helpful users. JazzMan 17:51, 9 April 2010 (UTC) PS: I'm sure someone will say this at some point, so I'll just be the first: if you will be making a lot of edits, you might consider creating an account. This will help other users recognize your work, and it will provide an easy way for you to keep track of your creations. Secondly, you should sign all of your posts using four tildes (~~~~) to keep conversations easier to read.
Well, thanks guys, this was really helpful and I hope someone else can find it useful, too. This is the person who asked the question, and I've had this account for a while. I've made quite a few edits to the race (Half-Dragon), and while it's gone through a lot of rough patches, I think it's done; I even followed the balance and editing that was suggested. It's been about a week, but no one seems to be changing it. Do I have to do it, or do I need to contact a mod to tell them about, or will it get corrected at a certain time? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Otogi (talkcontribs) . Please sign your posts!
If you think the issues raised in the tags have been solved, then you can go ahead and remove them yourself. With such a big wiki, it's hard for people to keep track of everything that goes on. Plus that specific page is over a year and a half old, so people might not even be watching for it any more. JazzMan 00:29, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

confusion[edit]

i think that we should put a separation canon races from fanon ones.

Design disclaimer[edit]

Can we segregate the races with a design disclaimer? (e.g. large creatures, races that add special mechanics outside of the normal design space like the Chirask) Marasmusine 01:32, 30 December 2011 (MST)

Furries[edit]

For fun, here's a list of animal-based races, not including the traditional ones I recognize from the monster manual.

  • Anukimori (cat)
  • Felid (cat)
  • Felinoid (cat)
  • Hito-Neko (cat)
  • Miw (cat)
  • Neko, Variant (cat)
  • Catfolk (cat)
  • Catkin (cat)
  • Aaenshi (fox)
  • Cerinian (fox)
  • Kitsune (fox)
  • Lion-Man (lion)
  • Tiger-Man (tiger)
  • Avian (bird)
  • Crane (bird)
  • Faltzar (bird)
  • Birdborn (bird)
  • Fenirborn (wolf)
  • Wolf-Man (wolf)
  • Wolfkin (wolf)
  • Bowman's Wolf (wolf)
  • Canine Moreau (dog)
  • Rat-Man (rat)
  • Skaven (rat)
  • Monkey-Man (monkey)
  • Truikani (monkey)
  • Murmillio (shark)
  • Shark-Man (shark)
  • Rabbit-Man (rabbit)
  • Serpent-Man (snake)
  • Arachnoid (spider)
  • Varis (hedgehog)
  • Genothrope (any)
  • Ant-Kind (ant)
  • Bearborn (bear)
  • Cowborn (cow)
  • Beastfolk (wolves, bears, cats and birds)
  • Monkeybird (monkey! bird!)

Clearly we don't have enough cow-based races. We should have enough to at least equal the variety of cat-eared people. Marasmusine 07:41, 30 December 2011 (MST)

I find that a little creepy. Why so many cats? JazzMan 08:54, 2 January 2012 (MST)

Categories[edit]

Okay, I'd like to introduce some thematic categories to help people browse the races. For example, all the furries mentioned above could be in Category:Anthropomorphic. The various Half- races could be in Category:Dual Heritage. Any objections? Marasmusine 04:14, 15 March 2012 (MDT)

Would these change the current organization or just be an alternative method of finding races? I just feel a little uncertain about fully organizing the races in a way not done by Wizards of the Coast. --Green Dragon 14:26, 15 March 2012 (MDT)
I don't see anything wrong with supplementing the categories we already have. You may not want to reorganize, as GD has said, but adding information is always helpful. JazzMan 15:04, 16 March 2012 (MDT)
The latter. The races will still have categories for all the official mechanics (origin, type, keywords) plus thematic categories. As I've been reviewing the races, I've noticed certain themes - ones that can be objectively defined. The two I mention above are probably the broadest of these. There's also the possibility of categories for size ("small", "large", probably not medium since that's the default) since that's mechanically defined and may also help readers find a race they want. Marasmusine 15:59, 16 March 2012 (MDT)
If it will be successful by all means implement it. If it is not successful then it can always be undone. --Green Dragon 19:46, 16 March 2012 (MDT)
Since this page is just a list something should be done to make people find a race that they would like to play more easily. I think that people look for various things when selecting a race. For example, they may look for the "other" categories and the "playing a" or they may look at the racial traits.
I find that "playing a" is a short comprehensive section about the races in question. Should we organize this page like 4e Feats (an "all" section, the origins, types, and keywords, and then the "other" categories?) with a short description from "playing a" on each separate page in the syntax of 4e Classes? --Green Dragon 14:31, 17 March 2012 (MDT)
I was thinking something like that. I need more time to picture different layouts. It might be helpful to know if we can do a) expandble/collapsable sections and b) sortable lists. Marasmusine 16:43, 17 March 2012 (MDT)
Yes, both can be done. See also "Create new class, paragon path, or epic destiny" and a page like Classes (Tirr Supplement). --Green Dragon 17:35, 17 March 2012 (MDT)
Is it appropriate to auto-hide the races with an improving, reviewing, or removing template present? A races by type section is missing as well. --Green Dragon 11:33, 29 March 2012 (MDT)

Per Discussion:Where Can I Find a Former 4e Race? I'll try to find a way to make the collapsable tables more obvious. Ideally I'd like the [show] link all the way on the left-hand side but it seems fixed to the right-side of the table. I've reduced the width of the tables which has helped a bit. Any idea why it's black and not blue? Marasmusine 04:04, 6 April 2012 (MDT)

I changed them to be class="4e" tables which I think helps mediate the problem. --Green Dragon 22:13, 6 April 2012 (MDT)
If I put the tables in divs the td formatting works, but I wonder if there is another way since the divs break the table too. Do you know how to make it work? --Green Dragon 10:02, 25 April 2012 (MDT)
I used spans and removed some of the formatting errors. I feel that the table opening (from the dpl table) is okay since it is hardly obtrusive. If we can remove this, though, that would be even better. At least now the table formatting goes through though. --Green Dragon (talk) 14:10, 26 May 2012 (MDT)

Regarding "Races by Type" - all PC Races should be Humanoid. We only have two homebrew races that are not humanoid, and both have huge balance issues. I think we should remove this as a search option. Marasmusine 00:53, 23 April 2012 (MDT)

I removed it. If there is ever a need later (for whatever reason) it can always be discussed again. --Green Dragon 10:02, 25 April 2012 (MDT)

List Test[edit]

If we insert a "description" field into the template on every race's page this could look nicer (no need for an x0 template). Marasmusine (talk) 00:56, 2 June 2012 (MDT)

Great idea. I added such tables as appropriate. --Green Dragon (talk) 00:05, 3 June 2012 (MDT)
Did having multiple racial templates on a page mess up the dpl? If so, I think I'd rather separate them out onto individual pages rather than merge them together. Marasmusine (talk) 01:45, 3 June 2012 (MDT)
It did. If I remember right, books that have tables with races' basic information and races with specific gender-based traits merge them together in those tables, so we should be fine. --Green Dragon (talk) 10:58, 3 June 2012 (MDT)
Ah, none of the published 4e races have gender differences; the nearest I can see is the Shifter which has two forms - this is printed in one trait box, but in a format that our template doesn't support (ability scores, skills and trait are printed in their own separate subsections). I will have a play around to make things more readable. Marasmusine (talk) 01:53, 4 June 2012 (MDT)
That must have been the one I was thinking of. I recalled that our format was getting closer to matching it, and separating races would be mis-formatted. --Green Dragon (talk) 18:49, 4 June 2012 (MDT)

Correction[edit]

Fungi aren't plants. --142.25.102.130 17:09, 4 March 2013 (MST)

Correct, but we want them to be effected by things that effect plants, because that's the abstract keyword WotC have used for plant-like creatures (including eumycota like myconids). Marasmusine (talk) 00:31, 5 March 2013 (MST)
Personal tools
Home of user-generated,
homebrew, pages!
d20M
miscellaneous
admin area
Terms and Conditions for Non-Human Visitors