Talk:Druid (Evaluational Base Class Layout)/TOC

Contents 1 TOC 1.1 Campaign information 1.1.1 TOC depth 1.1.2 Character/campaign divide

[edit] TOC

There used to be a TOC thread, but I don't know where it ended up.

[edit] Campaign information

Two related observations:

1. It strikes me that there's a major divide between sections 1.3 and 1.4, where everything up to 1.3 deals with character creation, and everything from 1.4 and following deals with campaign information.
2. The TOC still seems cluttered, mostly with subsections related to campaign information. This makes it harder to find the sections you're more likely to be looking for, related to character creation.

Two related proposals:

1. Set up the sections to reflect this intuitive divide.
2. Don't display the lowest level subsections in the TOC.

These proposals are (sort of) reflected on this page, with the caveat that you have to imagine the L5 headers are not displayed in the TOC. Eventually they should be handled in the same manner as class features.

Opinions? --Cúthalion 14:49, 12 April 2007 (MDT)

[edit] TOC depth

I've modified the CSS so that the depth of the TOC can be specified for each page. If you look at the evaluation page you'll note that only the L1 and L2 headers are displayed in the ToC. This is done by having the entire page surrounded by <div class="tocDepth2"></div>. An editor can specify whatever level of depth he chooses by changing the digit of the class attribute value. so class="tocDepth4" will only show headers L1 through L4 in the ToC and hide headers L5 and L6. —Sledged (talk) 15:24, 13 April 2007 (MDT)

This is a great idea. However, it doesn't seem to be working for me. This is the TOC I see on that page:

   * 1 Druid
         o 1.1 Making a Druid
               + 1.1.1 Class Features
               + 1.1.2 Ex-Druids
         o 1.2 The Druid's Animal Companion
               + 1.2.1 Alternative Animal Companions
         o 1.3 Epic Druid
         o 1.4 Playing a Druid
               + 1.4.1 Religion
               + 1.4.2 Other Classes
               + 1.4.3 Combat
               + 1.4.4 Advancement
         o 1.5 Human Druid Starting Package
         o 1.6 Druids in the World
               + 1.6.1 Daily Life
               + 1.6.2 Notables
               + 1.6.3 Organizations
               + 1.6.4 NPC Reactions
         o 1.7 Druid Lore
         o 1.8 Druids in the Game
               + 1.8.1 Adaptation
               + 1.8.2 Sample Encounter

--Cúthalion 07:21, 14 April 2007 (MDT)

You may need to hit the reload/refresh button to clear the old CSS from your cache. —Sledged (talk) 09:10, 14 April 2007 (MDT)

I'm afraid it's nothing so simple. I refreshed the page, cleared my cache, set the cache size to 0, restarted Firefox, and reloaded the page again. No dice. I even loaded it in IE, and got the same behavior as Firefox.

This is reminiscent of a problem I had (and still have) on WikiRPS, where I can't see a banner that Blue Dragon installed in the footer. The difference there is that I can see the banner in IE. This time the behavior is the same in both browsers.

Is it possible I have a local copy of some file that I'm not supposed to? --Cúthalion 11:31, 14 April 2007 (MDT)

No, I figured out a problem that might be the culprit. Try refreshing the evaluation page now. —Sledged (talk) 11:48, 14 April 2007 (MDT)

Frayed knot. :( --Cúthalion 12:22, 14 April 2007 (MDT)

Let's see if anyone else if having this problem. —Sledged (talk) 12:50, 14 April 2007 (MDT)

What shall I see?
David Latapie (✒ | @) — blog 13:21, 14 April 2007 (MDT)

"If you look at the evaluation page you'll note that only the L1 and L2 headers are displayed in the ToC."

—Sledged (talk) 16:25, 14 April 2007 (MDT)

I can verify that this is working for Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.3) Gecko/20070310 Iceweasel/2.0.0.3 (Debian-2.0.0.3-1). — Blue Dragon (talk) 16:58, 14 April 2007 (MDT)

It's now working for me (and it looks much better, btw). I don't know what the deal was. Thanks. --Cúthalion 17:58, 14 April 2007 (MDT)

[edit] Character/campaign divide

So, now that Sledged solved that one, what about my other suggestion? This demonstrates a proposed partition between character information and campaign information. --Cúthalion 18:08, 14 April 2007 (MDT)

Generally, I like how that looks. Surprise! All this debate is starting to make a mighty pretty entry. That divide should also make it easier to port existing classes to the new standard, as that will require less rearranging work. --Dmilewski 20:04, 14 April 2007 (MDT)

I always thought that the starting package was out of place. With the divides, it's even more so. It's definitely more a "Character Creation" element than a "Campaign Information" element. —Sledged (talk) 22:26, 14 April 2007 (MDT)

I like it! If it could make D&D more ROLEplay, that would be great. Thumb up.
David Latapie (✒ | @) — blog 03:09, 15 April 2007 (MDT)

I like it as it is now. Armond 11:57, 20 April 2007 (MDT)