Talk:DnD Equipment
From D&D Wiki
Contents |
[edit] Categories
Possibly this needs to be broken down into more catogories.
- Weapon (Simple Weapon, Martial Weapon, Exotic Weapon)
- Armour (Light Armour, Medium Armour, Heavy Armour, Exotic Armour)
- Equipment (Gear, Tools and Skill Kits, Special Substances)
- I will do it later today, thanks for the idea. --Green Dragon
- I can do it if you want... I have done some of the adjusting to the categories given that I am adding items to the list. If you want I can look through all the books I got and come up with one that should make it easy then adjust it to that. It should not be that hard really. --Law
- Awesome Law, go ahead :). Thanks so much. --Green Dragon
- Its done... Well im done with my adjustments. Some areas are still farly gerenral but weapons and armors should say if the are simple and such in there discript anyway so that should be easy to add in if any that are added dont have it listed.
- Otherwise I am done with adding all the magic items and such for a while. I might add my stronghold components on here (which means a new part will be added). But ill think/get around to that in a little while.
- I hope you like the stuff I added. --Law
- Wow, thanks so much. I actually forgot to add them, thats why I never got around to them... I must say, you did a very good job, impressive. Anyway thanks so much Law. --Green Dragon
Once I have converted over a bit more of the content from the "DnD" identifier to the "3.5e" identifier I will create a category to find orphans (this will also help the final changes over). --Sabre070 16:25, 13 November 2008 (MST)
[edit] Categories
Updated the categories for all the entries. Added new categories as appropriate. Added a full category spread to all the weapons. Moved a few items up to "artifact" status. --Dmilewski 10:03, 8 September 2006 (MDT)
[edit] New Category
Added Flavor Treasure to the categories. This encompasses non-standard treasure such as furniture and other bits that wouldn't necessarily be useful to an adventuring party. --Calidore Chase 02:50, 9 November 2006 (MST)
- Looks fine (except it is not a category, as that means something else entirely). --Green Dragon 22:40, 9 November 2006 (MST)
Is their a section for psionic weapon enhancements? Zau 16:20, 20 April 2008 (MDT)
[edit] Ack
What happened? --Calidore Chase 08:31, 16 November 2006 (MST)
- Checks out in Safari 2.0.4 and Firefox 2.0. I've seen what Calidore's talking about. It seems on IE 6 the text is small and gets smaller towards the bottom. I hate the standards fighting between browers... Long live WebKit/KHTML!... Maybe Gecko.
- The text gets smaller?? I am sorry but my IE7 or IE6 do not work, as they cannot connect to the Internet. I use FireFox 2.0 and with FireFox there is no problem. However, I can image the problem, as I never closed the "span style's". So, does it look better now after I closed all the "span style's"? --Green Dragon 10:09, 17 November 2006 (MST)
- Awesome, back to normal. Thanks. --Calidore Chase 10:14, 17 November 2006 (MST)
- No Problem. --Green Dragon 10:16, 17 November 2006 (MST)
[edit] Landing Page
Does this new landing page look better than the old landing page? Is it too confusing? What could be improved? --Green Dragon 22:25, 19 November 2006 (MST)
- This is much better; all the categories can be easily seen at once and picked through. The only difficulty is that the lists tend to get long and it is difficult to separate out information (it tends to swim before the eyes). Is there some way to keep the chart concise (as is much better than before) but to still make it easier to find information in each column? Perhaps splitting one of the columns... I'm not sure. I'll think about it-- -EldritchNumen 23:00, 20 November 2006 (MST)
- This is exactly what I was thinking... I believe that some of the problems may be from the fact that their are to many chioces, and some of the options, such as Class Tools and Skill Kits, are confusing and not well worded. It may make it better to either merge a couple options, or make all the wording easier to read. However, I do not see what ones could be merged, and I cannot think of a better way to word many of the options. This really needs a revision, it is just a tough nut. --Green Dragon 23:24, 20 November 2006 (MST)
[edit] Ease of use
Would it be possible to put a notation next to each entry indicating the number of entries contained in each section? --Calidore Chase 07:47, 27 November 2006 (MST)
- Hello Calidore Chase. It is possible, however I would have to build an extension to do it. This would not be that large of a problem, so let me know if you would want this feature added. Thanks, --Blue Dragon 20:26, 27 November 2006 (MST)
- While Blue Dragon is programming that extension (he still is waiting for the "go") I will make a non-dynamic version. Does this way look okay? Should this be how the dynamic version looks? --Green Dragon 22:15, 27 November 2006 (MST)
- That is perfect. Nice, simple and easy to read. Makes it easier to go looking for contributed entries in the equipment section and makes the chart very useful. So yes, please add the extension feature. I, at least will thank you for it. --Calidore Chase 07:11, 29 November 2006 (MST)
- Blue Dragon finally spend a little time working on it, and installed DPL2C, which will solve the problem. The number of items now is dynamic, and it looks the exact same. I hope this is what you had in mind. --Green Dragon 11:52, 3 December 2006 (MST)
- It looks great. I like it! --EldritchNumen 18:33, 6 December 2006 (MST)
- I like it as well, it is ...easier. --Green Dragon 18:56, 6 December 2006 (MST)
- Awesome, now I just need to add another item to test it out. --Calidore Chase 02:37, 7 December 2006 (MST)
[edit] Potions / Oils
Since potions and oils are simply spells in drinkable form, is it really necessary to have a section for them? Anyone can make a spell into a potion in about 15 seconds flat... just a thought. Getting rid of the categories potions/oils and epic potions/oils would clean up the table a bit... --EldritchNumen 19:02, 13 December 2006 (MST)
- We can keep them for now, however, if their are no items in them withing a month they will get deleted. Does this sound okay? Or would you really rather have them gone now? However, they might help some DM sometime, who knows... --Green Dragon 20:09, 13 December 2006 (MST)
- That sounds fine, of course. I just suspect that nothing will get added... but, if it does, no big deal. If there's something there, then they're definitely worth keeping. --EldritchNumen 20:20, 13 December 2006 (MST)
- Agreed. --Green Dragon 20:50, 13 December 2006 (MST)
[edit] Looking for Something
A few weeks ago I found an item that I think was basically a medieval, magically powered mech. I think it was in the template section but now I can't seem to find it. If someone happens to know what section it is or can just give me a link I'd be really grateful; I was hoping to use it in an upcoming game. --Tommy19 23:26, 22 December 2007 (MST)
- Nevermind, I found it. I was looking in the wrong place. --Tommy19 11:40, 23 December 2007 (MST)
[edit] Books, such as Spellbooks
Where would a book (such as a spellbook) go? What category? --Othtim 02:36, 27 February 2008 (MST)
- Wondrous Items? Flavor Treasure? I don't know... We may have to make another category. --Green Dragon 00:15, 28 February 2008 (MST)
- In the SRD, they're under "Tools and Skill Kits," so similar items would go under Class Tools and Skill Kits. —Sledged (talk) 02:22, 28 February 2008 (MST)
- Would we have to add a magical section to encompass books that have special abilities. Not sure if they should fall under wondrous items. Even if they normally would adding a section for them would help people searching for spellbooks. Granted they would be covered under a category... --Calidore Chase 13:31, 28 February 2008 (MST)
- Well, your everyday run-of-the-mill spellbook is not a magic item, even though it contains spells, nor is it detectable as magic. However, if you have a magic spellbook that's like the bag of holding of spellbooks, then it would go under wondrous items. (By default, any magic item that is neither an artifact, a staff, a rod, a wand, armor, a weapon, a ring, a potion or oil, nor a scroll, is a wondrous item.) So the question is "Are we talking about a book with special abilities/qualities, or a non-magic spellbook that's unique in some other fashion (e.g. made of a special material)?" —Sledged (talk) 13:48, 28 February 2008 (MST)
- The latter. Non-magic book. I'll put it in "Tools and Skill Kits" for now. Thanks --Othtim 14:14, 28 February 2008 (MST)
[edit] Cost and Weight
I just went over the mundane adventuring gear making it all use the form and noticed inconstancy with the format of cost and weight how do we want it to look on the page so I can add it to a template and to the form? --Hawk 20:07, 29 February 2008 (MST)
[edit] Suggestions
Cost: 12gp Weight: 1lb
[edit] Cost:
12gp
[edit] Weight:
1lb
| Cost: | 12gp |
| Weight: | 1lb |
[edit] Page Name
It would take some time but would it be benificial to change the name of this page to "3.5e DnD Equpment"?? --Sabre070 00:32, 13 November 2008 (MST)
- The issue with doing that is that then on Dungeons and Dragons it would show up with a "3.5e" in front of the name. If we move this page we have to move all the revised third edition sub-pages (like DnD Classes, or DnD Character Options, etc) as well. --Green Dragon 08:30, 14 November 2008 (MST)
[edit] Un 3.5e'd Mundane stuff (non-weapons)
(82 items) This is to make all things (non weapons) that are mundane into the 3.5e format. --Sabre070 16:41, 14 November 2008 (MST)
- We have 13 orphans. :( --Sabre070 16:43, 14 November 2008 (MST)
- No Sabre.. We HAD 13 orphans, I found some. --Sabre070 02:06, 17 November 2008 (MST)
- 11 now.. --Sabre070 03:10, 17 November 2008 (MST)
