https://www.dandwiki.com/w/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=EldritchNumen&feedformat=atomD&D Wiki - User contributions [en]2024-03-28T13:16:44ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.35.8https://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:3.5e_Campaign_Settings&diff=300803Talk:3.5e Campaign Settings2008-12-02T05:27:13Z<p>EldritchNumen: /* 4e?!?! */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Use: should this be re-organized? ==<br />
<br />
Right now I see the CS's on D&D Wiki as being very unusable, for a couple of reasons. First the very good CS's are mixed with the very bad ones (ones that have not been as thought out or finished). This alone makes it hard to find one that interests a DM without a lot of looking. Another problem is that it takes a while to understand what each CS is about, a lot of wasted time. It's like sifting many grains of sand for the golden grain instead of only sifting a couple grains for the golden grain. Also there are so many bad CS's on D&D Wiki that one gets discouraged trying to find the right one, so discouraged they may even stop looking for the golden grain of sand. So, because of all these reasons, I propose an organization change. <br />
#I think this page should be made to use a dlpc environment, with or without a table. <br />
#I think CS's should be organized in 11 (or 6) organizational categories with the purpose of determining how well made a certain CS is. If this is to happen this page would be organized entirely by their rating on a scale of 1/10 (or 1/5) with another space for unrated CS's. Stubs (minus Wikiworld) would be 1 and pages like the Wikiworld would be around a 10 (usable).<br />
What do you guys think about this idea? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:02, 25 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Certainly it needs to be re-organised, and I also painfully note that the big campaigns such as Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms aren't here. We really need to generate some BIG articles on the campaign settings so that people can quickly orientate themselves to places like Eberron.<br />
:--SMK {{Unsigned|203.143.250.6|03:17, 4 May 2007 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
::Forgotten Realms, Eberron cannot be on this site as they are not OGL. This site does not act like Wikipedia in that a short blurb about a certain CS is present. D&D Wiki actually hosts the CS's. Sorry. Anyway, what do you think about my organization idea above? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 09:35, 4 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::I think it is a very good idea. I was considering something like this myself since, as you point out, it is difficult to find the complete (slash good) settings through the bad. Weeding out all the stub settings is a '''''very''''' good idea. If we decide to rank the settings (which I am actually not that enthused about doing... a good ranking is hard to do) it should probably be on a scale of 1 to 5 and not measure balance, but rather comprehensiveness/completion. The process could be overseen both by the admins and by the authors themselves (when they go back and add a lot of stuff, they can upgrade the category themselves through a dplc or whatever). I'd suggest probably:<br />
:::#Very minimal pages. Stubs.<br />
:::#Some sparse information, but large amounts of material missing.<br />
:::#Some information in most categories; information may sometimes be sparse.<br />
:::#Complete in certain aspects, but lacking in others. Ex: Lots of material on religion, but not as much on geography.<br />
:::#Very comprehensive in most aspects.<br />
:::The main problem I see it that not all campaign settings necessarily need all the information. Thus, I'd propose that we figure out the major areas that a CS needs material for, and only judge those categories. Thus, for example, to be comprehensive a CS would need a lot of material on things like religion & gods, life in the world, at least some history, some geography, and places where significant changes from the traditional settings are marked (for example, if orcs are civilized or special rules for base classes, etc.). Other things, though, like NPCs, should not be judged; they are important to some settings (for example one that details a certain volcanic plain home to nomadic bands, where the leaders and shamen are quite important to the setting), while they are not in others (for example settings that have a large framework, eg continents and kingdoms, but leave much of the more detailed information to individual dms). Uh... those are my thoughts for now.<br />
:::To recap, I think that 1) move the stubs was good, and 2) a rating system would be okay, but should measure completeness/comprehensiveness rather than "balance" or other terms that are less meaningful when applied to CS, and 3) that the categories (if measured with a rating) should only examine the categories that are universally important to a CS, but should not judge the CS just because the other smaller, ancillary categories are under-represented.<br />
:::&ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:37, 8 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Here's some examples. I'd probably give:<br />
::::# Most of the stubs fit here. Very little information (if any), or only details one area (eg history or geography) in a mediocre way.<br />
::::# [[Hellas (DnD Campaign Setting)|Hellas]] - some useful information, but lots missing.<br />
::::# [[Desperado Desert (DnD Campaign Setting)|Desperado Desert]] - has an outline of much information about the setting, but most of the information is more of an outline than a full description.<br />
::::# [[Age of Titans (DnD Campaign Setting)|Age of Titans]] - Mostly complete, though many aspects could be expanded upon. Very nice setting. [[Six Gods Setting (DnD Campaign Setting)|Six Gods Setting]] - very full rules on characters, many rules on religion, lacking in geographical and historical information. In the vein of these previous two, also [[Carallion (DnD Campaign Setting)|Carallion]] and [[Lands of Blamakar (DnD Campaign Setting)|Lands of Blamakar]].<br />
::::# [[Wikiworld (DnD Campaign Setting)|Wikiworld]] - Still largely in development, but has a large amount of information already on many topics.<br />
::::&ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:59, 8 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree with all the points you stated above. A 1-5 scale should work that does not rate balance but rather rates completeness/comprehensiveness. To get this to work a couple things need to be done...<br />
:::::#A template for each rating needs to be made&mdash;one that will explain what each number means (or one that can encompass them all)<br />
:::::#This page needs to be organized for "Non-Rated" and then a rating scale via categories made (dlp at the moment, maybe a dlpc environment later)<br />
:::::#CS's need to be rated...<br />
:::::I think after this gets done the CS's on D&D Wiki should become a lot more useable. I hope we can get this to work. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:51, 8 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Okay, I worked on a template for this... How does [[Template:Campaign Setting Rating]] look? Please improve it if you see anything that needs to be changed. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:51, 9 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I'll start adding the template to pages, and we can update this main page whenever. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:50, 10 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::I've added the template to all the pages, but it doesn't seem to work... I think there might be something wrong with the switch. I've been typing in this: '''<nowiki>{{Campaign Setting Rating|3}}</nowiki>''', for example, and it doesn't show up right (so a few of the pages I put it ratings for just so when we updated this main page we could see if it worked). In any case, someone will have to look over the template... am I inputting the rating wrong? If so, what is the correct format? Or is the template skewed somehow? Thanks! &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 01:16, 10 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::The problem was that I made it work for field rating, not field 1. I now changed it to field 1 so one does not need to pipe it and then type rating. The template should now work how you want... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:05, 10 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::: Ah. Well, in either case, this seems to be a bit easier (less typing, at least, and we don't really need the field to be rating since there is only one field (it should be obvious what the contents of field one are). Thanks for changing it; I totally spaced and didn't notice that the field was rating instead of one. Thanks! &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 12:18, 10 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::I rated the CS's with the (moderately subjective) system, but I don't claim my rating to be infallible. They should suffice, though. Now we need to figure out a dpl system to separate the pages out (should be pretty easy to write up quickly...). &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:52, 10 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::I just added a basic dlp environment, and I hope it works. It is based off rating. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:45, 10 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Well Done! ==<br />
<br />
Thanks to everyone who helped out reorganizing this page. It is much, ''much'' more usable now! ''':)''' &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 20:55, 10 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I agree, thanks around. Anyway, do you think it would be good to put a cherry on top of this and make it a dlpc environment? If it were to be one each CS would be present with a link and a short blurb advertising it being present. Is this a good idea, or would it be too much work or make it more confusing? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:43, 10 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I think it might be lateral movement. Most people who will use these will be able to tell with a simple click whether they want to use the CS (most have an intro blurb, anyway). I think the nature of a CS is that it is a bit more complex than an entry would sum up. Some settings would benefit (for example, Hellas could say "Adventuring in the Ancient World") or something, but most are just going to end up as generic sword & sorcery descriptions... which I think aren't that useful. The current environment seems to work pretty well. Other thoughts? &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:14, 11 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::I cannot think of anything else that could really make this page better at this moment... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:31, 13 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Source Book ==<br />
<br />
It seems to me that a ''source book'' is its own category. A good example of a source book is the LotR setting or 800 CE. Both draw from existing settings with extensive literature, and present it for use as a game resource. Do we want to treat these differently? <br />
<br />
I see many possibilities for source books. As I work on 800 CE, I see source books possible for Slavic, Teutonic, Celtic, Arthurian, and Arabian Nights settings. Each of them represents a distinct category of resource that we do not need to continuously re-invent. I also see period source books as a draw to the wiki. Where people may not add to a personalized setting, they may may feel more free to add to a sourcebook.--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 07:06, 21 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Hm... Do you feel they should be treated differently? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:11, 23 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Yes. The expectation of a sourcebook is different. They rely on a body of knowledge far beyond that which comes from a custom setting. They act more as reference works than as setting writeups. If one is "abandoned", someone can come along and continue developing it. As there is existing material, these can often be developed faster, broader, and more in depth than a custom setting.<br />
::Most importantly, the settings are already known, and so the settings do not need a rating. We already know that they are 5's, even if the setting is not developed into a 5 yet. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 11:04, 25 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::The only question left is&mdash;should these be rated and still added to normal CS rating categories? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:08, 27 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::I think they still need a rating, based on how complete the background it is based on is, how easily this background can be accesssed from each page, and how well the CS represents the world on which it is based. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:03, 21 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:26, 21 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Sourcebook ==<br />
<br />
I added a Sourcebook category. We had enough sourcebook-like material to make this its own category. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 10:56, 25 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Homebrew Content within WoTC Campaign Settings ==<br />
<br />
Have sourcebooks ever been published that discuss integrating homebrew content within a WoTC setting (Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk)? {{unsigned|Othtim}}<br />
<br />
:Sign your posts, Othtim! Anyway, my expansive library of books has nothing of the sort in it. However, there is doubtless a column somewhere or a book I don't have that does deal with that. -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 20:22, 18 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::If you see an unsigned post, you can copy the name and paste it into an unsigned template. I put in this one as: <nowiki>{{unsigned|Othtim}}</nowiki>. I usually check who didn't sign their posts too in the history tab, and it is helpful to other users joining in the conversation ''':-)'''. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 09:09, 19 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
==Stubs==<br />
<br />
Should we keep the CS's that don't even have fluff? Some CS's have just been a page name and have had no actual development. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 16:58, 13 November 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
==4e?!?!==<br />
<br />
Why is this linked to 4e? This should only be 3.5e.. I didn't think you could use 3.5e material in 4e? If a campaign setting is compatible with both then let categories put it in both. If not then separate them. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 05:40, 30 November 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Technically speaking, the CSes can be used in either 3.5 or 4E. It is true, however, that many of the currently existing CSes were built around 3.5 and use rules from that system. Nonetheless, the majority of the material is either descriptive (and so transfers nicely) or can easily be replaced with 4E mechanics. This master list, though, should stay linked to both 3.5 and 4E. &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 22:27, 1 December 2008 (MST)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User:EldritchNumen/About_Me&diff=280327User:EldritchNumen/About Me2008-09-09T16:39:21Z<p>EldritchNumen: /* About Me */</p>
<hr />
<div>=== About Me ===<br />
<br />
EldritchNumen studies far too much. College takes up much of his time while the rest is readily devoured by living life. When he has time, he likes to just sit and think, which he feels is an admirable pursuit (as is evinced by his inclination for philosophy).<br />
<br />
In his many years of roleplaying, EldritchNumen has taught DnD to over 20 people.</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_talk:EldritchNumen&diff=280147User talk:EldritchNumen2008-09-08T04:50:57Z<p>EldritchNumen: /* Resigning as Admin */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Messages of Interest|messages=<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=MSRD_Talk:Modern_System_Reference_Document<br />
|section=PL-8 at Space Gunnery<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=21:38, 10 March 2008 (MDT)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Lizardfolk_Culture_(Paludia_Supplement)<br />
|section=Feedback<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:53, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Paludia_(DnD_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Feedback<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:52, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Paludia_(DnD_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Next Step<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=19:25, 1 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Halo_(D20_Modern_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Rating<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=23:59, 21 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Halo_(D20_Modern_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=<br />
|notifier=Sam Kay<br />
|date_time=03:45, 20 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Thunderer_(DnD_Class)<br />
|section=Ideas/ Changes??<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=23:15, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Welcome to D&D Wiki== <br />
<br />
Hello {{PAGENAME}}, and welcome to D&D Wiki! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like D&D Wiki and decide to stay. I am the owner of the site, and if you have a question feel free to ask me, however when contacting anyone on D&D Wiki through talk pages please sign your name using four tildes <nowiki>(~~~~)</nowiki>; this will automatically produce your name and the date. Also, if you want to help D&D Wiki but just don't know how [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Green_Dragon&action=edit&section=new drop me a note] and I'll see what I can do. However, when dropping me a note please tell me how much time you would like to spend working and how well you know the Wiki Format. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a D&D Wikian! If you need help ask me on my talk page, or just right here. Again, welcome! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:06, 3 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:No problem with the welcome. Also, I see that you are putting your Anazar campaign setting on D&D Wiki, and I must say it looks good so far. Thanks already for putting it on D&D Wiki. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:43, 24 August 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Rating the PrC's ==<br />
<br />
D&D Wiki has quite a bit of Prestige Classes, with only two having been rated on D&D Wiki's rating scale. So, on a small mission to try to get ratings of PrC's done, I would like you to help. All you would have to do is go to [[DnD Classes]] then to any PrC page. Click on the PrC you would like to rate; then rate its balance by clicking on the "here" in the ''Please, help D&D Wiki by rating the balance of this item '''here'''''. I hope you can take the time to help D&D Wiki become a useful tool for every visitor that comes here; and thanks in advance. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:29, 29 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:No problem. I'll do some now and then whenever I get the chance! -[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:19, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::By the way, the first one looks very well done, and thanks again. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:51, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Your Lord Cirth (DnD Deity) was Edited ==<br />
<br />
Someone, IP 66.116.27.101, edited your [[Lord Cirth (DnD Deity)]] by adding some content. I used the "Check User" function of Admins, and this IP did not register to you. So, are these edits okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:25, 7 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Thanks for pointing this out! I appreciate it. I just reverted to my version; the alignment change was unacceptable, one of the sentences was grammatically incorrect, and the extra text was not useful. Thank you *very much* for pointing this out! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:16, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::No problem. I will always do this if an IP edits something you have created and it is not your IP. Also, I will not miss anything as I go through every edit on D&D Wiki. I hope you did not lose trust in D&D Wiki. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:33, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::: Of course not! I understand how these things go; a power of a communal site is double-edged. I have no problems, so long as I have the opportunity to repair (which, fortunately, is easy). I love the site... --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:12, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Glad to hear it! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:29, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Amount of Edits ==<br />
<br />
When you posted about how to check how many edits one has done, I thought that it would be nice if their was an extension that just told one how many edits they have. So, just today, I got Blue Dragon to program an extension that does just this. Now, if you want to see how many edits you have made just go to Special Pages then User Edit Count to see how many edits you have made. By the way, while you are their, type in Blue Dragon to see how many edits he has done.... It's funny. Anyway, does this help you/is this what you wanted? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:38, 25 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:You still around? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:56, 31 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Yeah, sorry. I was unexpectedly (and unfortunately) left without internet for about 9 days or so! ''':(''' Anyway, I'm back now, though I won't be on much for the next week (but I'll be active again after then). The edits page looks great! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:28, 3 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Glad to hear that you'll still be around... Anyway, if you have some spare time, I would be happy if you could rate [[Staffmage (DnD Prestige Class)|the Staffmage]]; I would like to see how balanced my new revision is... Again, I'm glad to hear your still kicking! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:52, 3 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::BTW, your at 876 right now (1000 im [[Requests for Adminship|RfA'ing]] you...). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:29, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== User-Page edited ==<br />
<br />
Someone (possibly you (IP 199.89.175.12)) edited your user page. I am just letting you know, as I have not reverted their edits. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:07, 4 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:It was me. Thanks for the heads up; I didn't notice that I wasn't logged in. As always, I appreciate the alert! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:11, 4 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::No problem, my pleasure. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:52, 10 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Rating the [[Ghost Monk (DnD Prestige Class)|Ghost Monk]] ==<br />
<br />
Again... Would you mind rating the [[Ghost Monk (DnD Prestige Class)|Ghost Monk]]? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:52, 10 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== D20M ==<br />
<br />
Are you still willing to help D20M as their is still ''a lot'' of work that needs to be done? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:05, 7 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Yep! I don't run scripts (my knowledge of computer programming is not extensive), and so it's hard for me to do work maintaining pages like the mSRD, but I'm certainly willing to help out in any way I can. Right now I'm stuck in terms of updating the splash pages (in each category) since I don't know DPL or whatever. But I'm a fast learner, so I suppose I could learn to do that pretty easily, too. What specifically were you looking for help doing? --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 20:11, 8 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::It's a multi-step process (of course ''':)'''). So, right now all the pages that have an X on D20M main page need to be modernized to be like the D&D equivalent. After that the "Add a ___ to D&D Wiki" pages need to be made with |preload= like the D&D section, and modeled off those pages. After that everything in D20M needs to be formatted with tables so they look as good if not better than the best of the D&D equivalent. I think that is all that needs to be done and if you would be willing to help I would be very grateful. Also, DPL's are easy to use (maybe not the variant dlpc's and dlpcus's.). DPL's use categories to show a list of items dynamically made (DPL stands for "Dynamic Page List" or something like that). So, categories determine what links to the page. All you have to do is copy an existing dlp and change the categories for D20M. I hope this helps and I hope you can help with D20M. Thanks in advance. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:27, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== MoI's ==<br />
<br />
Just a formatting thing (some little things annoy me...). When you add a MoI instead of singing the last area with 4"~" sign it with 5"~" as that just produces the date and not your name as well. This works the other way as well seeing that 3"~" makes only the user-name.<br />
<br />
{| class="d20"<br />
! colspan="2" | Tilda's (you don't need to put the -- in front; I just like to)<br />
|- <br />
| <nowiki> --~~~ </nowiki> || --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]]<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| <nowiki> --~~~~ </nowiki> || --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
|- <br />
| <nowiki> --~~~~~ </nowiki> || --12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
|}<br />
<br />
Thanks. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Adminship ==<br />
<br />
Well, Congratulations. Your an Admin with a 100% approval rating from the RfA. Congratulations, I really hope that you like all the new cool things you can do, especially in the SRD and MSRD. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:12, 4 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Congratulations. I am formally handing the MSRD over to you. It's your baby. Take care of it well. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 06:19, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Thanks! I'll take care of her, no worries. My first task shall be to break apart the long pages (skills, etc.) into individual pages and to make some sense of the categories (which is going to involve a bit of shuffling, renaming, etc.). It's going to be a long but good ride! &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:05, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::A few words of advice. Persistence and patience are your friend. There's alot of work here. When you get burned out, take a break. Either work on something else, blow off the wiki for a few weeks and play a new game, or itch some other scratch. Mechanize what you can. Find ways to make repetitive tasks simpler. Oh, and be damned proud of your work. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 20:37, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Barnstar ==<br />
<br />
{{Barnstar|I give you this Barnstar for changing [[DnD Quests]] from a page that one must add their own link to their quest to a page that uses a DPL. Also, you have made it easier to add a quest with the [[Add New DnD Quest|Add your own Quest]]. Thanks so much. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:05, 6 March 2007 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== I'm trokking and i messed up my stats ==<br />
:''Originally posted on [[User talk:Green Dragon#I'm trokking and i messed up my stats]].''<br />
<br />
Eldritch, i created the the wee'diox and accidentally added a 1 in front of my +6 for intelligence, I apologize for that. But, this is also my first time and im not that good, though i am always willing to accept helpful criticism in any way. {{Unsigned|Trokking|17:46, 7 March 2007 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
:No problem, I make typoes all the time. I'd just seen that you didn't have a user account and did the standard "ask if this is vandalism or not" thing. For future reference, my user talk page is [[User Talk:EldritchNumen|here]]. This page belongs to Green Dragon. In any case, I apologize and I've written a couple of quick suggestions on the [[Talk:Wee'diox]] page. &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 17:50, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::thx for the suggestions... hey Eldritch, i took your advice and made the changes-tell me if i missed anything. By the way, should i make a page for my races diety? If so then how?<br />
<br />
::P.S. You said something about the four tildes signing. could you tell if it work<br />
<br />
::--[[User:Trokking|Trokking]] 18:07, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gosh, I hope I am leaving you a message correctly. ==<br />
<br />
Is there a way I can get the saved to my pc? besides going to each page and saving it? Sorry if I posted this wrong. (editing and posting wiki's confuse me). --- [[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]]<br />
<br />
:What exactly do you want to save to your pc? Or am I reading this message really wrong? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:36, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Opps! This is what happens you try to type someing while your tired; a bunch of incoherent words. What I ment to say was "Is there a way I can save the whole wiki to my PC? Besides going to each page and saving?" Of course I would only be useing if for personal use. I am such a D&D noob. Thanks --[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 21:10, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Honestly, I don't know, but I suspect not. The person to ask would be [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]], who administers all the technical aspects of the site. There might be some program that allows you to, but-- like I said-- probably not. What are you looking for? If you are mainly interested in having a copy of the SRD (that is, the core rules), one can be obtained very easily from the Wizards of the Coast website as a group of several text documents. There are also hypertext versions for download [http://www.pbemnexus.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Downloads&file=index&req=viewsdownload&sid=17 here]. Does this help? &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:36, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Yes! Thank you! --[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 09:52, 9 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::To start I am a very direct person, and please forgive me if this sounds rude. So, there is a way to get a copy of the entire site - it's called a back up. However, I do not trust you enough to give you a back up. I would not want a duplicate D&D Wiki coming around on the internet, and I am sorry for not trusting you. My reasoning from this comes from the fact that I once gave a copy of D&D Wiki away and it got posted on another site. I was not pleased. So, I do not want this to happen again and to make sure it will not I simply have decided I will not give away back ups of D&D Wiki to people that ask. Sorry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:00, 9 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I can see how a copy going around the web can be bad for this site, and understand your reasoning. At leasts I got a copy of the SRD to help me out. Thanks for helping me out.--[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 20:56, 10 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Again, sorry. I feel like I am begin very rude, and I am sure I am. However I really don't want a duplicate D&D Wiki coming into existance. Sorry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:58, 11 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Invitation for alpha testing ==<br />
<br />
Hey there. If you have time on your hands, I'd like to ask you to take a look at [[User:Armond/Deadly Assassin (DnD Prestige Class)]] for balance. There are a few things I'm concerned about, which I've listed at the very top of the page's coding in comment brackets. I feel it's only fair to warn you, however, that I've introduced a couple new game mechanics in that class, so it will likely take you a while to read and understand it all - but if you have the time and are willing, I'd really appreciate your input. If not, no worries, but if you know someone else who might be willing to help me find the bugs, I'd appreciate it if you'd let them know. Again, if you can't you can't, and I appreciate the thought all the same. Thanks! [[User:Armond|Armond]] 00:43, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
:I'm very busy this week, but I'll take a look at it as soon as I can spare some time. I'll try to get to in within a week... sorry for not being able to help faster. :( &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 13:31, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
::Worry not, this is just a preliminary test to see that I didn't screw things over too badly (I really don't want my first posted PrC to get a 1 right off the bat) before I throw it on the main namespace. Again, thanks for the thought, it means a lot. [[User:Armond|Armond]] 16:56, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== A little busy... ==<br />
<br />
I just quickly wanted to apologize to everyone for my absence this last week. I'll also be gone a lot next week, too. I will get around to answering messages, just not as quickly as usual... &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:01, 31 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Barnstar ==<br />
<br />
{{Barnstar|I give this Barnstar to [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] because he took the initiative and finally split up [[DnD Rules]] into Supplemental Variant Rules, Transformational Variant Rules, and Radical Variant Rules. This has made all of D&D Wiki's variant rules more user-friendly so even the most stringent DM can accept some of them --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 09:51, 10 April 2007}}<br />
<br />
== Sparse Contributions ==<br />
<br />
Ack. I just wanted to let everyone know that this last week I've been out of town a lot and am approaching the end of the term at school, so my contributions to the site have been a little low. Sorry! In any case, I'm not dead, but am going to be pretty busy the next few weeks, so things are going to be slow in my land... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:40, 25 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I was almost getting worried ''';)'''. Anyway, thanks for letting us know you still intend to stay around even though you may not be able to help out that much ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:10, 25 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Need some thoughts ==<br />
<br />
i was wondering if you could use the balance template to look at my [[Demon Lord (DnD Class)|Demon Lord]] class. thank you ==[[User:Alabastor|Alabastor]] 16:52, 26 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Alive, but starving... ==<br />
<br />
Hey. I just wanted to let you all know that I am, in fact, still alive. But I have no internet access at my house, so I've been relegated to posting from the local library. So... I'm probably going to be pretty quiet until august, when I get back to school. Sorry! Please don't mourn my loss too much! ''':)''' &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 11:42, 25 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:That is very good to know, I was getting worried. I thought that the Admin syndrome (the one that makes all admins leave after getting elected) was happening to you as well... It's good to know what is really happening ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:13, 31 July 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Resigning as Admin ==<br />
<br />
Well, as people have certainly noticed, I have been rather quiet around here lately. A seven month stint in Greece certainly had a bit to do with that, and I unfortunately don't see things improving much in the immediate future with the beginning of a demanding course load in grad school this year. So, I'll continue to check in around here occasionally (and add maps to the map section, comment on random conversations, and the like), but I don't foresee myself doing much of anything admin-related for quite some time. So, I'm adding my official admin resignation to the ad hoc one I've been engaged in for the past several months. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:14, 3 September 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Hello EldritchNumen. I am sorry to hear about this, but D&D Wiki is grateful for the contributions that you have given to it. I hope that your grad studies go well, and that you had a good time in Greece. And of course, you are still welcome to contribute to D&D Wiki! Thanks again for having helped so much. I am sure that Green Dragon would say the same, but he recently relocated and is having some troubles getting a solid Internet connection. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 13:29, 4 September 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Yes, thank you for all your contributions in the past, and good luck with your studies. What are you studying by the way? --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 20:00, 4 September 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Philosophy, as a matter of fact. ''':)''' Employment is going to be... a little rough. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 22:50, 7 September 2008 (MDT)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_talk:EldritchNumen&diff=279394User talk:EldritchNumen2008-09-04T05:15:11Z<p>EldritchNumen: /* Resigning as Admin */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Messages of Interest|messages=<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=MSRD_Talk:Modern_System_Reference_Document<br />
|section=PL-8 at Space Gunnery<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=21:38, 10 March 2008 (MDT)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Lizardfolk_Culture_(Paludia_Supplement)<br />
|section=Feedback<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:53, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Paludia_(DnD_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Feedback<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:52, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Paludia_(DnD_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Next Step<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=19:25, 1 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Halo_(D20_Modern_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Rating<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=23:59, 21 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Halo_(D20_Modern_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=<br />
|notifier=Sam Kay<br />
|date_time=03:45, 20 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Thunderer_(DnD_Class)<br />
|section=Ideas/ Changes??<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=23:15, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Welcome to D&D Wiki== <br />
<br />
Hello {{PAGENAME}}, and welcome to D&D Wiki! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like D&D Wiki and decide to stay. I am the owner of the site, and if you have a question feel free to ask me, however when contacting anyone on D&D Wiki through talk pages please sign your name using four tildes <nowiki>(~~~~)</nowiki>; this will automatically produce your name and the date. Also, if you want to help D&D Wiki but just don't know how [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Green_Dragon&action=edit&section=new drop me a note] and I'll see what I can do. However, when dropping me a note please tell me how much time you would like to spend working and how well you know the Wiki Format. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a D&D Wikian! If you need help ask me on my talk page, or just right here. Again, welcome! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:06, 3 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:No problem with the welcome. Also, I see that you are putting your Anazar campaign setting on D&D Wiki, and I must say it looks good so far. Thanks already for putting it on D&D Wiki. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:43, 24 August 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Rating the PrC's ==<br />
<br />
D&D Wiki has quite a bit of Prestige Classes, with only two having been rated on D&D Wiki's rating scale. So, on a small mission to try to get ratings of PrC's done, I would like you to help. All you would have to do is go to [[DnD Classes]] then to any PrC page. Click on the PrC you would like to rate; then rate its balance by clicking on the "here" in the ''Please, help D&D Wiki by rating the balance of this item '''here'''''. I hope you can take the time to help D&D Wiki become a useful tool for every visitor that comes here; and thanks in advance. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:29, 29 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:No problem. I'll do some now and then whenever I get the chance! -[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:19, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::By the way, the first one looks very well done, and thanks again. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:51, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Your Lord Cirth (DnD Deity) was Edited ==<br />
<br />
Someone, IP 66.116.27.101, edited your [[Lord Cirth (DnD Deity)]] by adding some content. I used the "Check User" function of Admins, and this IP did not register to you. So, are these edits okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:25, 7 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Thanks for pointing this out! I appreciate it. I just reverted to my version; the alignment change was unacceptable, one of the sentences was grammatically incorrect, and the extra text was not useful. Thank you *very much* for pointing this out! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:16, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::No problem. I will always do this if an IP edits something you have created and it is not your IP. Also, I will not miss anything as I go through every edit on D&D Wiki. I hope you did not lose trust in D&D Wiki. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:33, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::: Of course not! I understand how these things go; a power of a communal site is double-edged. I have no problems, so long as I have the opportunity to repair (which, fortunately, is easy). I love the site... --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:12, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Glad to hear it! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:29, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Amount of Edits ==<br />
<br />
When you posted about how to check how many edits one has done, I thought that it would be nice if their was an extension that just told one how many edits they have. So, just today, I got Blue Dragon to program an extension that does just this. Now, if you want to see how many edits you have made just go to Special Pages then User Edit Count to see how many edits you have made. By the way, while you are their, type in Blue Dragon to see how many edits he has done.... It's funny. Anyway, does this help you/is this what you wanted? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:38, 25 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:You still around? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:56, 31 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Yeah, sorry. I was unexpectedly (and unfortunately) left without internet for about 9 days or so! ''':(''' Anyway, I'm back now, though I won't be on much for the next week (but I'll be active again after then). The edits page looks great! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:28, 3 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Glad to hear that you'll still be around... Anyway, if you have some spare time, I would be happy if you could rate [[Staffmage (DnD Prestige Class)|the Staffmage]]; I would like to see how balanced my new revision is... Again, I'm glad to hear your still kicking! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:52, 3 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::BTW, your at 876 right now (1000 im [[Requests for Adminship|RfA'ing]] you...). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:29, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== User-Page edited ==<br />
<br />
Someone (possibly you (IP 199.89.175.12)) edited your user page. I am just letting you know, as I have not reverted their edits. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:07, 4 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:It was me. Thanks for the heads up; I didn't notice that I wasn't logged in. As always, I appreciate the alert! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:11, 4 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::No problem, my pleasure. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:52, 10 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Rating the [[Ghost Monk (DnD Prestige Class)|Ghost Monk]] ==<br />
<br />
Again... Would you mind rating the [[Ghost Monk (DnD Prestige Class)|Ghost Monk]]? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:52, 10 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== D20M ==<br />
<br />
Are you still willing to help D20M as their is still ''a lot'' of work that needs to be done? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:05, 7 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Yep! I don't run scripts (my knowledge of computer programming is not extensive), and so it's hard for me to do work maintaining pages like the mSRD, but I'm certainly willing to help out in any way I can. Right now I'm stuck in terms of updating the splash pages (in each category) since I don't know DPL or whatever. But I'm a fast learner, so I suppose I could learn to do that pretty easily, too. What specifically were you looking for help doing? --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 20:11, 8 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::It's a multi-step process (of course ''':)'''). So, right now all the pages that have an X on D20M main page need to be modernized to be like the D&D equivalent. After that the "Add a ___ to D&D Wiki" pages need to be made with |preload= like the D&D section, and modeled off those pages. After that everything in D20M needs to be formatted with tables so they look as good if not better than the best of the D&D equivalent. I think that is all that needs to be done and if you would be willing to help I would be very grateful. Also, DPL's are easy to use (maybe not the variant dlpc's and dlpcus's.). DPL's use categories to show a list of items dynamically made (DPL stands for "Dynamic Page List" or something like that). So, categories determine what links to the page. All you have to do is copy an existing dlp and change the categories for D20M. I hope this helps and I hope you can help with D20M. Thanks in advance. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:27, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== MoI's ==<br />
<br />
Just a formatting thing (some little things annoy me...). When you add a MoI instead of singing the last area with 4"~" sign it with 5"~" as that just produces the date and not your name as well. This works the other way as well seeing that 3"~" makes only the user-name.<br />
<br />
{| class="d20"<br />
! colspan="2" | Tilda's (you don't need to put the -- in front; I just like to)<br />
|- <br />
| <nowiki> --~~~ </nowiki> || --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]]<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| <nowiki> --~~~~ </nowiki> || --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
|- <br />
| <nowiki> --~~~~~ </nowiki> || --12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
|}<br />
<br />
Thanks. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Adminship ==<br />
<br />
Well, Congratulations. Your an Admin with a 100% approval rating from the RfA. Congratulations, I really hope that you like all the new cool things you can do, especially in the SRD and MSRD. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:12, 4 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Congratulations. I am formally handing the MSRD over to you. It's your baby. Take care of it well. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 06:19, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Thanks! I'll take care of her, no worries. My first task shall be to break apart the long pages (skills, etc.) into individual pages and to make some sense of the categories (which is going to involve a bit of shuffling, renaming, etc.). It's going to be a long but good ride! &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:05, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::A few words of advice. Persistence and patience are your friend. There's alot of work here. When you get burned out, take a break. Either work on something else, blow off the wiki for a few weeks and play a new game, or itch some other scratch. Mechanize what you can. Find ways to make repetitive tasks simpler. Oh, and be damned proud of your work. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 20:37, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Barnstar ==<br />
<br />
{{Barnstar|I give you this Barnstar for changing [[DnD Quests]] from a page that one must add their own link to their quest to a page that uses a DPL. Also, you have made it easier to add a quest with the [[Add New DnD Quest|Add your own Quest]]. Thanks so much. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:05, 6 March 2007 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== I'm trokking and i messed up my stats ==<br />
:''Originally posted on [[User talk:Green Dragon#I'm trokking and i messed up my stats]].''<br />
<br />
Eldritch, i created the the wee'diox and accidentally added a 1 in front of my +6 for intelligence, I apologize for that. But, this is also my first time and im not that good, though i am always willing to accept helpful criticism in any way. {{Unsigned|Trokking|17:46, 7 March 2007 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
:No problem, I make typoes all the time. I'd just seen that you didn't have a user account and did the standard "ask if this is vandalism or not" thing. For future reference, my user talk page is [[User Talk:EldritchNumen|here]]. This page belongs to Green Dragon. In any case, I apologize and I've written a couple of quick suggestions on the [[Talk:Wee'diox]] page. &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 17:50, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::thx for the suggestions... hey Eldritch, i took your advice and made the changes-tell me if i missed anything. By the way, should i make a page for my races diety? If so then how?<br />
<br />
::P.S. You said something about the four tildes signing. could you tell if it work<br />
<br />
::--[[User:Trokking|Trokking]] 18:07, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gosh, I hope I am leaving you a message correctly. ==<br />
<br />
Is there a way I can get the saved to my pc? besides going to each page and saving it? Sorry if I posted this wrong. (editing and posting wiki's confuse me). --- [[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]]<br />
<br />
:What exactly do you want to save to your pc? Or am I reading this message really wrong? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:36, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Opps! This is what happens you try to type someing while your tired; a bunch of incoherent words. What I ment to say was "Is there a way I can save the whole wiki to my PC? Besides going to each page and saving?" Of course I would only be useing if for personal use. I am such a D&D noob. Thanks --[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 21:10, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Honestly, I don't know, but I suspect not. The person to ask would be [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]], who administers all the technical aspects of the site. There might be some program that allows you to, but-- like I said-- probably not. What are you looking for? If you are mainly interested in having a copy of the SRD (that is, the core rules), one can be obtained very easily from the Wizards of the Coast website as a group of several text documents. There are also hypertext versions for download [http://www.pbemnexus.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Downloads&file=index&req=viewsdownload&sid=17 here]. Does this help? &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:36, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Yes! Thank you! --[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 09:52, 9 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::To start I am a very direct person, and please forgive me if this sounds rude. So, there is a way to get a copy of the entire site - it's called a back up. However, I do not trust you enough to give you a back up. I would not want a duplicate D&D Wiki coming around on the internet, and I am sorry for not trusting you. My reasoning from this comes from the fact that I once gave a copy of D&D Wiki away and it got posted on another site. I was not pleased. So, I do not want this to happen again and to make sure it will not I simply have decided I will not give away back ups of D&D Wiki to people that ask. Sorry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:00, 9 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I can see how a copy going around the web can be bad for this site, and understand your reasoning. At leasts I got a copy of the SRD to help me out. Thanks for helping me out.--[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 20:56, 10 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Again, sorry. I feel like I am begin very rude, and I am sure I am. However I really don't want a duplicate D&D Wiki coming into existance. Sorry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:58, 11 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Invitation for alpha testing ==<br />
<br />
Hey there. If you have time on your hands, I'd like to ask you to take a look at [[User:Armond/Deadly Assassin (DnD Prestige Class)]] for balance. There are a few things I'm concerned about, which I've listed at the very top of the page's coding in comment brackets. I feel it's only fair to warn you, however, that I've introduced a couple new game mechanics in that class, so it will likely take you a while to read and understand it all - but if you have the time and are willing, I'd really appreciate your input. If not, no worries, but if you know someone else who might be willing to help me find the bugs, I'd appreciate it if you'd let them know. Again, if you can't you can't, and I appreciate the thought all the same. Thanks! [[User:Armond|Armond]] 00:43, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
:I'm very busy this week, but I'll take a look at it as soon as I can spare some time. I'll try to get to in within a week... sorry for not being able to help faster. :( &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 13:31, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
::Worry not, this is just a preliminary test to see that I didn't screw things over too badly (I really don't want my first posted PrC to get a 1 right off the bat) before I throw it on the main namespace. Again, thanks for the thought, it means a lot. [[User:Armond|Armond]] 16:56, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== A little busy... ==<br />
<br />
I just quickly wanted to apologize to everyone for my absence this last week. I'll also be gone a lot next week, too. I will get around to answering messages, just not as quickly as usual... &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:01, 31 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Barnstar ==<br />
<br />
{{Barnstar|I give this Barnstar to [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] because he took the initiative and finally split up [[DnD Rules]] into Supplemental Variant Rules, Transformational Variant Rules, and Radical Variant Rules. This has made all of D&D Wiki's variant rules more user-friendly so even the most stringent DM can accept some of them --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 09:51, 10 April 2007}}<br />
<br />
== Sparse Contributions ==<br />
<br />
Ack. I just wanted to let everyone know that this last week I've been out of town a lot and am approaching the end of the term at school, so my contributions to the site have been a little low. Sorry! In any case, I'm not dead, but am going to be pretty busy the next few weeks, so things are going to be slow in my land... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:40, 25 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I was almost getting worried ''';)'''. Anyway, thanks for letting us know you still intend to stay around even though you may not be able to help out that much ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:10, 25 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Need some thoughts ==<br />
<br />
i was wondering if you could use the balance template to look at my [[Demon Lord (DnD Class)|Demon Lord]] class. thank you ==[[User:Alabastor|Alabastor]] 16:52, 26 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Alive, but starving... ==<br />
<br />
Hey. I just wanted to let you all know that I am, in fact, still alive. But I have no internet access at my house, so I've been relegated to posting from the local library. So... I'm probably going to be pretty quiet until august, when I get back to school. Sorry! Please don't mourn my loss too much! ''':)''' &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 11:42, 25 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:That is very good to know, I was getting worried. I thought that the Admin syndrome (the one that makes all admins leave after getting elected) was happening to you as well... It's good to know what is really happening ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:13, 31 July 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Resigning as Admin ==<br />
<br />
Well, as people have certainly noticed, I have been rather quiet around here lately. A seven month stint in Greece certainly had a bit to do with that, and I unfortunately don't see things improving much in the immediate future with the beginning of a demanding course load in grad school this year. So, I'll continue to check in around here occasionally (and add maps to the map section, comment on random conversations, and the like), but I don't foresee myself doing much of anything admin-related for quite some time. So, I'm adding my official admin resignation to the ad hoc one I've been engaged in for the past several months. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:14, 3 September 2008 (MDT)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_talk:EldritchNumen&diff=279393User talk:EldritchNumen2008-09-04T05:14:45Z<p>EldritchNumen: admin resignation (i.e. a recognition of the reality of the situation)</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Messages of Interest|messages=<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=MSRD_Talk:Modern_System_Reference_Document<br />
|section=PL-8 at Space Gunnery<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=21:38, 10 March 2008 (MDT)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Lizardfolk_Culture_(Paludia_Supplement)<br />
|section=Feedback<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:53, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Paludia_(DnD_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Feedback<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:52, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Paludia_(DnD_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Next Step<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=19:25, 1 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Halo_(D20_Modern_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Rating<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=23:59, 21 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Halo_(D20_Modern_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=<br />
|notifier=Sam Kay<br />
|date_time=03:45, 20 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Thunderer_(DnD_Class)<br />
|section=Ideas/ Changes??<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=23:15, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Welcome to D&D Wiki== <br />
<br />
Hello {{PAGENAME}}, and welcome to D&D Wiki! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like D&D Wiki and decide to stay. I am the owner of the site, and if you have a question feel free to ask me, however when contacting anyone on D&D Wiki through talk pages please sign your name using four tildes <nowiki>(~~~~)</nowiki>; this will automatically produce your name and the date. Also, if you want to help D&D Wiki but just don't know how [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Green_Dragon&action=edit&section=new drop me a note] and I'll see what I can do. However, when dropping me a note please tell me how much time you would like to spend working and how well you know the Wiki Format. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a D&D Wikian! If you need help ask me on my talk page, or just right here. Again, welcome! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:06, 3 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:No problem with the welcome. Also, I see that you are putting your Anazar campaign setting on D&D Wiki, and I must say it looks good so far. Thanks already for putting it on D&D Wiki. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:43, 24 August 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Rating the PrC's ==<br />
<br />
D&D Wiki has quite a bit of Prestige Classes, with only two having been rated on D&D Wiki's rating scale. So, on a small mission to try to get ratings of PrC's done, I would like you to help. All you would have to do is go to [[DnD Classes]] then to any PrC page. Click on the PrC you would like to rate; then rate its balance by clicking on the "here" in the ''Please, help D&D Wiki by rating the balance of this item '''here'''''. I hope you can take the time to help D&D Wiki become a useful tool for every visitor that comes here; and thanks in advance. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:29, 29 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:No problem. I'll do some now and then whenever I get the chance! -[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:19, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::By the way, the first one looks very well done, and thanks again. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:51, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Your Lord Cirth (DnD Deity) was Edited ==<br />
<br />
Someone, IP 66.116.27.101, edited your [[Lord Cirth (DnD Deity)]] by adding some content. I used the "Check User" function of Admins, and this IP did not register to you. So, are these edits okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:25, 7 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Thanks for pointing this out! I appreciate it. I just reverted to my version; the alignment change was unacceptable, one of the sentences was grammatically incorrect, and the extra text was not useful. Thank you *very much* for pointing this out! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:16, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::No problem. I will always do this if an IP edits something you have created and it is not your IP. Also, I will not miss anything as I go through every edit on D&D Wiki. I hope you did not lose trust in D&D Wiki. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:33, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::: Of course not! I understand how these things go; a power of a communal site is double-edged. I have no problems, so long as I have the opportunity to repair (which, fortunately, is easy). I love the site... --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:12, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Glad to hear it! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:29, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Amount of Edits ==<br />
<br />
When you posted about how to check how many edits one has done, I thought that it would be nice if their was an extension that just told one how many edits they have. So, just today, I got Blue Dragon to program an extension that does just this. Now, if you want to see how many edits you have made just go to Special Pages then User Edit Count to see how many edits you have made. By the way, while you are their, type in Blue Dragon to see how many edits he has done.... It's funny. Anyway, does this help you/is this what you wanted? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:38, 25 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:You still around? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:56, 31 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Yeah, sorry. I was unexpectedly (and unfortunately) left without internet for about 9 days or so! ''':(''' Anyway, I'm back now, though I won't be on much for the next week (but I'll be active again after then). The edits page looks great! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:28, 3 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Glad to hear that you'll still be around... Anyway, if you have some spare time, I would be happy if you could rate [[Staffmage (DnD Prestige Class)|the Staffmage]]; I would like to see how balanced my new revision is... Again, I'm glad to hear your still kicking! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:52, 3 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::BTW, your at 876 right now (1000 im [[Requests for Adminship|RfA'ing]] you...). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:29, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== User-Page edited ==<br />
<br />
Someone (possibly you (IP 199.89.175.12)) edited your user page. I am just letting you know, as I have not reverted their edits. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:07, 4 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:It was me. Thanks for the heads up; I didn't notice that I wasn't logged in. As always, I appreciate the alert! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:11, 4 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::No problem, my pleasure. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:52, 10 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Rating the [[Ghost Monk (DnD Prestige Class)|Ghost Monk]] ==<br />
<br />
Again... Would you mind rating the [[Ghost Monk (DnD Prestige Class)|Ghost Monk]]? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:52, 10 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== D20M ==<br />
<br />
Are you still willing to help D20M as their is still ''a lot'' of work that needs to be done? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:05, 7 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Yep! I don't run scripts (my knowledge of computer programming is not extensive), and so it's hard for me to do work maintaining pages like the mSRD, but I'm certainly willing to help out in any way I can. Right now I'm stuck in terms of updating the splash pages (in each category) since I don't know DPL or whatever. But I'm a fast learner, so I suppose I could learn to do that pretty easily, too. What specifically were you looking for help doing? --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 20:11, 8 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::It's a multi-step process (of course ''':)'''). So, right now all the pages that have an X on D20M main page need to be modernized to be like the D&D equivalent. After that the "Add a ___ to D&D Wiki" pages need to be made with |preload= like the D&D section, and modeled off those pages. After that everything in D20M needs to be formatted with tables so they look as good if not better than the best of the D&D equivalent. I think that is all that needs to be done and if you would be willing to help I would be very grateful. Also, DPL's are easy to use (maybe not the variant dlpc's and dlpcus's.). DPL's use categories to show a list of items dynamically made (DPL stands for "Dynamic Page List" or something like that). So, categories determine what links to the page. All you have to do is copy an existing dlp and change the categories for D20M. I hope this helps and I hope you can help with D20M. Thanks in advance. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:27, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== MoI's ==<br />
<br />
Just a formatting thing (some little things annoy me...). When you add a MoI instead of singing the last area with 4"~" sign it with 5"~" as that just produces the date and not your name as well. This works the other way as well seeing that 3"~" makes only the user-name.<br />
<br />
{| class="d20"<br />
! colspan="2" | Tilda's (you don't need to put the -- in front; I just like to)<br />
|- <br />
| <nowiki> --~~~ </nowiki> || --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]]<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| <nowiki> --~~~~ </nowiki> || --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
|- <br />
| <nowiki> --~~~~~ </nowiki> || --12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
|}<br />
<br />
Thanks. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Adminship ==<br />
<br />
Well, Congratulations. Your an Admin with a 100% approval rating from the RfA. Congratulations, I really hope that you like all the new cool things you can do, especially in the SRD and MSRD. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:12, 4 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Congratulations. I am formally handing the MSRD over to you. It's your baby. Take care of it well. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 06:19, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Thanks! I'll take care of her, no worries. My first task shall be to break apart the long pages (skills, etc.) into individual pages and to make some sense of the categories (which is going to involve a bit of shuffling, renaming, etc.). It's going to be a long but good ride! &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:05, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::A few words of advice. Persistence and patience are your friend. There's alot of work here. When you get burned out, take a break. Either work on something else, blow off the wiki for a few weeks and play a new game, or itch some other scratch. Mechanize what you can. Find ways to make repetitive tasks simpler. Oh, and be damned proud of your work. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 20:37, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Barnstar ==<br />
<br />
{{Barnstar|I give you this Barnstar for changing [[DnD Quests]] from a page that one must add their own link to their quest to a page that uses a DPL. Also, you have made it easier to add a quest with the [[Add New DnD Quest|Add your own Quest]]. Thanks so much. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:05, 6 March 2007 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== I'm trokking and i messed up my stats ==<br />
:''Originally posted on [[User talk:Green Dragon#I'm trokking and i messed up my stats]].''<br />
<br />
Eldritch, i created the the wee'diox and accidentally added a 1 in front of my +6 for intelligence, I apologize for that. But, this is also my first time and im not that good, though i am always willing to accept helpful criticism in any way. {{Unsigned|Trokking|17:46, 7 March 2007 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
:No problem, I make typoes all the time. I'd just seen that you didn't have a user account and did the standard "ask if this is vandalism or not" thing. For future reference, my user talk page is [[User Talk:EldritchNumen|here]]. This page belongs to Green Dragon. In any case, I apologize and I've written a couple of quick suggestions on the [[Talk:Wee'diox]] page. &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 17:50, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::thx for the suggestions... hey Eldritch, i took your advice and made the changes-tell me if i missed anything. By the way, should i make a page for my races diety? If so then how?<br />
<br />
::P.S. You said something about the four tildes signing. could you tell if it work<br />
<br />
::--[[User:Trokking|Trokking]] 18:07, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gosh, I hope I am leaving you a message correctly. ==<br />
<br />
Is there a way I can get the saved to my pc? besides going to each page and saving it? Sorry if I posted this wrong. (editing and posting wiki's confuse me). --- [[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]]<br />
<br />
:What exactly do you want to save to your pc? Or am I reading this message really wrong? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:36, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Opps! This is what happens you try to type someing while your tired; a bunch of incoherent words. What I ment to say was "Is there a way I can save the whole wiki to my PC? Besides going to each page and saving?" Of course I would only be useing if for personal use. I am such a D&D noob. Thanks --[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 21:10, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Honestly, I don't know, but I suspect not. The person to ask would be [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]], who administers all the technical aspects of the site. There might be some program that allows you to, but-- like I said-- probably not. What are you looking for? If you are mainly interested in having a copy of the SRD (that is, the core rules), one can be obtained very easily from the Wizards of the Coast website as a group of several text documents. There are also hypertext versions for download [http://www.pbemnexus.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Downloads&file=index&req=viewsdownload&sid=17 here]. Does this help? &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:36, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Yes! Thank you! --[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 09:52, 9 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::To start I am a very direct person, and please forgive me if this sounds rude. So, there is a way to get a copy of the entire site - it's called a back up. However, I do not trust you enough to give you a back up. I would not want a duplicate D&D Wiki coming around on the internet, and I am sorry for not trusting you. My reasoning from this comes from the fact that I once gave a copy of D&D Wiki away and it got posted on another site. I was not pleased. So, I do not want this to happen again and to make sure it will not I simply have decided I will not give away back ups of D&D Wiki to people that ask. Sorry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:00, 9 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I can see how a copy going around the web can be bad for this site, and understand your reasoning. At leasts I got a copy of the SRD to help me out. Thanks for helping me out.--[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 20:56, 10 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Again, sorry. I feel like I am begin very rude, and I am sure I am. However I really don't want a duplicate D&D Wiki coming into existance. Sorry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:58, 11 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Invitation for alpha testing ==<br />
<br />
Hey there. If you have time on your hands, I'd like to ask you to take a look at [[User:Armond/Deadly Assassin (DnD Prestige Class)]] for balance. There are a few things I'm concerned about, which I've listed at the very top of the page's coding in comment brackets. I feel it's only fair to warn you, however, that I've introduced a couple new game mechanics in that class, so it will likely take you a while to read and understand it all - but if you have the time and are willing, I'd really appreciate your input. If not, no worries, but if you know someone else who might be willing to help me find the bugs, I'd appreciate it if you'd let them know. Again, if you can't you can't, and I appreciate the thought all the same. Thanks! [[User:Armond|Armond]] 00:43, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
:I'm very busy this week, but I'll take a look at it as soon as I can spare some time. I'll try to get to in within a week... sorry for not being able to help faster. :( &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 13:31, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
::Worry not, this is just a preliminary test to see that I didn't screw things over too badly (I really don't want my first posted PrC to get a 1 right off the bat) before I throw it on the main namespace. Again, thanks for the thought, it means a lot. [[User:Armond|Armond]] 16:56, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== A little busy... ==<br />
<br />
I just quickly wanted to apologize to everyone for my absence this last week. I'll also be gone a lot next week, too. I will get around to answering messages, just not as quickly as usual... &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:01, 31 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Barnstar ==<br />
<br />
{{Barnstar|I give this Barnstar to [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] because he took the initiative and finally split up [[DnD Rules]] into Supplemental Variant Rules, Transformational Variant Rules, and Radical Variant Rules. This has made all of D&D Wiki's variant rules more user-friendly so even the most stringent DM can accept some of them --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 09:51, 10 April 2007}}<br />
<br />
== Sparse Contributions ==<br />
<br />
Ack. I just wanted to let everyone know that this last week I've been out of town a lot and am approaching the end of the term at school, so my contributions to the site have been a little low. Sorry! In any case, I'm not dead, but am going to be pretty busy the next few weeks, so things are going to be slow in my land... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:40, 25 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I was almost getting worried ''';)'''. Anyway, thanks for letting us know you still intend to stay around even though you may not be able to help out that much ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:10, 25 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Need some thoughts ==<br />
<br />
i was wondering if you could use the balance template to look at my [[Demon Lord (DnD Class)|Demon Lord]] class. thank you ==[[User:Alabastor|Alabastor]] 16:52, 26 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Alive, but starving... ==<br />
<br />
Hey. I just wanted to let you all know that I am, in fact, still alive. But I have no internet access at my house, so I've been relegated to posting from the local library. So... I'm probably going to be pretty quiet until august, when I get back to school. Sorry! Please don't mourn my loss too much! ''':)''' &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 11:42, 25 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:That is very good to know, I was getting worried. I thought that the Admin syndrome (the one that makes all admins leave after getting elected) was happening to you as well... It's good to know what is really happening ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:13, 31 July 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Resigning as Admin ==<br />
<br />
Well, as people have certainly noticed, I have been rather quiet around here lately. A seven month stint in Greece certainly had a bit to do with that, and I unfortunately don't see things improving much in the immediate future with the beginning of a demanding course load in grad school this year. So, I'll continue to check in around here occasionally, (and add maps to the map section, comment on random conversations, and the like) but I don't foresee myself doing much of anything admin-related for quite some time. So, I'm adding my official admin resignation to the ad hoc one I've been engaged in for the past several months. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:14, 3 September 2008 (MDT)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_talk:EldritchNumen&diff=258676User talk:EldritchNumen2008-06-02T22:20:15Z<p>EldritchNumen: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Messages of Interest|messages=<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=MSRD_Talk:Modern_System_Reference_Document<br />
|section=PL-8 at Space Gunnery<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=21:38, 10 March 2008 (MDT)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Lizardfolk_Culture_(Paludia_Supplement)<br />
|section=Feedback<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:53, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Paludia_(DnD_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Feedback<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:52, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Paludia_(DnD_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Next Step<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=19:25, 1 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Halo_(D20_Modern_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Rating<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=23:59, 21 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Halo_(D20_Modern_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=<br />
|notifier=Sam Kay<br />
|date_time=03:45, 20 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Thunderer_(DnD_Class)<br />
|section=Ideas/ Changes??<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=23:15, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Welcome to D&D Wiki== <br />
<br />
Hello {{PAGENAME}}, and welcome to D&D Wiki! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like D&D Wiki and decide to stay. I am the owner of the site, and if you have a question feel free to ask me, however when contacting anyone on D&D Wiki through talk pages please sign your name using four tildes <nowiki>(~~~~)</nowiki>; this will automatically produce your name and the date. Also, if you want to help D&D Wiki but just don't know how [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Green_Dragon&action=edit&section=new drop me a note] and I'll see what I can do. However, when dropping me a note please tell me how much time you would like to spend working and how well you know the Wiki Format. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a D&D Wikian! If you need help ask me on my talk page, or just right here. Again, welcome! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:06, 3 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:No problem with the welcome. Also, I see that you are putting your Anazar campaign setting on D&D Wiki, and I must say it looks good so far. Thanks already for putting it on D&D Wiki. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:43, 24 August 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Rating the PrC's ==<br />
<br />
D&D Wiki has quite a bit of Prestige Classes, with only two having been rated on D&D Wiki's rating scale. So, on a small mission to try to get ratings of PrC's done, I would like you to help. All you would have to do is go to [[DnD Classes]] then to any PrC page. Click on the PrC you would like to rate; then rate its balance by clicking on the "here" in the ''Please, help D&D Wiki by rating the balance of this item '''here'''''. I hope you can take the time to help D&D Wiki become a useful tool for every visitor that comes here; and thanks in advance. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:29, 29 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:No problem. I'll do some now and then whenever I get the chance! -[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:19, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::By the way, the first one looks very well done, and thanks again. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:51, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Your Lord Cirth (DnD Deity) was Edited ==<br />
<br />
Someone, IP 66.116.27.101, edited your [[Lord Cirth (DnD Deity)]] by adding some content. I used the "Check User" function of Admins, and this IP did not register to you. So, are these edits okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:25, 7 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Thanks for pointing this out! I appreciate it. I just reverted to my version; the alignment change was unacceptable, one of the sentences was grammatically incorrect, and the extra text was not useful. Thank you *very much* for pointing this out! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:16, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::No problem. I will always do this if an IP edits something you have created and it is not your IP. Also, I will not miss anything as I go through every edit on D&D Wiki. I hope you did not lose trust in D&D Wiki. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:33, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::: Of course not! I understand how these things go; a power of a communal site is double-edged. I have no problems, so long as I have the opportunity to repair (which, fortunately, is easy). I love the site... --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:12, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Glad to hear it! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:29, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Amount of Edits ==<br />
<br />
When you posted about how to check how many edits one has done, I thought that it would be nice if their was an extension that just told one how many edits they have. So, just today, I got Blue Dragon to program an extension that does just this. Now, if you want to see how many edits you have made just go to Special Pages then User Edit Count to see how many edits you have made. By the way, while you are their, type in Blue Dragon to see how many edits he has done.... It's funny. Anyway, does this help you/is this what you wanted? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:38, 25 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:You still around? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:56, 31 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Yeah, sorry. I was unexpectedly (and unfortunately) left without internet for about 9 days or so! ''':(''' Anyway, I'm back now, though I won't be on much for the next week (but I'll be active again after then). The edits page looks great! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:28, 3 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Glad to hear that you'll still be around... Anyway, if you have some spare time, I would be happy if you could rate [[Staffmage (DnD Prestige Class)|the Staffmage]]; I would like to see how balanced my new revision is... Again, I'm glad to hear your still kicking! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:52, 3 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::BTW, your at 876 right now (1000 im [[Requests for Adminship|RfA'ing]] you...). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:29, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== User-Page edited ==<br />
<br />
Someone (possibly you (IP 199.89.175.12)) edited your user page. I am just letting you know, as I have not reverted their edits. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:07, 4 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:It was me. Thanks for the heads up; I didn't notice that I wasn't logged in. As always, I appreciate the alert! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:11, 4 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::No problem, my pleasure. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:52, 10 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Rating the [[Ghost Monk (DnD Prestige Class)|Ghost Monk]] ==<br />
<br />
Again... Would you mind rating the [[Ghost Monk (DnD Prestige Class)|Ghost Monk]]? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:52, 10 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== D20M ==<br />
<br />
Are you still willing to help D20M as their is still ''a lot'' of work that needs to be done? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:05, 7 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Yep! I don't run scripts (my knowledge of computer programming is not extensive), and so it's hard for me to do work maintaining pages like the mSRD, but I'm certainly willing to help out in any way I can. Right now I'm stuck in terms of updating the splash pages (in each category) since I don't know DPL or whatever. But I'm a fast learner, so I suppose I could learn to do that pretty easily, too. What specifically were you looking for help doing? --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 20:11, 8 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::It's a multi-step process (of course ''':)'''). So, right now all the pages that have an X on D20M main page need to be modernized to be like the D&D equivalent. After that the "Add a ___ to D&D Wiki" pages need to be made with |preload= like the D&D section, and modeled off those pages. After that everything in D20M needs to be formatted with tables so they look as good if not better than the best of the D&D equivalent. I think that is all that needs to be done and if you would be willing to help I would be very grateful. Also, DPL's are easy to use (maybe not the variant dlpc's and dlpcus's.). DPL's use categories to show a list of items dynamically made (DPL stands for "Dynamic Page List" or something like that). So, categories determine what links to the page. All you have to do is copy an existing dlp and change the categories for D20M. I hope this helps and I hope you can help with D20M. Thanks in advance. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:27, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== MoI's ==<br />
<br />
Just a formatting thing (some little things annoy me...). When you add a MoI instead of singing the last area with 4"~" sign it with 5"~" as that just produces the date and not your name as well. This works the other way as well seeing that 3"~" makes only the user-name.<br />
<br />
{| class="d20"<br />
! colspan="2" | Tilda's (you don't need to put the -- in front; I just like to)<br />
|- <br />
| <nowiki> --~~~ </nowiki> || --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]]<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| <nowiki> --~~~~ </nowiki> || --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
|- <br />
| <nowiki> --~~~~~ </nowiki> || --12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
|}<br />
<br />
Thanks. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Adminship ==<br />
<br />
Well, Congratulations. Your an Admin with a 100% approval rating from the RfA. Congratulations, I really hope that you like all the new cool things you can do, especially in the SRD and MSRD. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:12, 4 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Congratulations. I am formally handing the MSRD over to you. It's your baby. Take care of it well. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 06:19, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Thanks! I'll take care of her, no worries. My first task shall be to break apart the long pages (skills, etc.) into individual pages and to make some sense of the categories (which is going to involve a bit of shuffling, renaming, etc.). It's going to be a long but good ride! &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:05, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::A few words of advice. Persistence and patience are your friend. There's alot of work here. When you get burned out, take a break. Either work on something else, blow off the wiki for a few weeks and play a new game, or itch some other scratch. Mechanize what you can. Find ways to make repetitive tasks simpler. Oh, and be damned proud of your work. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 20:37, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Barnstar ==<br />
<br />
{{Barnstar|I give you this Barnstar for changing [[DnD Quests]] from a page that one must add their own link to their quest to a page that uses a DPL. Also, you have made it easier to add a quest with the [[Add New DnD Quest|Add your own Quest]]. Thanks so much. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:05, 6 March 2007 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== I'm trokking and i messed up my stats ==<br />
:''Originally posted on [[User talk:Green Dragon#I'm trokking and i messed up my stats]].''<br />
<br />
Eldritch, i created the the wee'diox and accidentally added a 1 in front of my +6 for intelligence, I apologize for that. But, this is also my first time and im not that good, though i am always willing to accept helpful criticism in any way. {{Unsigned|Trokking|17:46, 7 March 2007 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
:No problem, I make typoes all the time. I'd just seen that you didn't have a user account and did the standard "ask if this is vandalism or not" thing. For future reference, my user talk page is [[User Talk:EldritchNumen|here]]. This page belongs to Green Dragon. In any case, I apologize and I've written a couple of quick suggestions on the [[Talk:Wee'diox]] page. &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 17:50, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::thx for the suggestions... hey Eldritch, i took your advice and made the changes-tell me if i missed anything. By the way, should i make a page for my races diety? If so then how?<br />
<br />
::P.S. You said something about the four tildes signing. could you tell if it work<br />
<br />
::--[[User:Trokking|Trokking]] 18:07, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gosh, I hope I am leaving you a message correctly. ==<br />
<br />
Is there a way I can get the saved to my pc? besides going to each page and saving it? Sorry if I posted this wrong. (editing and posting wiki's confuse me). --- [[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]]<br />
<br />
:What exactly do you want to save to your pc? Or am I reading this message really wrong? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:36, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Opps! This is what happens you try to type someing while your tired; a bunch of incoherent words. What I ment to say was "Is there a way I can save the whole wiki to my PC? Besides going to each page and saving?" Of course I would only be useing if for personal use. I am such a D&D noob. Thanks --[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 21:10, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Honestly, I don't know, but I suspect not. The person to ask would be [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]], who administers all the technical aspects of the site. There might be some program that allows you to, but-- like I said-- probably not. What are you looking for? If you are mainly interested in having a copy of the SRD (that is, the core rules), one can be obtained very easily from the Wizards of the Coast website as a group of several text documents. There are also hypertext versions for download [http://www.pbemnexus.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Downloads&file=index&req=viewsdownload&sid=17 here]. Does this help? &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:36, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Yes! Thank you! --[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 09:52, 9 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::To start I am a very direct person, and please forgive me if this sounds rude. So, there is a way to get a copy of the entire site - it's called a back up. However, I do not trust you enough to give you a back up. I would not want a duplicate D&D Wiki coming around on the internet, and I am sorry for not trusting you. My reasoning from this comes from the fact that I once gave a copy of D&D Wiki away and it got posted on another site. I was not pleased. So, I do not want this to happen again and to make sure it will not I simply have decided I will not give away back ups of D&D Wiki to people that ask. Sorry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:00, 9 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I can see how a copy going around the web can be bad for this site, and understand your reasoning. At leasts I got a copy of the SRD to help me out. Thanks for helping me out.--[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 20:56, 10 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Again, sorry. I feel like I am begin very rude, and I am sure I am. However I really don't want a duplicate D&D Wiki coming into existance. Sorry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:58, 11 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Invitation for alpha testing ==<br />
<br />
Hey there. If you have time on your hands, I'd like to ask you to take a look at [[User:Armond/Deadly Assassin (DnD Prestige Class)]] for balance. There are a few things I'm concerned about, which I've listed at the very top of the page's coding in comment brackets. I feel it's only fair to warn you, however, that I've introduced a couple new game mechanics in that class, so it will likely take you a while to read and understand it all - but if you have the time and are willing, I'd really appreciate your input. If not, no worries, but if you know someone else who might be willing to help me find the bugs, I'd appreciate it if you'd let them know. Again, if you can't you can't, and I appreciate the thought all the same. Thanks! [[User:Armond|Armond]] 00:43, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
:I'm very busy this week, but I'll take a look at it as soon as I can spare some time. I'll try to get to in within a week... sorry for not being able to help faster. :( &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 13:31, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
::Worry not, this is just a preliminary test to see that I didn't screw things over too badly (I really don't want my first posted PrC to get a 1 right off the bat) before I throw it on the main namespace. Again, thanks for the thought, it means a lot. [[User:Armond|Armond]] 16:56, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== A little busy... ==<br />
<br />
I just quickly wanted to apologize to everyone for my absence this last week. I'll also be gone a lot next week, too. I will get around to answering messages, just not as quickly as usual... &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:01, 31 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Barnstar ==<br />
<br />
{{Barnstar|I give this Barnstar to [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] because he took the initiative and finally split up [[DnD Rules]] into Supplemental Variant Rules, Transformational Variant Rules, and Radical Variant Rules. This has made all of D&D Wiki's variant rules more user-friendly so even the most stringent DM can accept some of them --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 09:51, 10 April 2007}}<br />
<br />
== Sparse Contributions ==<br />
<br />
Ack. I just wanted to let everyone know that this last week I've been out of town a lot and am approaching the end of the term at school, so my contributions to the site have been a little low. Sorry! In any case, I'm not dead, but am going to be pretty busy the next few weeks, so things are going to be slow in my land... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:40, 25 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I was almost getting worried ''';)'''. Anyway, thanks for letting us know you still intend to stay around even though you may not be able to help out that much ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:10, 25 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Need some thoughts ==<br />
<br />
i was wondering if you could use the balance template to look at my [[Demon Lord (DnD Class)|Demon Lord]] class. thank you ==[[User:Alabastor|Alabastor]] 16:52, 26 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Alive, but starving... ==<br />
<br />
Hey. I just wanted to let you all know that I am, in fact, still alive. But I have no internet access at my house, so I've been relegated to posting from the local library. So... I'm probably going to be pretty quiet until august, when I get back to school. Sorry! Please don't mourn my loss too much! ''':)''' &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 11:42, 25 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:That is very good to know, I was getting worried. I thought that the Admin syndrome (the one that makes all admins leave after getting elected) was happening to you as well... It's good to know what is really happening ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:13, 31 July 2007 (MDT)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:D20_Modern&diff=258651Talk:D20 Modern2008-06-02T19:27:30Z<p>EldritchNumen: /* Homebrew Occupations? */ done and added</p>
<hr />
<div>== Phoenix v0.1 == <br />
<br />
I have a free d20 Modern expansion pack that I've been working on. It's a superhero system, the goal of which is to maintain total d20 compatibility and be an expansion pack, not a standalone product. You can find it here (http://members.shaw.ca/orionuk/Phoenix.v0.1.pdf). There are seven chapters. <br />
<br />
Ch1 "Building a Hero" (character creation). <br />
<br />
Ch2 "Classes" (superhero classes, built on the D&D model)<br />
<br />
Ch3 "Skills" (the d20 Modern skills, arranged by class)<br />
<br />
Ch4 "Feats" (a complete list of all D&D and d20 Modern feats, with some Psionic feats thrown in, and 40+ pages of original feats)<br />
<br />
Ch5 "Powers" (50+ pages of superhero-style powers, from Flight to Extra Limbs to Webbing)<br />
<br />
Ch6 "Combat and Movement" (fighting with superstrength, swinging, fighting in zero-G)<br />
<br />
Ch7 "Running the Game" (the GMing chapter, notes on superheroes as a genre, tips on running any RPG)<br />
<br />
Please feel free to download the game! It's a hobby project. If you email the address listed in the Introduction, I will send you any and all updates to the system that I make in the future. Updates come out every six weeks or so, or when I feel like avoiding my dissertation.<br />
<br />
== Please ==<br />
<br />
Please add a section for Advanced Classes. Modern class structure follows the order of:<br />
<br />
* Base Class<br />
* Advanced Class<br />
* Prestige Class<br />
<br />
Advanced Classes are 10 levels, Prestige Classes are 5 levels. Base classes do not change often, though there have been (a couple) variant base classes created. The most customization of classes takes place in Advanced Classes. ~ ShadoStahker, WotC Modern board member<br />
<br />
:I added it, thank you for telling me that. I do not play D20 Modern often, so...<br />
<br />
::No problem, thanks for putting it up. I know a couple people on the WotC boards are also interested in a NPCs section (may be a good idea for the D&D part too). As well, there may be interest in a "talent trees" section for fan-made base class talent trees (if you aren't familiar, they're similar to class-specific feat trees, for base classes only). ~ ShadoStahker<br />
<br />
:::NPCs... There's a link to such a wiki here: http://d20npcs.wikicities.com/wiki/D20_Modern_NPCs_by_Challenge_Rating<br />
<br />
::::Actually, there's DnD NPCs there as well. --[[User:PsiSeveredHead|PsiSeveredHead]] 21:26, 15 February 2006 (MST) WotC board member<br />
<br />
== Hello ==<br />
My name is [[User:Wolfen Fenrison|Wolfen]] , some of you may remember me from the WotC boards, anyway I'm the admid for the D20 modern section so any questions or requests can be directed at me, thank you.<br />
<br />
:Hey Wolfen. The only thing I can think of is a "Talent Trees" section. I personally don't use expanded talent trees, but I know some do. They may fit under "Variant Rules", though. Also, the main page is now unlocked. I don't know if you'd want to lock it again, but I'd assume so. ~ ShadoStahker<br />
<br />
::You are correct expanded talent trees should go under varient rules -Wolfen<br />
<br />
== Hi ==<br />
<br />
This is blackknight5k from the wotc boards, how's it going? Anyways, I was thinking that it might be a good idea to more organize d20 modern with something like "d20 past, d20 modern, d20 future" because I know no one likes to go through d20 past stuff to get to a new mecha, or something like that. It might not be a problem now, but it might become a little cluttered if this wiki takes off.<br />
<br />
:neccesity... as of late i hae become rather busy, finding a job, kingdom hearts 2, important stuff like that. but maby latter this week the d20 modern page will get a major update. as for sections for past and future, submissions should be marked for modern, past, or future. - Wolfen<br />
<br />
::Em Back... Well the update I promised is done, and I updated my campaign setting, it is good to see all the material has been posted since green dragon and I concived this section and then handed it over to me. My hope is that as this game grows and evolves community support and creativity will grow as well, and remember the only stupid idea is the one not acted upon. - Wolfen<br />
<br />
:::I agree with ''blackknight5k'' we need to break down d20 Modern into d20 Past, d20 Modern, d20 Future, and most all d20 Apocalypse. These variations are core to d20 Modern and if they sub-catagories are implemented now it will stop confusion in the future. -- [[User:Sepsis|Sepsis]] 18:15, 7 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I say okay, lets do it. However, before anything else, all the D20 Past need to be part of [[:Category:D20 Past]], all the D20 Modern need to be a part of [[:Category:D20 Modern]], etc. When this is done the change will be easy. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:15, 7 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::The category right now is D20M for modern stuff. It would be easy enough to use D20P for past, D20F for future, and D20A for apocalypse. And the shorthand would be kept. Do we want to do it this way or the longer way (spelling out modern, past, etc.)? I personally prefer the shorthand... --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 02:03, 9 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::Shorthand. When I posted that I did not think of good "Shorthands" so I just wrote them long. Good thinking and the Shorthands should be used. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:40, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Keep em coming guys ==<br />
<br />
I'm very pleased with the amount of matirial that is getting posted (the oil elemental is very sweet), I'm working on more stuff my self but job huntinh has priority right now. -Wolfen<br />
<br />
== Categories ==<br />
<br />
Are there any D20 modern categories? Virtually none of the pages have categories or "return to" bars. I'll start to add some, but I need to know what categories there are and (if there are none) what should be made (besides the obvious: D20 modern feats, classes, etc.). Help? --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:50, 18 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:To be honest, I really don't care that much about D20M. I don't play it, and I only added it to this site as an afterthought. So... when a new item is posted, or when the D&D section of D&D Wiki changes, I do not change the D20M section to reflect the D&D change. This section is a ''very'' primitive version of the D&D section. If you would like, go ahead and update it, and try to make it like the D&D section. If you have any questions of what categories are correct for what please feel free to ask me. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:55, 18 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Admin Cat change... ==<br />
<br />
Could an admin please change the category of this page from "D20Modern" to "D20 Modern". The second category will be the one used for all the D20 Modern pages. Thanks! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 03:49, 19 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I changed the category; but not to what you wanted. I think all D20M material should be under D20M category, not D20 Modern. I changed it to reflect this. Will this work for your modernization of [[D20 Modern]]? Now for the reason: In the begginging of the D&D section of this site, all the cateories were [[:Category:Dungeons and Dragons]], and as the D&D seciton changed all the categories became [[:Category:DnD]] (Even though many are still part of [[:Category:Dungeons and Dragons]]). So, since you are bringing this up to date, all the categories should be brought up to date. I hope I made sense... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:02, 19 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Updating Check Boxes ==<br />
<br />
I changed the equipment splash page. It can have a green check mark now. I'll fix up the rest in the coming days. ''':)''' --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 02:00, 9 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Feats now, also. --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 03:35, 10 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::And Races and FX Abilities. All have been updated to mirror the DnD pages. --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 03:45, 10 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::For the classes description on this page, the "and NPC..." should be removed. There are not NPC classes in D20 Modern. --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 21:04, 10 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Okay... <br />
::::*Classes<br />
::::**<strike>The actual pages need a dlpc header so they show up on the "With Descriptions" pages</strike><br />
::::**<strike>Since the MSRD has been added all the MSRD classes need to be linked to here just like [[DnD Classes]].</strike><br />
::::**the "By type" pages need to be made with dlpcu's.<br />
::::*Equipment<br />
::::**This needs to be like [[DnD Equipment]] with the table (maybe?).<br />
::::*Feats<br />
::::**Shouldn't these be organized into general categories than put into wikitables (like [[DnD Feats]])?<br />
::::*FX Abilities<br />
::::**They need to be broken up by class than (so it is ''more'' advanced than [[DnD Feats]]) into dpl's by level.<br />
::::*Races<br />
::::**There must be a LA page; an all page, and the LA pages should include a dplcu list (like LA 6 races on [[DnD Races]]). Also, this page needs to look like [[DnD Races]] when done (LA on the side with links to other places throughout). <br />
::::This is all I can think of now, and I am sorry if this is a lot (I left all the harder ones to be done later ''':)'''). If you want help ask and I will be more than willing to help. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:08, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I'm going to put off working on the equipment and FX Abilities for now, since there is almost no content there. It can be updated later, if necessary. For now the simply DPLC lists I've implemented should work. Classes is first up for work; I'm actually finally getting there on some of the things to do. Next up will be races and, as I go, fixing all the tables into the "d20" class (I'm doing this as I go, for the most part). --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 02:04, 13 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::Okay. So far classes looks better than before. Good work so far. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:04, 13 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Checklist of Updates and Revisions ==<br />
<br />
# Add preload functions:<br />
#*<s>[[D20 Modern Character Optimizations]]</s><br />
#*<s>[[D20 Modern Classes]]</s><br />
#*<s>[[D20 Modern Feats]]</s><br />
#*[[D20 Modern Races]]<br />
#*[[D20 Modern Creatures]]<br />
#*[[D20 Modern NPCs]]<br />
# D20 Modern Classes:<br />
#*<s> Add dplcus for classes by type.</s><br />
#* <s>Make the MSRD links link to ''only'' the class type in question with their own dlp page while not linking to [[Classes (MSRD)]].</s><br />
# Update all tables to d20 class.<br />
# <s>Update all categories to newest system.</s><br />
# Change all the pages to the formatting used in the preload (the very old pages are just haphazardly thrown together, and it doesn't look very professional).<br />
# Make a D20 Modern specific creature template (with Massive Damage Threshold, etc.).<br />
# Major overhaul of [[D20 Modern Races]]; it needs to look like the DnD version, with LA categories, an "All" page, etc.<br />
<br />
::This is mainly just for me, and will grow as other important things come up. But feel free to add things if they come up. &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 17:03, 20 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Some of this is going to be a pain to do without the ability to edit the MSRD. For example, the categories should be renamed, and the pages need to be split (there needs to be just a MSRD:Basic Classes page, that has the category "Basic Class (MSRD)", etc. Otherwise setting up some of the pages, such as the class splash page, can't be done with any sort of efficiency or order (see 2B above about classes, for example)... --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 15:13, 21 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Hm... All I can say is ask Dmilewski as he is in charge of the MSRD ''or'' just go for an RfA. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:43, 22 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I removed all the checks and x's from the page, primarily to make it look better. Is this okay? I figured I know pretty well what still has to be updated, and I'm keeping a running list here, so we don't need to clutter the home page with it... what do you think? &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:06, 9 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I only speak for myself however it should be okay. Since you have taken over D20M I am sure you know what needs to be done. Removing the X's is a good move so visitors understand their is content even though X's used to be their. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:48, 9 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Homebrew Occupations? ==<br />
Please do add a category for homebrew occupations, I have some I'd like to share. [[User:81.233.196.49|81.233.196.49]] 04:31, 1 June 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Done. Enjoy! :) &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 13:27, 2 June 2008 (MDT)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=D20_Modern&diff=258650D20 Modern2008-06-02T19:27:01Z<p>EldritchNumen: added occupations</p>
<hr />
<div>Back to [[Main Page]].<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
<br />
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="column"<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
;<big>For Players</big><br />
* [[D20 Modern Classes|Classes]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Base, Prestige, Advanced, and NPC</div><br />
* [[D20 Modern Occupations|Occupations]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">It's where everything begins...</div><br />
* [[D20 Modern Equipment|Equipment]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Weapons, Armor, Food & Drink, Magic Items, etc...</div><br />
* [[D20 Modern Feats|Feats]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">General, Epic, Divine, Racial, etc...</div><br />
* [[D20 Modern FX Abilities|FX Abilities]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">0&ndash;9th and Epic</div><br />
* [[D20 Modern Races|Races]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Dragons, Giants, Aberrations, Oh My!</div><br />
* [[D20 Modern Vehicles|Vehicles]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Who doesn't like whizzing along at 350 mph?</div><br />
|<br />
; <big>For GMs</big><br />
* [[D20 Modern Campaign Settings|Campaign Settings]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Worlds and Options</div><br />
* [[D20 Modern Creatures|Creatures]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Monsters and Templates</div><br />
* [[D20 Modern NPCs|NPCs]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Good Guys, Bad Guys, and Ugly Guys</div><br />
* [[D20 Modern Adventures|Adventures]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Where Do You Want To Go Today?</div><br />
|<br />
; <big>General</big><br />
<br />
* [[DnD Guidelines|Guidelines]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Helpful guidelines for creating wiki content</div><br />
* [[DnD Discussion|Discussion]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">General discussions and answers to various topics</div><br />
* [[D20 Modern Character Optimizations|Character Optimizations]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">d20 Modern: Anything You Can Do, I Can Do Better</div><br />
* [[D20 Modern Rules|Rules]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">d20 Modern: Transformational, Supplemental, and Variant Rules</div><br />
* [[To-Do List]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Pick up the drycleaning. Walk the taxes. File the dog.</div><br />
|}<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
{{Admin_Locked_Page}}</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=D20M_Occupation_Template&diff=258649D20M Occupation Template2008-06-02T19:25:46Z<p>EldritchNumen: creation</p>
<hr />
<div>__NOTOC__<br />
{{author<br />
|author_name=<!-- Insert your name here --><br />
|date_created=<!-- Insert date here --><br />
|status=<!-- Insert idea's status here --><br />
}}<br />
<br />
===<!-- Occupation Name -->===<br />
<br />
<!-- Brief description of occupation. -->.<br />
<br />
=====Prerequisites=====<br />
<br />
<!-- Prerequisites for entering the occupation. --><br />
<br />
=====Benefits=====<br />
<br />
<!-- The additional skills or feats gained within the occupation. --><br />
<br />
'''Wealth Bonus Increase: ''' <!-- The amount of wealth bonus granted by the occupation. --><br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
Back to [[D20 Modern]] &rarr; [[D20 Modern Occupations|Occupations]] &rarr; [[<!-- insert page name that links to this occupation add another "Back to" line if it's linked from more than one list page. -->]].<br />
<!-- REMOVE THIS ENTIRE LINE (and only this line) BEFORE YOU SAVE!!! --><nowiki><br />
[[Category:D20M]]<br />
[[Category:User]]<br />
[[Category:Occupation]]<br />
</nowiki><!-- REMOVE THIS ENTIRE LINE (and only this line) BEFORE YOU SAVE!!! --></div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=D20M_Occupation_Instructions&diff=258646D20M Occupation Instructions2008-06-02T19:21:28Z<p>EldritchNumen: creation</p>
<hr />
<div>Simply remove all commented areas ('''<nowiki><!--</nowiki>''' to '''<nowiki>--></nowiki>''') and replace with your own text.<br />
<br />
Remember to add additional categories (at the bottom of the page) to make your feat easier to find.</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Add_a_New_D20M_Occupation&diff=258644Add a New D20M Occupation2008-06-02T19:20:20Z<p>EldritchNumen: creation</p>
<hr />
<div>'''Creating a New Occupation:''' <br><br />
To make a new page for you own Occupation, simply replace '''''"OccupationName"''''' in the field below. Please leave the '''''" (D20 Modern Occupation)"''''' identifier. Then click the button and you'll be taken to an edit page. If an article already exists by the name you submit, you'll be taken to the ''Edit'' page for the existing article.<br />
<br />
{| style="margin: 1em;"<br />
|<br />
<inputbox><br />
type=create<br />
width=35<br />
break=no<br />
buttonlabel=Create New Occupation<br />
default=OccupationName (D20 Modern Occupation)<br />
editintro=D20M Occupation Instructions<br />
preload=D20M Occupation Template<br />
</inputbox><br />
|}<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Note:''' If you are putting something on this site, and it is not your idea, please get permission from the author.<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
Back to [[D20 Modern]] &rarr; [[D20 Modern Occupations]].<br />
[[Category:D20M]]</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=D20_Modern_Occupations&diff=258640D20 Modern Occupations2008-06-02T19:16:17Z<p>EldritchNumen: creation</p>
<hr />
<div>{| style="width: 100%;" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"<br />
|- style="text-align: left; font-size: larger;"<br />
|- style="vertical-align: top;"<br />
| style="width: 30%; padding: 0.077em 0.385em;" |<br />
Back to [[D20 Modern]]<br />
| style="width: 70%; padding: 0.077em 0.385em;" |<br />
'''[[Add a New D20M Occupation|Add your own D20M Occupation to D&D Wiki]]''' by clicking the link and following the instructions.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<br />
==Homebrew Occupations==<br />
<br />
:<DPL><br />
debug=1<br />
category=D20M<br />
category=User<br />
category=Occupation<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL></div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Fast_Study_(D20_Modern_Feat)&diff=258324Fast Study (D20 Modern Feat)2008-05-31T16:48:10Z<p>EldritchNumen: fixed up footer</p>
<hr />
<div>__NOTOC__<br />
{{author<br />
|author_name=Ktonos<br />
|date_created=24 February 2008<br />
|status=Ideas For Changes<br />
}}<br />
<br />
===Fast Study [Robotic]===<br />
<br />
Study time to change form is halved.<br />
<br />
=====Prerequisite=====<br />
<br />
Intelligence 16, Autobot/Decepticon<br />
<br />
=====Benefit=====<br />
<br />
The minimum time to study a new form is halved (to 5 Rounds).<br />
<br />
=====Normal=====<br />
<br />
The study time is 10 rounds.<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
Back to [[D20 Modern]] &rarr; [[D20 Modern Feats|Feats]]<br />
[[Category:D20M]]<br />
[[Category:User]]<br />
[[Category:Feat]]<br />
[[Category:Robotic Feat]]</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Adamantine_Knight_(3.5e_Prestige_Class)&diff=258322Adamantine Knight (3.5e Prestige Class)2008-05-31T16:44:44Z<p>EldritchNumen: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{DnD Prestige Class Infobox<br />
|img=<br />
|imgloc=<br />
|imgsize=<br />
|imgcaption=<br />
|rating_power=2<br />
|raters_power=<br />
|rating_wording=4<br />
|raters_wording=<br />
|rating_formatting=4<br />
|raters_formatting=<br />
|rating_flavor=4<br />
|raters_flavor=<br />
|authors=[[User:Maglad|Maglad]]<br />
|datecreated=2006-05-01<br />
|adopters=[[User:Roszlishan|Roszlishan]]<br />
|dateadopted=2007-12-07<br />
|status=v 3.x<br />
|editing=<br />
|type=Good Guy, Combat-Focused<br />
|desc=<br />
|len=3<br />
|minlvl=15<br />
}}<br />
<br />
=Adamantine Knight=<br />
<br />
''Original idea inspired By:'' [[User:Maglad|Maglad]]<br />
<br />
{{quote|You have erred.|orig=Bock Lin, servant of the Heavy Sword, [[Adamantine Knight (DnD Prestige Class)|adamantine knight]]|src=on the battlefield.}}<br />
<br />
The Adamantine Knight sees perfection in the unyielding resilience and unequalled hardness of adamantine. Those are the true qualities of a knight, to be undefeated and unbowed by anything except adherence to the stern precepts that define existence. By means of a strange alchemical process kept secret by the Adamantine Knights, these stalwart defenders of Order actually incorporate that perfect metal into their own bodies, and so gain its knightly qualities.<br />
<br />
Although this concoction was thought to have been developed by Dwarven paladins, the mere existence of the process has led to its replication by other, less idealistic, groups. Some of these groups are dedicated only to the ideals of Law, others use the powerful abilities of the Adamantine Quaff to support soul-crushing tyrannies of the worst sort.<br />
In all cases, however, orders of Adamantine Knights are devoted to Order. Presumably<br />
the supernatural forces of Order are needed to catalyze the uptake of adamantine<br />
in the Quaff, as Adamantine Knights are invariably lawful. The few cases where an Adamantine Knight has strayed from the moral path of Order have resulted, without exception, in a debilitating illness where the Knight's body violently rejects the incorporated metal.<br />
<br />
The path of the Adamantine Knight draws fighters<br />
dedicated to the heavy rule of law. Although clerics<br />
interested in spreading martial law may well be<br />
attracted to Adamantine Knight, it is difficult<br />
for any but a principally martial-focused character to qualify,<br />
given the steep entry requirement of the high<br />
[[Base Attack Bonus (terminology)|Base Attack Bonus]].<br />
The path of the Adamantine Knight rarely interests druids,<br />
arcane spellcasters, or rogues, or even monks.<br />
<br />
The process of incorporating adamantine does have a minor drawback;<br />
the Knight becomes less flexible and more rigid as his skin takes in <br />
more and more adamantine. The defensive advantages, however, far outweigh<br />
the minor inconveniences.<br />
<br />
==Requirements== <br />
* '''[[SRD:Alignment|Alignment]]:''' Any Lawful<br />
* '''[[Base Attack Bonus (terminology)|Base Attack Bonus]] +15<br />
* '''Feats:''' [[Leadership (SRD Feat)|Leadership]] and one of the following: Disciple of Darkness, [[Path of the Inevitables (DnD Feat)|Path of the Inevitables]], Servant of the Heavens.<br />
<br />
* '''Skills:'''<br />
[[Intimidate (SRD Skill)|Intimidate]] 15 ranks, <br />
and [[Knowledge (SRD Skill)|Knowledge]] (religion) 5 ranks<br />
<br />
* '''Special:'''<br />
The would-be Adamantine Knight must be accepted by an Order of Knights, and be given the Adamantine Quaff, a powerful concoction made of not less than 5000GP worth of adamantine dissolved in a unique alchemical potion that makes the metal biologically available.<br />
<br />
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="d20"<br />
|+ <div style="float: right;">Hit Die: d10</div>Table: The Adamantine Knight<br />
|-<br />
! Level<br />
! [[Base Attack Bonus (terminology)|Base<br/>Attack Bonus]]<br />
! [[Saving Throw (SRD Rules)|Fort<br/>Save]]<br />
! [[Saving Throw (SRD Rules)|Ref<br/>Save]]<br />
! [[Saving Throw (SRD Rules)|Will<br/>Save]]<br />
! style="text-align: left;" | Special<br />
|-<br />
| 1st<br />
| +1<br />
| +2<br />
| +2<br />
| +2<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | Adamantine Skin<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| 2nd<br />
| +2<br />
| +3<br />
| +3<br />
| +3<br />
| style="text-align: left;" |Adamantine Defense<br />
|-<br />
| 3rd<br />
| +3<br />
| +3<br />
| +3<br />
| +3<br />
| style="text-align: left;" |Adamantine Body<br />
|- class ="even"<br />
| 4th<br />
| +4<br />
| +4<br />
| +4<br />
| +4<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | Adamantine Intractibility<br />
|-<br />
| 5th<br />
| +5<br />
| +4<br />
| +4<br />
| +4<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | Adamantine Perfection<br />
|-<br />
| colspan="6" style="text-align: left; border: none;" |<br />
'''Class Skills (2 + Int modifier per level)'''<br/><br />
[[Craft (SRD Skill)|Craft]] (Armorsmithing), <br />
[[Craft (SRD Skill)|Craft]] (Weaponsmithing),<br />
[[Intimidate (SRD Skill)|Intimidate]],<br />
[[Knowledge (SRD Skill)|Knowledge]] (Geography),<br />
[[Knowledge (SRD Skill)|Knowledge]] (Local),<br />
[[Knowledge (SRD Skill)|Knowledge]] (Nobility and Royalty),<br />
[[Knowledge (SRD Skill)|Knowledge]] (Religion),<br />
[[Ride (SRD Skill)|Ride]],<br />
[[Profession (SRD Skill)|Profession]] Lawyer,<br />
[[Sense Motive (SRD Skill)|Sense Motive]].<br />
|}<br />
<br />
==Class Features==<br />
<br />
'''Weapons and Armor Proficiency:''' An Adamantine Knight gains no proficiency with weapons or armor.<br />
<br />
'''Adamantine Skin (Ex):''' The Adamantine Knight armors himself with the inflexible teachings and unyielding precepts of his Order, and his supernatural devotion is echoed physically as his skin slowly incorporates the qualities of adamantine.<br />
This grants the Adamantine Knight<br />
[[SRD:Damage Reduction|DR]]&nbsp;2/[[SRD:Adamantine|Adamantine]]<br />
per level of Adamantine Knight.<br />
<br />
'''Adamantine Defense (Ex):''' The Adamantine Knight's refusal to bend to anything but the dictates of pure law permit him and any adamantine equipment to treat a failed Reflex save as if the Knight had made the save. The Adamantine Knight can call upon his Adamantine Defense once per day per class level of Adamantine Knight.<br />
Any material he carries that are primarily composed of less stern stuff than adamantine must save as if it was an unattended object, should the Adamantine Knight fail a Reflex save.<br />
<br />
'''Adamantine Body (Ex):''' As the Adamantine Knight falls into the regulum of his duties and gives himself over to the perfection of Law, his body in turn incorporates adamantine into his slowly perfecting flesh. The Adamantine Knight may re-roll any hit die from any class (including this one), if that hit die is less than half the maximum roll (thus, a roll of 1 on a d4, 1-2 on a d3, 1-3 on a d8, 1-4 on a d10, and 1-5 on a d12).<br />
<br />
'''Adamantine Intractibility (Ex):''' As the Adamantine Knight perfects his understanding and performance, so too is he less affected by the imperfect processes of the material world. His Adamantine Defense now permits him to ignore damage from any successfully made Reflex Save as well as treating a failed save as if he made it. This Adamantine Intractibility is likewise shared by his adamantine equipment, but anything he wears or carries that is not made of adamantine must save as if it were an unattended object any time the Adamantine Knight uses his Adamantine Defense.<br />
<br />
'''Adamantine Perfection (Ex & Su):''' Finally, the Adamantine Knight reaches the pinnacle of moral and physical perfection. The adamantine infusing his body is incorporated fully into his body, and he becomes a native outsider (although he can still be raised or resurrected). The perfect adamantine processes of his material body are intolerant of disruption or change, granting him an +10 Perfection bonus against disease and poison effects of all kinds as well as Transmutatation effects. The Knight's resistance to poison and disease is an extraordinary ability, and the resistance to magical effects is a supernatural ability.<br />
<br />
==Ex-Adamantine Knights==<br />
Law is just, not forgiving. An Adamantine Knight who knowingly and willingly takes a Chaotic action, or consorts too often and too frequently with Chaos, loses all benefits of this class. His adamantine skin sloughs off, and in a terrible day&ndash;long process of vomiting and incontinence, the incorporated adamantine is expelled violently from his body. Upon receipt of [[SRD:Atonement|Atonement]] from a Lawful cleric of at least the ex-Adamantine Knight's character level, the ex-Adamantine Knight may again take the Adamantine Quaff, restoring his class abilities.<br />
<br />
==Multiclassing Note==<br />
A Paladin who takes levels of Adamantine Knight may continue to take levels of Paladin, as long as the Paladin continues to uphold the ideals of Lawful Good.<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
{{DnD Prestige Classes Breadcrumb}}<br />
[[Category:DnD]]<br />
[[Category:User]]<br />
[[Category:Class]]<br />
[[Category:Prestige Class]]<br />
[[Category:Good Guy]]<br />
[[Category:Combat-Focused]]</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_talk:EldritchNumen&diff=258321User talk:EldritchNumen2008-05-31T16:42:47Z<p>EldritchNumen: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Messages of Interest|messages=<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=MSRD_Talk:Modern_System_Reference_Document<br />
|section=PL-8 at Space Gunnery<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=21:38, 10 March 2008 (MDT)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Lizardfolk_Culture_(Paludia_Supplement)<br />
|section=Feedback<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:53, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:History_(Paludia_Supplement)<br />
|section=Feedback and Purpose<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:53, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Paludia_(DnD_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Feedback<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:52, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Paludia_(DnD_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Next Step<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=19:25, 1 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Halo_(D20_Modern_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Rating<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=23:59, 21 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Halo_(D20_Modern_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=<br />
|notifier=Sam Kay<br />
|date_time=03:45, 20 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Thunderer_(DnD_Class)<br />
|section=Ideas/ Changes??<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=23:15, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Welcome to D&D Wiki== <br />
<br />
Hello {{PAGENAME}}, and welcome to D&D Wiki! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like D&D Wiki and decide to stay. I am the owner of the site, and if you have a question feel free to ask me, however when contacting anyone on D&D Wiki through talk pages please sign your name using four tildes <nowiki>(~~~~)</nowiki>; this will automatically produce your name and the date. Also, if you want to help D&D Wiki but just don't know how [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Green_Dragon&action=edit&section=new drop me a note] and I'll see what I can do. However, when dropping me a note please tell me how much time you would like to spend working and how well you know the Wiki Format. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a D&D Wikian! If you need help ask me on my talk page, or just right here. Again, welcome! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:06, 3 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:No problem with the welcome. Also, I see that you are putting your Anazar campaign setting on D&D Wiki, and I must say it looks good so far. Thanks already for putting it on D&D Wiki. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:43, 24 August 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Rating the PrC's ==<br />
<br />
D&D Wiki has quite a bit of Prestige Classes, with only two having been rated on D&D Wiki's rating scale. So, on a small mission to try to get ratings of PrC's done, I would like you to help. All you would have to do is go to [[DnD Classes]] then to any PrC page. Click on the PrC you would like to rate; then rate its balance by clicking on the "here" in the ''Please, help D&D Wiki by rating the balance of this item '''here'''''. I hope you can take the time to help D&D Wiki become a useful tool for every visitor that comes here; and thanks in advance. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:29, 29 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:No problem. I'll do some now and then whenever I get the chance! -[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:19, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::By the way, the first one looks very well done, and thanks again. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:51, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Your Lord Cirth (DnD Deity) was Edited ==<br />
<br />
Someone, IP 66.116.27.101, edited your [[Lord Cirth (DnD Deity)]] by adding some content. I used the "Check User" function of Admins, and this IP did not register to you. So, are these edits okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:25, 7 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Thanks for pointing this out! I appreciate it. I just reverted to my version; the alignment change was unacceptable, one of the sentences was grammatically incorrect, and the extra text was not useful. Thank you *very much* for pointing this out! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:16, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::No problem. I will always do this if an IP edits something you have created and it is not your IP. Also, I will not miss anything as I go through every edit on D&D Wiki. I hope you did not lose trust in D&D Wiki. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:33, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::: Of course not! I understand how these things go; a power of a communal site is double-edged. I have no problems, so long as I have the opportunity to repair (which, fortunately, is easy). I love the site... --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:12, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Glad to hear it! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:29, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Amount of Edits ==<br />
<br />
When you posted about how to check how many edits one has done, I thought that it would be nice if their was an extension that just told one how many edits they have. So, just today, I got Blue Dragon to program an extension that does just this. Now, if you want to see how many edits you have made just go to Special Pages then User Edit Count to see how many edits you have made. By the way, while you are their, type in Blue Dragon to see how many edits he has done.... It's funny. Anyway, does this help you/is this what you wanted? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:38, 25 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:You still around? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:56, 31 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Yeah, sorry. I was unexpectedly (and unfortunately) left without internet for about 9 days or so! ''':(''' Anyway, I'm back now, though I won't be on much for the next week (but I'll be active again after then). The edits page looks great! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:28, 3 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Glad to hear that you'll still be around... Anyway, if you have some spare time, I would be happy if you could rate [[Staffmage (DnD Prestige Class)|the Staffmage]]; I would like to see how balanced my new revision is... Again, I'm glad to hear your still kicking! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:52, 3 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::BTW, your at 876 right now (1000 im [[Requests for Adminship|RfA'ing]] you...). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:29, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== User-Page edited ==<br />
<br />
Someone (possibly you (IP 199.89.175.12)) edited your user page. I am just letting you know, as I have not reverted their edits. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:07, 4 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:It was me. Thanks for the heads up; I didn't notice that I wasn't logged in. As always, I appreciate the alert! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:11, 4 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::No problem, my pleasure. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:52, 10 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Rating the [[Ghost Monk (DnD Prestige Class)|Ghost Monk]] ==<br />
<br />
Again... Would you mind rating the [[Ghost Monk (DnD Prestige Class)|Ghost Monk]]? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:52, 10 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== D20M ==<br />
<br />
Are you still willing to help D20M as their is still ''a lot'' of work that needs to be done? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:05, 7 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Yep! I don't run scripts (my knowledge of computer programming is not extensive), and so it's hard for me to do work maintaining pages like the mSRD, but I'm certainly willing to help out in any way I can. Right now I'm stuck in terms of updating the splash pages (in each category) since I don't know DPL or whatever. But I'm a fast learner, so I suppose I could learn to do that pretty easily, too. What specifically were you looking for help doing? --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 20:11, 8 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::It's a multi-step process (of course ''':)'''). So, right now all the pages that have an X on D20M main page need to be modernized to be like the D&D equivalent. After that the "Add a ___ to D&D Wiki" pages need to be made with |preload= like the D&D section, and modeled off those pages. After that everything in D20M needs to be formatted with tables so they look as good if not better than the best of the D&D equivalent. I think that is all that needs to be done and if you would be willing to help I would be very grateful. Also, DPL's are easy to use (maybe not the variant dlpc's and dlpcus's.). DPL's use categories to show a list of items dynamically made (DPL stands for "Dynamic Page List" or something like that). So, categories determine what links to the page. All you have to do is copy an existing dlp and change the categories for D20M. I hope this helps and I hope you can help with D20M. Thanks in advance. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:27, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== MoI's ==<br />
<br />
Just a formatting thing (some little things annoy me...). When you add a MoI instead of singing the last area with 4"~" sign it with 5"~" as that just produces the date and not your name as well. This works the other way as well seeing that 3"~" makes only the user-name.<br />
<br />
{| class="d20"<br />
! colspan="2" | Tilda's (you don't need to put the -- in front; I just like to)<br />
|- <br />
| <nowiki> --~~~ </nowiki> || --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]]<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| <nowiki> --~~~~ </nowiki> || --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
|- <br />
| <nowiki> --~~~~~ </nowiki> || --12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
|}<br />
<br />
Thanks. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Adminship ==<br />
<br />
Well, Congratulations. Your an Admin with a 100% approval rating from the RfA. Congratulations, I really hope that you like all the new cool things you can do, especially in the SRD and MSRD. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:12, 4 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Congratulations. I am formally handing the MSRD over to you. It's your baby. Take care of it well. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 06:19, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Thanks! I'll take care of her, no worries. My first task shall be to break apart the long pages (skills, etc.) into individual pages and to make some sense of the categories (which is going to involve a bit of shuffling, renaming, etc.). It's going to be a long but good ride! &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:05, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::A few words of advice. Persistence and patience are your friend. There's alot of work here. When you get burned out, take a break. Either work on something else, blow off the wiki for a few weeks and play a new game, or itch some other scratch. Mechanize what you can. Find ways to make repetitive tasks simpler. Oh, and be damned proud of your work. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 20:37, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Barnstar ==<br />
<br />
{{Barnstar|I give you this Barnstar for changing [[DnD Quests]] from a page that one must add their own link to their quest to a page that uses a DPL. Also, you have made it easier to add a quest with the [[Add New DnD Quest|Add your own Quest]]. Thanks so much. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:05, 6 March 2007 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== I'm trokking and i messed up my stats ==<br />
:''Originally posted on [[User talk:Green Dragon#I'm trokking and i messed up my stats]].''<br />
<br />
Eldritch, i created the the wee'diox and accidentally added a 1 in front of my +6 for intelligence, I apologize for that. But, this is also my first time and im not that good, though i am always willing to accept helpful criticism in any way. {{Unsigned|Trokking|17:46, 7 March 2007 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
:No problem, I make typoes all the time. I'd just seen that you didn't have a user account and did the standard "ask if this is vandalism or not" thing. For future reference, my user talk page is [[User Talk:EldritchNumen|here]]. This page belongs to Green Dragon. In any case, I apologize and I've written a couple of quick suggestions on the [[Talk:Wee'diox]] page. &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 17:50, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::thx for the suggestions... hey Eldritch, i took your advice and made the changes-tell me if i missed anything. By the way, should i make a page for my races diety? If so then how?<br />
<br />
::P.S. You said something about the four tildes signing. could you tell if it work<br />
<br />
::--[[User:Trokking|Trokking]] 18:07, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gosh, I hope I am leaving you a message correctly. ==<br />
<br />
Is there a way I can get the saved to my pc? besides going to each page and saving it? Sorry if I posted this wrong. (editing and posting wiki's confuse me). --- [[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]]<br />
<br />
:What exactly do you want to save to your pc? Or am I reading this message really wrong? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:36, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Opps! This is what happens you try to type someing while your tired; a bunch of incoherent words. What I ment to say was "Is there a way I can save the whole wiki to my PC? Besides going to each page and saving?" Of course I would only be useing if for personal use. I am such a D&D noob. Thanks --[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 21:10, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Honestly, I don't know, but I suspect not. The person to ask would be [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]], who administers all the technical aspects of the site. There might be some program that allows you to, but-- like I said-- probably not. What are you looking for? If you are mainly interested in having a copy of the SRD (that is, the core rules), one can be obtained very easily from the Wizards of the Coast website as a group of several text documents. There are also hypertext versions for download [http://www.pbemnexus.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Downloads&file=index&req=viewsdownload&sid=17 here]. Does this help? &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:36, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Yes! Thank you! --[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 09:52, 9 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::To start I am a very direct person, and please forgive me if this sounds rude. So, there is a way to get a copy of the entire site - it's called a back up. However, I do not trust you enough to give you a back up. I would not want a duplicate D&D Wiki coming around on the internet, and I am sorry for not trusting you. My reasoning from this comes from the fact that I once gave a copy of D&D Wiki away and it got posted on another site. I was not pleased. So, I do not want this to happen again and to make sure it will not I simply have decided I will not give away back ups of D&D Wiki to people that ask. Sorry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:00, 9 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I can see how a copy going around the web can be bad for this site, and understand your reasoning. At leasts I got a copy of the SRD to help me out. Thanks for helping me out.--[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 20:56, 10 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Again, sorry. I feel like I am begin very rude, and I am sure I am. However I really don't want a duplicate D&D Wiki coming into existance. Sorry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:58, 11 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Invitation for alpha testing ==<br />
<br />
Hey there. If you have time on your hands, I'd like to ask you to take a look at [[User:Armond/Deadly Assassin (DnD Prestige Class)]] for balance. There are a few things I'm concerned about, which I've listed at the very top of the page's coding in comment brackets. I feel it's only fair to warn you, however, that I've introduced a couple new game mechanics in that class, so it will likely take you a while to read and understand it all - but if you have the time and are willing, I'd really appreciate your input. If not, no worries, but if you know someone else who might be willing to help me find the bugs, I'd appreciate it if you'd let them know. Again, if you can't you can't, and I appreciate the thought all the same. Thanks! [[User:Armond|Armond]] 00:43, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
:I'm very busy this week, but I'll take a look at it as soon as I can spare some time. I'll try to get to in within a week... sorry for not being able to help faster. :( &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 13:31, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
::Worry not, this is just a preliminary test to see that I didn't screw things over too badly (I really don't want my first posted PrC to get a 1 right off the bat) before I throw it on the main namespace. Again, thanks for the thought, it means a lot. [[User:Armond|Armond]] 16:56, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== A little busy... ==<br />
<br />
I just quickly wanted to apologize to everyone for my absence this last week. I'll also be gone a lot next week, too. I will get around to answering messages, just not as quickly as usual... &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:01, 31 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Barnstar ==<br />
<br />
{{Barnstar|I give this Barnstar to [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] because he took the initiative and finally split up [[DnD Rules]] into Supplemental Variant Rules, Transformational Variant Rules, and Radical Variant Rules. This has made all of D&D Wiki's variant rules more user-friendly so even the most stringent DM can accept some of them --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 09:51, 10 April 2007}}<br />
<br />
== Sparse Contributions ==<br />
<br />
Ack. I just wanted to let everyone know that this last week I've been out of town a lot and am approaching the end of the term at school, so my contributions to the site have been a little low. Sorry! In any case, I'm not dead, but am going to be pretty busy the next few weeks, so things are going to be slow in my land... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:40, 25 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I was almost getting worried ''';)'''. Anyway, thanks for letting us know you still intend to stay around even though you may not be able to help out that much ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:10, 25 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Need some thoughts ==<br />
<br />
i was wondering if you could use the balance template to look at my [[Demon Lord (DnD Class)|Demon Lord]] class. thank you ==[[User:Alabastor|Alabastor]] 16:52, 26 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Alive, but starving... ==<br />
<br />
Hey. I just wanted to let you all know that I am, in fact, still alive. But I have no internet access at my house, so I've been relegated to posting from the local library. So... I'm probably going to be pretty quiet until august, when I get back to school. Sorry! Please don't mourn my loss too much! ''':)''' &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 11:42, 25 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:That is very good to know, I was getting worried. I thought that the Admin syndrome (the one that makes all admins leave after getting elected) was happening to you as well... It's good to know what is really happening ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:13, 31 July 2007 (MDT)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_talk:EldritchNumen&diff=258320User talk:EldritchNumen2008-05-31T16:39:01Z<p>EldritchNumen: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Messages of Interest|messages=<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=MSRD_Talk:Modern_System_Reference_Document<br />
|section=PL-8 at Space Gunnery<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=21:38, 10 March 2008 (MDT)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=MSRD_Talk:Modern_System_Reference_Document<br />
|section=Enlarging Weapons and Combined Purchase DC<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=11:55, 7 February 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Lizardfolk_Culture_(Paludia_Supplement)<br />
|section=Feedback<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:53, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:History_(Paludia_Supplement)<br />
|section=Feedback and Purpose<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:53, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Paludia_(DnD_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Feedback<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:52, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Paludia_(DnD_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Next Step<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=19:25, 1 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Halo_(D20_Modern_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Rating<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=23:59, 21 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Halo_(D20_Modern_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=<br />
|notifier=Sam Kay<br />
|date_time=03:45, 20 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Thunderer_(DnD_Class)<br />
|section=Ideas/ Changes??<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=23:15, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Adamantine_Knight_(DnD_Prestige_Class)<br />
|section=Adamantine Knight Mark III<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=20:36, 15 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Welcome to D&D Wiki== <br />
<br />
Hello {{PAGENAME}}, and welcome to D&D Wiki! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like D&D Wiki and decide to stay. I am the owner of the site, and if you have a question feel free to ask me, however when contacting anyone on D&D Wiki through talk pages please sign your name using four tildes <nowiki>(~~~~)</nowiki>; this will automatically produce your name and the date. Also, if you want to help D&D Wiki but just don't know how [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Green_Dragon&action=edit&section=new drop me a note] and I'll see what I can do. However, when dropping me a note please tell me how much time you would like to spend working and how well you know the Wiki Format. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a D&D Wikian! If you need help ask me on my talk page, or just right here. Again, welcome! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:06, 3 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:No problem with the welcome. Also, I see that you are putting your Anazar campaign setting on D&D Wiki, and I must say it looks good so far. Thanks already for putting it on D&D Wiki. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:43, 24 August 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Rating the PrC's ==<br />
<br />
D&D Wiki has quite a bit of Prestige Classes, with only two having been rated on D&D Wiki's rating scale. So, on a small mission to try to get ratings of PrC's done, I would like you to help. All you would have to do is go to [[DnD Classes]] then to any PrC page. Click on the PrC you would like to rate; then rate its balance by clicking on the "here" in the ''Please, help D&D Wiki by rating the balance of this item '''here'''''. I hope you can take the time to help D&D Wiki become a useful tool for every visitor that comes here; and thanks in advance. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:29, 29 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:No problem. I'll do some now and then whenever I get the chance! -[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:19, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::By the way, the first one looks very well done, and thanks again. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:51, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Your Lord Cirth (DnD Deity) was Edited ==<br />
<br />
Someone, IP 66.116.27.101, edited your [[Lord Cirth (DnD Deity)]] by adding some content. I used the "Check User" function of Admins, and this IP did not register to you. So, are these edits okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:25, 7 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Thanks for pointing this out! I appreciate it. I just reverted to my version; the alignment change was unacceptable, one of the sentences was grammatically incorrect, and the extra text was not useful. Thank you *very much* for pointing this out! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:16, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::No problem. I will always do this if an IP edits something you have created and it is not your IP. Also, I will not miss anything as I go through every edit on D&D Wiki. I hope you did not lose trust in D&D Wiki. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:33, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::: Of course not! I understand how these things go; a power of a communal site is double-edged. I have no problems, so long as I have the opportunity to repair (which, fortunately, is easy). I love the site... --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:12, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Glad to hear it! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:29, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Amount of Edits ==<br />
<br />
When you posted about how to check how many edits one has done, I thought that it would be nice if their was an extension that just told one how many edits they have. So, just today, I got Blue Dragon to program an extension that does just this. Now, if you want to see how many edits you have made just go to Special Pages then User Edit Count to see how many edits you have made. By the way, while you are their, type in Blue Dragon to see how many edits he has done.... It's funny. Anyway, does this help you/is this what you wanted? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:38, 25 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:You still around? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:56, 31 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Yeah, sorry. I was unexpectedly (and unfortunately) left without internet for about 9 days or so! ''':(''' Anyway, I'm back now, though I won't be on much for the next week (but I'll be active again after then). The edits page looks great! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:28, 3 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Glad to hear that you'll still be around... Anyway, if you have some spare time, I would be happy if you could rate [[Staffmage (DnD Prestige Class)|the Staffmage]]; I would like to see how balanced my new revision is... Again, I'm glad to hear your still kicking! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:52, 3 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::BTW, your at 876 right now (1000 im [[Requests for Adminship|RfA'ing]] you...). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:29, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== User-Page edited ==<br />
<br />
Someone (possibly you (IP 199.89.175.12)) edited your user page. I am just letting you know, as I have not reverted their edits. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:07, 4 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:It was me. Thanks for the heads up; I didn't notice that I wasn't logged in. As always, I appreciate the alert! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:11, 4 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::No problem, my pleasure. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:52, 10 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Rating the [[Ghost Monk (DnD Prestige Class)|Ghost Monk]] ==<br />
<br />
Again... Would you mind rating the [[Ghost Monk (DnD Prestige Class)|Ghost Monk]]? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:52, 10 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== D20M ==<br />
<br />
Are you still willing to help D20M as their is still ''a lot'' of work that needs to be done? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:05, 7 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Yep! I don't run scripts (my knowledge of computer programming is not extensive), and so it's hard for me to do work maintaining pages like the mSRD, but I'm certainly willing to help out in any way I can. Right now I'm stuck in terms of updating the splash pages (in each category) since I don't know DPL or whatever. But I'm a fast learner, so I suppose I could learn to do that pretty easily, too. What specifically were you looking for help doing? --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 20:11, 8 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::It's a multi-step process (of course ''':)'''). So, right now all the pages that have an X on D20M main page need to be modernized to be like the D&D equivalent. After that the "Add a ___ to D&D Wiki" pages need to be made with |preload= like the D&D section, and modeled off those pages. After that everything in D20M needs to be formatted with tables so they look as good if not better than the best of the D&D equivalent. I think that is all that needs to be done and if you would be willing to help I would be very grateful. Also, DPL's are easy to use (maybe not the variant dlpc's and dlpcus's.). DPL's use categories to show a list of items dynamically made (DPL stands for "Dynamic Page List" or something like that). So, categories determine what links to the page. All you have to do is copy an existing dlp and change the categories for D20M. I hope this helps and I hope you can help with D20M. Thanks in advance. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:27, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== MoI's ==<br />
<br />
Just a formatting thing (some little things annoy me...). When you add a MoI instead of singing the last area with 4"~" sign it with 5"~" as that just produces the date and not your name as well. This works the other way as well seeing that 3"~" makes only the user-name.<br />
<br />
{| class="d20"<br />
! colspan="2" | Tilda's (you don't need to put the -- in front; I just like to)<br />
|- <br />
| <nowiki> --~~~ </nowiki> || --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]]<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| <nowiki> --~~~~ </nowiki> || --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
|- <br />
| <nowiki> --~~~~~ </nowiki> || --12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
|}<br />
<br />
Thanks. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Adminship ==<br />
<br />
Well, Congratulations. Your an Admin with a 100% approval rating from the RfA. Congratulations, I really hope that you like all the new cool things you can do, especially in the SRD and MSRD. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:12, 4 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Congratulations. I am formally handing the MSRD over to you. It's your baby. Take care of it well. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 06:19, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Thanks! I'll take care of her, no worries. My first task shall be to break apart the long pages (skills, etc.) into individual pages and to make some sense of the categories (which is going to involve a bit of shuffling, renaming, etc.). It's going to be a long but good ride! &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:05, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::A few words of advice. Persistence and patience are your friend. There's alot of work here. When you get burned out, take a break. Either work on something else, blow off the wiki for a few weeks and play a new game, or itch some other scratch. Mechanize what you can. Find ways to make repetitive tasks simpler. Oh, and be damned proud of your work. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 20:37, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Barnstar ==<br />
<br />
{{Barnstar|I give you this Barnstar for changing [[DnD Quests]] from a page that one must add their own link to their quest to a page that uses a DPL. Also, you have made it easier to add a quest with the [[Add New DnD Quest|Add your own Quest]]. Thanks so much. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:05, 6 March 2007 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== I'm trokking and i messed up my stats ==<br />
:''Originally posted on [[User talk:Green Dragon#I'm trokking and i messed up my stats]].''<br />
<br />
Eldritch, i created the the wee'diox and accidentally added a 1 in front of my +6 for intelligence, I apologize for that. But, this is also my first time and im not that good, though i am always willing to accept helpful criticism in any way. {{Unsigned|Trokking|17:46, 7 March 2007 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
:No problem, I make typoes all the time. I'd just seen that you didn't have a user account and did the standard "ask if this is vandalism or not" thing. For future reference, my user talk page is [[User Talk:EldritchNumen|here]]. This page belongs to Green Dragon. In any case, I apologize and I've written a couple of quick suggestions on the [[Talk:Wee'diox]] page. &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 17:50, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::thx for the suggestions... hey Eldritch, i took your advice and made the changes-tell me if i missed anything. By the way, should i make a page for my races diety? If so then how?<br />
<br />
::P.S. You said something about the four tildes signing. could you tell if it work<br />
<br />
::--[[User:Trokking|Trokking]] 18:07, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gosh, I hope I am leaving you a message correctly. ==<br />
<br />
Is there a way I can get the saved to my pc? besides going to each page and saving it? Sorry if I posted this wrong. (editing and posting wiki's confuse me). --- [[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]]<br />
<br />
:What exactly do you want to save to your pc? Or am I reading this message really wrong? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:36, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Opps! This is what happens you try to type someing while your tired; a bunch of incoherent words. What I ment to say was "Is there a way I can save the whole wiki to my PC? Besides going to each page and saving?" Of course I would only be useing if for personal use. I am such a D&D noob. Thanks --[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 21:10, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Honestly, I don't know, but I suspect not. The person to ask would be [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]], who administers all the technical aspects of the site. There might be some program that allows you to, but-- like I said-- probably not. What are you looking for? If you are mainly interested in having a copy of the SRD (that is, the core rules), one can be obtained very easily from the Wizards of the Coast website as a group of several text documents. There are also hypertext versions for download [http://www.pbemnexus.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Downloads&file=index&req=viewsdownload&sid=17 here]. Does this help? &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:36, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Yes! Thank you! --[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 09:52, 9 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::To start I am a very direct person, and please forgive me if this sounds rude. So, there is a way to get a copy of the entire site - it's called a back up. However, I do not trust you enough to give you a back up. I would not want a duplicate D&D Wiki coming around on the internet, and I am sorry for not trusting you. My reasoning from this comes from the fact that I once gave a copy of D&D Wiki away and it got posted on another site. I was not pleased. So, I do not want this to happen again and to make sure it will not I simply have decided I will not give away back ups of D&D Wiki to people that ask. Sorry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:00, 9 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I can see how a copy going around the web can be bad for this site, and understand your reasoning. At leasts I got a copy of the SRD to help me out. Thanks for helping me out.--[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 20:56, 10 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Again, sorry. I feel like I am begin very rude, and I am sure I am. However I really don't want a duplicate D&D Wiki coming into existance. Sorry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:58, 11 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Invitation for alpha testing ==<br />
<br />
Hey there. If you have time on your hands, I'd like to ask you to take a look at [[User:Armond/Deadly Assassin (DnD Prestige Class)]] for balance. There are a few things I'm concerned about, which I've listed at the very top of the page's coding in comment brackets. I feel it's only fair to warn you, however, that I've introduced a couple new game mechanics in that class, so it will likely take you a while to read and understand it all - but if you have the time and are willing, I'd really appreciate your input. If not, no worries, but if you know someone else who might be willing to help me find the bugs, I'd appreciate it if you'd let them know. Again, if you can't you can't, and I appreciate the thought all the same. Thanks! [[User:Armond|Armond]] 00:43, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
:I'm very busy this week, but I'll take a look at it as soon as I can spare some time. I'll try to get to in within a week... sorry for not being able to help faster. :( &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 13:31, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
::Worry not, this is just a preliminary test to see that I didn't screw things over too badly (I really don't want my first posted PrC to get a 1 right off the bat) before I throw it on the main namespace. Again, thanks for the thought, it means a lot. [[User:Armond|Armond]] 16:56, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== A little busy... ==<br />
<br />
I just quickly wanted to apologize to everyone for my absence this last week. I'll also be gone a lot next week, too. I will get around to answering messages, just not as quickly as usual... &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:01, 31 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Barnstar ==<br />
<br />
{{Barnstar|I give this Barnstar to [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] because he took the initiative and finally split up [[DnD Rules]] into Supplemental Variant Rules, Transformational Variant Rules, and Radical Variant Rules. This has made all of D&D Wiki's variant rules more user-friendly so even the most stringent DM can accept some of them --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 09:51, 10 April 2007}}<br />
<br />
== Sparse Contributions ==<br />
<br />
Ack. I just wanted to let everyone know that this last week I've been out of town a lot and am approaching the end of the term at school, so my contributions to the site have been a little low. Sorry! In any case, I'm not dead, but am going to be pretty busy the next few weeks, so things are going to be slow in my land... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:40, 25 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I was almost getting worried ''';)'''. Anyway, thanks for letting us know you still intend to stay around even though you may not be able to help out that much ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:10, 25 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Need some thoughts ==<br />
<br />
i was wondering if you could use the balance template to look at my [[Demon Lord (DnD Class)|Demon Lord]] class. thank you ==[[User:Alabastor|Alabastor]] 16:52, 26 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Alive, but starving... ==<br />
<br />
Hey. I just wanted to let you all know that I am, in fact, still alive. But I have no internet access at my house, so I've been relegated to posting from the local library. So... I'm probably going to be pretty quiet until august, when I get back to school. Sorry! Please don't mourn my loss too much! ''':)''' &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 11:42, 25 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:That is very good to know, I was getting worried. I thought that the Admin syndrome (the one that makes all admins leave after getting elected) was happening to you as well... It's good to know what is really happening ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:13, 31 July 2007 (MDT)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_talk:EldritchNumen&diff=258318User talk:EldritchNumen2008-05-31T16:36:39Z<p>EldritchNumen: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Messages of Interest|messages=<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=MSRD_Talk:Modern_System_Reference_Document<br />
|section=PL-8 at Space Gunnery<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=21:38, 10 March 2008 (MDT)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=MSRD_Talk:Modern_System_Reference_Document<br />
|section=Enlarging Weapons and Combined Purchase DC<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=11:55, 7 February 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:4e_Complex_Special_Ability_Components<br />
|section=<br />
|notifier=Sam Kay<br />
|date_time=13:51, 22 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Catling,_Variant_(DnD_Race)<br />
|section=Major Changes<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=15:49, 18 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Lizardfolk_Culture_(Paludia_Supplement)<br />
|section=Feedback<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:53, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:History_(Paludia_Supplement)<br />
|section=Feedback and Purpose<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:53, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Paludia_(DnD_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Feedback<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:52, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Paludia_(DnD_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Next Step<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=19:25, 1 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Halo_(D20_Modern_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Rating<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=23:59, 21 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Halo_(D20_Modern_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=<br />
|notifier=Sam Kay<br />
|date_time=03:45, 20 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Thunderer_(DnD_Class)<br />
|section=Ideas/ Changes??<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=23:15, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Adamantine_Knight_(DnD_Prestige_Class)<br />
|section=Adamantine Knight Mark III<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=20:36, 15 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Welcome to D&D Wiki== <br />
<br />
Hello {{PAGENAME}}, and welcome to D&D Wiki! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like D&D Wiki and decide to stay. I am the owner of the site, and if you have a question feel free to ask me, however when contacting anyone on D&D Wiki through talk pages please sign your name using four tildes <nowiki>(~~~~)</nowiki>; this will automatically produce your name and the date. Also, if you want to help D&D Wiki but just don't know how [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Green_Dragon&action=edit&section=new drop me a note] and I'll see what I can do. However, when dropping me a note please tell me how much time you would like to spend working and how well you know the Wiki Format. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a D&D Wikian! If you need help ask me on my talk page, or just right here. Again, welcome! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:06, 3 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:No problem with the welcome. Also, I see that you are putting your Anazar campaign setting on D&D Wiki, and I must say it looks good so far. Thanks already for putting it on D&D Wiki. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:43, 24 August 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Rating the PrC's ==<br />
<br />
D&D Wiki has quite a bit of Prestige Classes, with only two having been rated on D&D Wiki's rating scale. So, on a small mission to try to get ratings of PrC's done, I would like you to help. All you would have to do is go to [[DnD Classes]] then to any PrC page. Click on the PrC you would like to rate; then rate its balance by clicking on the "here" in the ''Please, help D&D Wiki by rating the balance of this item '''here'''''. I hope you can take the time to help D&D Wiki become a useful tool for every visitor that comes here; and thanks in advance. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:29, 29 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:No problem. I'll do some now and then whenever I get the chance! -[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:19, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::By the way, the first one looks very well done, and thanks again. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:51, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Your Lord Cirth (DnD Deity) was Edited ==<br />
<br />
Someone, IP 66.116.27.101, edited your [[Lord Cirth (DnD Deity)]] by adding some content. I used the "Check User" function of Admins, and this IP did not register to you. So, are these edits okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:25, 7 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Thanks for pointing this out! I appreciate it. I just reverted to my version; the alignment change was unacceptable, one of the sentences was grammatically incorrect, and the extra text was not useful. Thank you *very much* for pointing this out! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:16, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::No problem. I will always do this if an IP edits something you have created and it is not your IP. Also, I will not miss anything as I go through every edit on D&D Wiki. I hope you did not lose trust in D&D Wiki. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:33, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::: Of course not! I understand how these things go; a power of a communal site is double-edged. I have no problems, so long as I have the opportunity to repair (which, fortunately, is easy). I love the site... --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:12, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Glad to hear it! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:29, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Amount of Edits ==<br />
<br />
When you posted about how to check how many edits one has done, I thought that it would be nice if their was an extension that just told one how many edits they have. So, just today, I got Blue Dragon to program an extension that does just this. Now, if you want to see how many edits you have made just go to Special Pages then User Edit Count to see how many edits you have made. By the way, while you are their, type in Blue Dragon to see how many edits he has done.... It's funny. Anyway, does this help you/is this what you wanted? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:38, 25 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:You still around? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:56, 31 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Yeah, sorry. I was unexpectedly (and unfortunately) left without internet for about 9 days or so! ''':(''' Anyway, I'm back now, though I won't be on much for the next week (but I'll be active again after then). The edits page looks great! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:28, 3 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Glad to hear that you'll still be around... Anyway, if you have some spare time, I would be happy if you could rate [[Staffmage (DnD Prestige Class)|the Staffmage]]; I would like to see how balanced my new revision is... Again, I'm glad to hear your still kicking! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:52, 3 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::BTW, your at 876 right now (1000 im [[Requests for Adminship|RfA'ing]] you...). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:29, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== User-Page edited ==<br />
<br />
Someone (possibly you (IP 199.89.175.12)) edited your user page. I am just letting you know, as I have not reverted their edits. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:07, 4 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:It was me. Thanks for the heads up; I didn't notice that I wasn't logged in. As always, I appreciate the alert! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:11, 4 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::No problem, my pleasure. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:52, 10 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Rating the [[Ghost Monk (DnD Prestige Class)|Ghost Monk]] ==<br />
<br />
Again... Would you mind rating the [[Ghost Monk (DnD Prestige Class)|Ghost Monk]]? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:52, 10 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== D20M ==<br />
<br />
Are you still willing to help D20M as their is still ''a lot'' of work that needs to be done? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:05, 7 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Yep! I don't run scripts (my knowledge of computer programming is not extensive), and so it's hard for me to do work maintaining pages like the mSRD, but I'm certainly willing to help out in any way I can. Right now I'm stuck in terms of updating the splash pages (in each category) since I don't know DPL or whatever. But I'm a fast learner, so I suppose I could learn to do that pretty easily, too. What specifically were you looking for help doing? --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 20:11, 8 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::It's a multi-step process (of course ''':)'''). So, right now all the pages that have an X on D20M main page need to be modernized to be like the D&D equivalent. After that the "Add a ___ to D&D Wiki" pages need to be made with |preload= like the D&D section, and modeled off those pages. After that everything in D20M needs to be formatted with tables so they look as good if not better than the best of the D&D equivalent. I think that is all that needs to be done and if you would be willing to help I would be very grateful. Also, DPL's are easy to use (maybe not the variant dlpc's and dlpcus's.). DPL's use categories to show a list of items dynamically made (DPL stands for "Dynamic Page List" or something like that). So, categories determine what links to the page. All you have to do is copy an existing dlp and change the categories for D20M. I hope this helps and I hope you can help with D20M. Thanks in advance. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:27, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== MoI's ==<br />
<br />
Just a formatting thing (some little things annoy me...). When you add a MoI instead of singing the last area with 4"~" sign it with 5"~" as that just produces the date and not your name as well. This works the other way as well seeing that 3"~" makes only the user-name.<br />
<br />
{| class="d20"<br />
! colspan="2" | Tilda's (you don't need to put the -- in front; I just like to)<br />
|- <br />
| <nowiki> --~~~ </nowiki> || --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]]<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| <nowiki> --~~~~ </nowiki> || --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
|- <br />
| <nowiki> --~~~~~ </nowiki> || --12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
|}<br />
<br />
Thanks. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Adminship ==<br />
<br />
Well, Congratulations. Your an Admin with a 100% approval rating from the RfA. Congratulations, I really hope that you like all the new cool things you can do, especially in the SRD and MSRD. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:12, 4 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Congratulations. I am formally handing the MSRD over to you. It's your baby. Take care of it well. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 06:19, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Thanks! I'll take care of her, no worries. My first task shall be to break apart the long pages (skills, etc.) into individual pages and to make some sense of the categories (which is going to involve a bit of shuffling, renaming, etc.). It's going to be a long but good ride! &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:05, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::A few words of advice. Persistence and patience are your friend. There's alot of work here. When you get burned out, take a break. Either work on something else, blow off the wiki for a few weeks and play a new game, or itch some other scratch. Mechanize what you can. Find ways to make repetitive tasks simpler. Oh, and be damned proud of your work. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 20:37, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Barnstar ==<br />
<br />
{{Barnstar|I give you this Barnstar for changing [[DnD Quests]] from a page that one must add their own link to their quest to a page that uses a DPL. Also, you have made it easier to add a quest with the [[Add New DnD Quest|Add your own Quest]]. Thanks so much. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:05, 6 March 2007 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== I'm trokking and i messed up my stats ==<br />
:''Originally posted on [[User talk:Green Dragon#I'm trokking and i messed up my stats]].''<br />
<br />
Eldritch, i created the the wee'diox and accidentally added a 1 in front of my +6 for intelligence, I apologize for that. But, this is also my first time and im not that good, though i am always willing to accept helpful criticism in any way. {{Unsigned|Trokking|17:46, 7 March 2007 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
:No problem, I make typoes all the time. I'd just seen that you didn't have a user account and did the standard "ask if this is vandalism or not" thing. For future reference, my user talk page is [[User Talk:EldritchNumen|here]]. This page belongs to Green Dragon. In any case, I apologize and I've written a couple of quick suggestions on the [[Talk:Wee'diox]] page. &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 17:50, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::thx for the suggestions... hey Eldritch, i took your advice and made the changes-tell me if i missed anything. By the way, should i make a page for my races diety? If so then how?<br />
<br />
::P.S. You said something about the four tildes signing. could you tell if it work<br />
<br />
::--[[User:Trokking|Trokking]] 18:07, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gosh, I hope I am leaving you a message correctly. ==<br />
<br />
Is there a way I can get the saved to my pc? besides going to each page and saving it? Sorry if I posted this wrong. (editing and posting wiki's confuse me). --- [[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]]<br />
<br />
:What exactly do you want to save to your pc? Or am I reading this message really wrong? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:36, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Opps! This is what happens you try to type someing while your tired; a bunch of incoherent words. What I ment to say was "Is there a way I can save the whole wiki to my PC? Besides going to each page and saving?" Of course I would only be useing if for personal use. I am such a D&D noob. Thanks --[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 21:10, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Honestly, I don't know, but I suspect not. The person to ask would be [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]], who administers all the technical aspects of the site. There might be some program that allows you to, but-- like I said-- probably not. What are you looking for? If you are mainly interested in having a copy of the SRD (that is, the core rules), one can be obtained very easily from the Wizards of the Coast website as a group of several text documents. There are also hypertext versions for download [http://www.pbemnexus.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Downloads&file=index&req=viewsdownload&sid=17 here]. Does this help? &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:36, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Yes! Thank you! --[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 09:52, 9 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::To start I am a very direct person, and please forgive me if this sounds rude. So, there is a way to get a copy of the entire site - it's called a back up. However, I do not trust you enough to give you a back up. I would not want a duplicate D&D Wiki coming around on the internet, and I am sorry for not trusting you. My reasoning from this comes from the fact that I once gave a copy of D&D Wiki away and it got posted on another site. I was not pleased. So, I do not want this to happen again and to make sure it will not I simply have decided I will not give away back ups of D&D Wiki to people that ask. Sorry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:00, 9 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I can see how a copy going around the web can be bad for this site, and understand your reasoning. At leasts I got a copy of the SRD to help me out. Thanks for helping me out.--[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 20:56, 10 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Again, sorry. I feel like I am begin very rude, and I am sure I am. However I really don't want a duplicate D&D Wiki coming into existance. Sorry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:58, 11 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Invitation for alpha testing ==<br />
<br />
Hey there. If you have time on your hands, I'd like to ask you to take a look at [[User:Armond/Deadly Assassin (DnD Prestige Class)]] for balance. There are a few things I'm concerned about, which I've listed at the very top of the page's coding in comment brackets. I feel it's only fair to warn you, however, that I've introduced a couple new game mechanics in that class, so it will likely take you a while to read and understand it all - but if you have the time and are willing, I'd really appreciate your input. If not, no worries, but if you know someone else who might be willing to help me find the bugs, I'd appreciate it if you'd let them know. Again, if you can't you can't, and I appreciate the thought all the same. Thanks! [[User:Armond|Armond]] 00:43, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
:I'm very busy this week, but I'll take a look at it as soon as I can spare some time. I'll try to get to in within a week... sorry for not being able to help faster. :( &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 13:31, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
::Worry not, this is just a preliminary test to see that I didn't screw things over too badly (I really don't want my first posted PrC to get a 1 right off the bat) before I throw it on the main namespace. Again, thanks for the thought, it means a lot. [[User:Armond|Armond]] 16:56, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== A little busy... ==<br />
<br />
I just quickly wanted to apologize to everyone for my absence this last week. I'll also be gone a lot next week, too. I will get around to answering messages, just not as quickly as usual... &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:01, 31 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Barnstar ==<br />
<br />
{{Barnstar|I give this Barnstar to [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] because he took the initiative and finally split up [[DnD Rules]] into Supplemental Variant Rules, Transformational Variant Rules, and Radical Variant Rules. This has made all of D&D Wiki's variant rules more user-friendly so even the most stringent DM can accept some of them --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 09:51, 10 April 2007}}<br />
<br />
== Sparse Contributions ==<br />
<br />
Ack. I just wanted to let everyone know that this last week I've been out of town a lot and am approaching the end of the term at school, so my contributions to the site have been a little low. Sorry! In any case, I'm not dead, but am going to be pretty busy the next few weeks, so things are going to be slow in my land... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:40, 25 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I was almost getting worried ''';)'''. Anyway, thanks for letting us know you still intend to stay around even though you may not be able to help out that much ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:10, 25 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Need some thoughts ==<br />
<br />
i was wondering if you could use the balance template to look at my [[Demon Lord (DnD Class)|Demon Lord]] class. thank you ==[[User:Alabastor|Alabastor]] 16:52, 26 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Alive, but starving... ==<br />
<br />
Hey. I just wanted to let you all know that I am, in fact, still alive. But I have no internet access at my house, so I've been relegated to posting from the local library. So... I'm probably going to be pretty quiet until august, when I get back to school. Sorry! Please don't mourn my loss too much! ''':)''' &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 11:42, 25 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:That is very good to know, I was getting worried. I thought that the Admin syndrome (the one that makes all admins leave after getting elected) was happening to you as well... It's good to know what is really happening ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:13, 31 July 2007 (MDT)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=MSRD_Talk:Starships&diff=258317MSRD Talk:Starships2008-05-31T16:36:23Z<p>EldritchNumen: /* I think I Found a Bug */ yep :)</p>
<hr />
<div>== Just so you know==<br />
The gravitic redirector would cause tremendous tidal forces, and time dilation on the ship. If its big enough to pull the ship, its big enough to pull it apart. And don't get me started on the radiation. {{unsigned|T G Geko|19:26, 9 January 2008}}<br />
<br />
:Yes, there are major scientific issues with the "future technology" in d20 Modern. That is why d20 Future is written as Galactic Fantasy rather than Hard Sci-fi: it makes no attempt to truly explain the future technology beyond mere descriptive generalizations. If it adhered to hard Sci-Fi, there would '''be''' no d20 Future. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 19:48, 9 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Hey, this is PL8, and i think the technology at the 27th-century would be good enough to deal with the tidal force problem (maybe some Inducers weakening the tidal forces by creating gravity the opposite direction). and for the radiation, it seems to me like creating energy from nothing (you don't use fuel as you don't accelerate, just the singularity and the ship move and no energy is absorbed) and there no matter to create gravitation from, just gravions that don't go to anywhere. [[User:Arielby|Arielby]] 10:46, 27 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::: Actually what I meant was that a black hole of that size would radiate via Hawkings radiation, which isn't too plesant to fleshy organisms. And by weakening the gravity, you weaken how fast you go. Sorry, I just have to say this stuff. --[[User:T G Geko|T G Geko]] 18:27, 18 March 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== I think I Found a Bug ==<br />
<br />
As i did see, PL8 Zero Bore deals the same damage and has a similar range unit as the PL7 Quantum Cannon, but purchase DC is higher by 11. [[User:Arielby|Arielby]] 08:23, 27 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Indeed. There are a variety of minor inconsistencies in the space combat chapter. I'd suggest house-ruling the situation (reducing the purchase DC or adding an additional effect or quality). There are also, of course, non-statistic based narrative differences between the weapons. &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 10:36, 31 May 2008 (MDT)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_talk:EldritchNumen&diff=258314User talk:EldritchNumen2008-05-31T16:34:09Z<p>EldritchNumen: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Messages of Interest|messages=<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=MSRD_Talk:Modern_System_Reference_Document<br />
|section=PL-8 at Space Gunnery<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=21:38, 10 March 2008 (MDT)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=MSRD_Talk:Starships<br />
|section=I think I Found a Bug<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=00:39, 28 February 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=MSRD_Talk:Modern_System_Reference_Document<br />
|section=Enlarging Weapons and Combined Purchase DC<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=11:55, 7 February 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:4e_Complex_Special_Ability_Components<br />
|section=<br />
|notifier=Sam Kay<br />
|date_time=13:51, 22 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Catling,_Variant_(DnD_Race)<br />
|section=Major Changes<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=15:49, 18 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Lizardfolk_Culture_(Paludia_Supplement)<br />
|section=Feedback<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:53, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:History_(Paludia_Supplement)<br />
|section=Feedback and Purpose<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:53, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Paludia_(DnD_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Feedback<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=18:52, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Paludia_(DnD_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Next Step<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=19:25, 1 January 2008 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Halo_(D20_Modern_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=Rating<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=23:59, 21 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Halo_(D20_Modern_Campaign_Setting)<br />
|section=<br />
|notifier=Sam Kay<br />
|date_time=03:45, 20 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Thunderer_(DnD_Class)<br />
|section=Ideas/ Changes??<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=23:15, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Adamantine_Knight_(DnD_Prestige_Class)<br />
|section=Adamantine Knight Mark III<br />
|notifier=Green Dragon<br />
|date_time=20:36, 15 December 2007 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Welcome to D&D Wiki== <br />
<br />
Hello {{PAGENAME}}, and welcome to D&D Wiki! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like D&D Wiki and decide to stay. I am the owner of the site, and if you have a question feel free to ask me, however when contacting anyone on D&D Wiki through talk pages please sign your name using four tildes <nowiki>(~~~~)</nowiki>; this will automatically produce your name and the date. Also, if you want to help D&D Wiki but just don't know how [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Green_Dragon&action=edit&section=new drop me a note] and I'll see what I can do. However, when dropping me a note please tell me how much time you would like to spend working and how well you know the Wiki Format. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a D&D Wikian! If you need help ask me on my talk page, or just right here. Again, welcome! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:06, 3 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:No problem with the welcome. Also, I see that you are putting your Anazar campaign setting on D&D Wiki, and I must say it looks good so far. Thanks already for putting it on D&D Wiki. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:43, 24 August 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Rating the PrC's ==<br />
<br />
D&D Wiki has quite a bit of Prestige Classes, with only two having been rated on D&D Wiki's rating scale. So, on a small mission to try to get ratings of PrC's done, I would like you to help. All you would have to do is go to [[DnD Classes]] then to any PrC page. Click on the PrC you would like to rate; then rate its balance by clicking on the "here" in the ''Please, help D&D Wiki by rating the balance of this item '''here'''''. I hope you can take the time to help D&D Wiki become a useful tool for every visitor that comes here; and thanks in advance. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:29, 29 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:No problem. I'll do some now and then whenever I get the chance! -[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:19, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::By the way, the first one looks very well done, and thanks again. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:51, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Your Lord Cirth (DnD Deity) was Edited ==<br />
<br />
Someone, IP 66.116.27.101, edited your [[Lord Cirth (DnD Deity)]] by adding some content. I used the "Check User" function of Admins, and this IP did not register to you. So, are these edits okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:25, 7 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Thanks for pointing this out! I appreciate it. I just reverted to my version; the alignment change was unacceptable, one of the sentences was grammatically incorrect, and the extra text was not useful. Thank you *very much* for pointing this out! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:16, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::No problem. I will always do this if an IP edits something you have created and it is not your IP. Also, I will not miss anything as I go through every edit on D&D Wiki. I hope you did not lose trust in D&D Wiki. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:33, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::: Of course not! I understand how these things go; a power of a communal site is double-edged. I have no problems, so long as I have the opportunity to repair (which, fortunately, is easy). I love the site... --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:12, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Glad to hear it! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:29, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Amount of Edits ==<br />
<br />
When you posted about how to check how many edits one has done, I thought that it would be nice if their was an extension that just told one how many edits they have. So, just today, I got Blue Dragon to program an extension that does just this. Now, if you want to see how many edits you have made just go to Special Pages then User Edit Count to see how many edits you have made. By the way, while you are their, type in Blue Dragon to see how many edits he has done.... It's funny. Anyway, does this help you/is this what you wanted? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:38, 25 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:You still around? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:56, 31 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Yeah, sorry. I was unexpectedly (and unfortunately) left without internet for about 9 days or so! ''':(''' Anyway, I'm back now, though I won't be on much for the next week (but I'll be active again after then). The edits page looks great! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:28, 3 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Glad to hear that you'll still be around... Anyway, if you have some spare time, I would be happy if you could rate [[Staffmage (DnD Prestige Class)|the Staffmage]]; I would like to see how balanced my new revision is... Again, I'm glad to hear your still kicking! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:52, 3 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::BTW, your at 876 right now (1000 im [[Requests for Adminship|RfA'ing]] you...). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:29, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== User-Page edited ==<br />
<br />
Someone (possibly you (IP 199.89.175.12)) edited your user page. I am just letting you know, as I have not reverted their edits. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:07, 4 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:It was me. Thanks for the heads up; I didn't notice that I wasn't logged in. As always, I appreciate the alert! --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:11, 4 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::No problem, my pleasure. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:52, 10 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Rating the [[Ghost Monk (DnD Prestige Class)|Ghost Monk]] ==<br />
<br />
Again... Would you mind rating the [[Ghost Monk (DnD Prestige Class)|Ghost Monk]]? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:52, 10 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== D20M ==<br />
<br />
Are you still willing to help D20M as their is still ''a lot'' of work that needs to be done? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:05, 7 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Yep! I don't run scripts (my knowledge of computer programming is not extensive), and so it's hard for me to do work maintaining pages like the mSRD, but I'm certainly willing to help out in any way I can. Right now I'm stuck in terms of updating the splash pages (in each category) since I don't know DPL or whatever. But I'm a fast learner, so I suppose I could learn to do that pretty easily, too. What specifically were you looking for help doing? --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 20:11, 8 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::It's a multi-step process (of course ''':)'''). So, right now all the pages that have an X on D20M main page need to be modernized to be like the D&D equivalent. After that the "Add a ___ to D&D Wiki" pages need to be made with |preload= like the D&D section, and modeled off those pages. After that everything in D20M needs to be formatted with tables so they look as good if not better than the best of the D&D equivalent. I think that is all that needs to be done and if you would be willing to help I would be very grateful. Also, DPL's are easy to use (maybe not the variant dlpc's and dlpcus's.). DPL's use categories to show a list of items dynamically made (DPL stands for "Dynamic Page List" or something like that). So, categories determine what links to the page. All you have to do is copy an existing dlp and change the categories for D20M. I hope this helps and I hope you can help with D20M. Thanks in advance. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:27, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== MoI's ==<br />
<br />
Just a formatting thing (some little things annoy me...). When you add a MoI instead of singing the last area with 4"~" sign it with 5"~" as that just produces the date and not your name as well. This works the other way as well seeing that 3"~" makes only the user-name.<br />
<br />
{| class="d20"<br />
! colspan="2" | Tilda's (you don't need to put the -- in front; I just like to)<br />
|- <br />
| <nowiki> --~~~ </nowiki> || --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]]<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| <nowiki> --~~~~ </nowiki> || --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
|- <br />
| <nowiki> --~~~~~ </nowiki> || --12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
|}<br />
<br />
Thanks. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:54, 11 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Adminship ==<br />
<br />
Well, Congratulations. Your an Admin with a 100% approval rating from the RfA. Congratulations, I really hope that you like all the new cool things you can do, especially in the SRD and MSRD. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:12, 4 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Congratulations. I am formally handing the MSRD over to you. It's your baby. Take care of it well. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 06:19, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Thanks! I'll take care of her, no worries. My first task shall be to break apart the long pages (skills, etc.) into individual pages and to make some sense of the categories (which is going to involve a bit of shuffling, renaming, etc.). It's going to be a long but good ride! &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:05, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::A few words of advice. Persistence and patience are your friend. There's alot of work here. When you get burned out, take a break. Either work on something else, blow off the wiki for a few weeks and play a new game, or itch some other scratch. Mechanize what you can. Find ways to make repetitive tasks simpler. Oh, and be damned proud of your work. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 20:37, 5 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Barnstar ==<br />
<br />
{{Barnstar|I give you this Barnstar for changing [[DnD Quests]] from a page that one must add their own link to their quest to a page that uses a DPL. Also, you have made it easier to add a quest with the [[Add New DnD Quest|Add your own Quest]]. Thanks so much. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:05, 6 March 2007 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== I'm trokking and i messed up my stats ==<br />
:''Originally posted on [[User talk:Green Dragon#I'm trokking and i messed up my stats]].''<br />
<br />
Eldritch, i created the the wee'diox and accidentally added a 1 in front of my +6 for intelligence, I apologize for that. But, this is also my first time and im not that good, though i am always willing to accept helpful criticism in any way. {{Unsigned|Trokking|17:46, 7 March 2007 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
:No problem, I make typoes all the time. I'd just seen that you didn't have a user account and did the standard "ask if this is vandalism or not" thing. For future reference, my user talk page is [[User Talk:EldritchNumen|here]]. This page belongs to Green Dragon. In any case, I apologize and I've written a couple of quick suggestions on the [[Talk:Wee'diox]] page. &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 17:50, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::thx for the suggestions... hey Eldritch, i took your advice and made the changes-tell me if i missed anything. By the way, should i make a page for my races diety? If so then how?<br />
<br />
::P.S. You said something about the four tildes signing. could you tell if it work<br />
<br />
::--[[User:Trokking|Trokking]] 18:07, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
<br />
== Gosh, I hope I am leaving you a message correctly. ==<br />
<br />
Is there a way I can get the saved to my pc? besides going to each page and saving it? Sorry if I posted this wrong. (editing and posting wiki's confuse me). --- [[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]]<br />
<br />
:What exactly do you want to save to your pc? Or am I reading this message really wrong? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:36, 7 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Opps! This is what happens you try to type someing while your tired; a bunch of incoherent words. What I ment to say was "Is there a way I can save the whole wiki to my PC? Besides going to each page and saving?" Of course I would only be useing if for personal use. I am such a D&D noob. Thanks --[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 21:10, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Honestly, I don't know, but I suspect not. The person to ask would be [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]], who administers all the technical aspects of the site. There might be some program that allows you to, but-- like I said-- probably not. What are you looking for? If you are mainly interested in having a copy of the SRD (that is, the core rules), one can be obtained very easily from the Wizards of the Coast website as a group of several text documents. There are also hypertext versions for download [http://www.pbemnexus.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Downloads&file=index&req=viewsdownload&sid=17 here]. Does this help? &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:36, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Yes! Thank you! --[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 09:52, 9 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::To start I am a very direct person, and please forgive me if this sounds rude. So, there is a way to get a copy of the entire site - it's called a back up. However, I do not trust you enough to give you a back up. I would not want a duplicate D&D Wiki coming around on the internet, and I am sorry for not trusting you. My reasoning from this comes from the fact that I once gave a copy of D&D Wiki away and it got posted on another site. I was not pleased. So, I do not want this to happen again and to make sure it will not I simply have decided I will not give away back ups of D&D Wiki to people that ask. Sorry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:00, 9 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I can see how a copy going around the web can be bad for this site, and understand your reasoning. At leasts I got a copy of the SRD to help me out. Thanks for helping me out.--[[User:Bk115595|Bk115595]] 20:56, 10 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Again, sorry. I feel like I am begin very rude, and I am sure I am. However I really don't want a duplicate D&D Wiki coming into existance. Sorry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:58, 11 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Invitation for alpha testing ==<br />
<br />
Hey there. If you have time on your hands, I'd like to ask you to take a look at [[User:Armond/Deadly Assassin (DnD Prestige Class)]] for balance. There are a few things I'm concerned about, which I've listed at the very top of the page's coding in comment brackets. I feel it's only fair to warn you, however, that I've introduced a couple new game mechanics in that class, so it will likely take you a while to read and understand it all - but if you have the time and are willing, I'd really appreciate your input. If not, no worries, but if you know someone else who might be willing to help me find the bugs, I'd appreciate it if you'd let them know. Again, if you can't you can't, and I appreciate the thought all the same. Thanks! [[User:Armond|Armond]] 00:43, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
:I'm very busy this week, but I'll take a look at it as soon as I can spare some time. I'll try to get to in within a week... sorry for not being able to help faster. :( &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 13:31, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
::Worry not, this is just a preliminary test to see that I didn't screw things over too badly (I really don't want my first posted PrC to get a 1 right off the bat) before I throw it on the main namespace. Again, thanks for the thought, it means a lot. [[User:Armond|Armond]] 16:56, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== A little busy... ==<br />
<br />
I just quickly wanted to apologize to everyone for my absence this last week. I'll also be gone a lot next week, too. I will get around to answering messages, just not as quickly as usual... &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:01, 31 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Barnstar ==<br />
<br />
{{Barnstar|I give this Barnstar to [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] because he took the initiative and finally split up [[DnD Rules]] into Supplemental Variant Rules, Transformational Variant Rules, and Radical Variant Rules. This has made all of D&D Wiki's variant rules more user-friendly so even the most stringent DM can accept some of them --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 09:51, 10 April 2007}}<br />
<br />
== Sparse Contributions ==<br />
<br />
Ack. I just wanted to let everyone know that this last week I've been out of town a lot and am approaching the end of the term at school, so my contributions to the site have been a little low. Sorry! In any case, I'm not dead, but am going to be pretty busy the next few weeks, so things are going to be slow in my land... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:40, 25 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I was almost getting worried ''';)'''. Anyway, thanks for letting us know you still intend to stay around even though you may not be able to help out that much ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:10, 25 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Need some thoughts ==<br />
<br />
i was wondering if you could use the balance template to look at my [[Demon Lord (DnD Class)|Demon Lord]] class. thank you ==[[User:Alabastor|Alabastor]] 16:52, 26 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Alive, but starving... ==<br />
<br />
Hey. I just wanted to let you all know that I am, in fact, still alive. But I have no internet access at my house, so I've been relegated to posting from the local library. So... I'm probably going to be pretty quiet until august, when I get back to school. Sorry! Please don't mourn my loss too much! ''':)''' &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 11:42, 25 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:That is very good to know, I was getting worried. I thought that the Admin syndrome (the one that makes all admins leave after getting elected) was happening to you as well... It's good to know what is really happening ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:13, 31 July 2007 (MDT)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Candidates_for_Deletion&diff=258313Candidates for Deletion2008-05-31T16:31:43Z<p>EldritchNumen: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''Please post below this line a page that you would want to have deleted. An admin will look it over, and delete it if necessary.'''<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
* [[Zodiac Signs (DnD Template)]] - This pages needs to be deleted because it was blanked and then recreated at [[Zodiac Born (DnD Template)]] — [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] <small>([[User talk:OptimizationFanatic|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/OptimizationFanatic|contrib]])</small> 17:47, 23 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::That is only if this was done by the author...Carey ruff created it, and an IP blanked it. That may have been him having not logged in, or it may have been someone else entirely. If the latter is the case, then it should probably be reverted rather than deleted. --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 19:21, 23 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::: Probably true. It just looks like an IP's attempt to move a page. — [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] <small>([[User talk:OptimizationFanatic|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/OptimizationFanatic|contrib]])</small> 19:25, 23 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::I agree, it looks like an IP's attempt to move a page. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:46, 25 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
[[Dark Elves, Ascyria (DnD Race)]] Could you delete this page... Delete Requested by [[User:Lord Dhazriel|Lord Dhazriel]] 16:49, 27 April 2008 (MDT) <br />
<br />
[[Summoner (DnD Class)]] I decided not to keep developing this class due to other projects, so I think it should be deleted. --[[User:ElfsMaster|ElfsMaster]] 01:39, 27 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
[[Psionic Naturalist (DnD Class)]] Has been re-written to [[Manifesting Warrior (DnD Class)]]--[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 18:02, 17 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
* [[Malak %28DnD Race%29]], [[The Malaks %28Ascyria Supplement%29]]]] - These two are redirection pages. - Delete request by [[User:Lord Dhazriel|Lord Dhazriel]] 20:34, 7 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
[[Discussion talk:How would the battle of five armies work best?]] Was posted on both the discussion page and on discussion talk page. --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 13:55, 3 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
[[Macabre Dancer (DnD Class)]] blank/useless page --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 13:55, 3 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
[[Chance (DnD NPC)]] blank/useless page --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 13:55, 3 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
[[The Kingdom of Herregor (Herregor Supplement)]] blank/useless page --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 13:55, 3 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
[[Weapons & Armor (Herregor Supplement)]] blank/useless page --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 13:55, 3 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
[[Leviathan]] blank/useless page --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 13:55, 3 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
[[Two-handed weapon]] blank/useless page --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 13:55, 3 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
[[Life in the City (Twelve Swords Supplement)]] blank/useless page --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 13:55, 3 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
[[Destiny]] blank/useless page --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 13:55, 3 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
==Pending Requests==<br />
<br />
* [[Malak %28DnD Race%29]]<br />
* [[The Malaks %28DnD Race%29]]<br />
* [[The Malaks %28Ascyria Supplement%29]]<br />
A chain of pages that redirect through each other to reach the actual race's page. Please delete them, or point them to the proper page. -- [[User:Cronocke|Cronocke]] 15:51, 25 March 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
[[Lots and Lots of Spells (DnD Optimized Character Build)]] - This page needs to be deleted as it is misinformation. [[User:Othtim|Othtim]] 18:15, 20 March 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
I Created "The performer" form the to do list, but on a different page. I moved it to the page linked to the to do list and now need to second page deleted. The page i need deleted is just titled "Performer (DnD Prestige Class)" --[[User:Cerin616|Cerin616, Drew]] 09:56, 11 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
Oops, wrong catagory. I fixed it (it should have been paragon class and not prestige), but time to delete the old. <s>Ambiko (DnD Prestige Class)</s> This is it here. -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 19:31, 26 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
[[1337 Supa N00b F337 (DnD Feat)|This]] needs to be deleted for pretty obvious reasons. --[[User:Flession|Flession]] 20:50, 19 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
Also, see also all articles in [[:Category:Candidates for deletion]]<br />
{{#dpl:debug=1<br />
|category=Candidates for deletion<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Recent Deletions==<br />
:''see also:'' [[Special:Log/delete]]<br />
<br />
[[Mirror Golem, Faux (DnD Creature)]] blank/useless page --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 13:55, 3 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
:Deleted. [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 10:31, 31 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
[[Bard (Ascyria Supplement)]] blank/useless page --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 13:55, 3 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
: Delete it, kill this bard. I created it but in the end it is useless--[[User:Lord Dhazriel|Lord Dhazriel]] 20:31, 7 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
::Deleted. [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 10:31, 31 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
You'd think a page with <s>Conditions (SRD Rules)|this name</s> would be useful. --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 07:54, 17 March 2008 (MDT)<br />
:Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:23, 18 March 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
* <s>Venom Sting</s>. I screwed up and accidentally created both it and the page [[Venom Sting (DnD Spell)]], so the former can't be moved anymore and should be deleted. --[[User:Barnacle Ed|Barnacle Ed]] 21:35, 3 March 2008 (MST)<br />
:Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:18, 4 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
*<s>Waywocket Dusseldorf Linderman the 69th</s>, really only a title, please delete this orphaned page.--[[User:Archangel|Arael]] 18:34, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
:Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:27, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
*<s>Telling Blow</s> is, as it claims to be, copyrighted material from the [[Player's Handbook II]], and thus cannot be included on this wiki. -- [[User:Cronocke|Cronocke]] 14:39, 1 January 2008 (MST)<br />
:Deleted. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 15:01, 1 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
*<s>User:Daniel Draco/techniquetop</s> -- This was going to be used for a class I'm working on, but I've changed how it's gonna work, so I don't need it anymore. --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 12:39, 27 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
:Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:45, 27 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
* MagiTech - I was wondering if these really should be deleted. Currently, I see both sides. One is that no one has edited these in a very long time (and they may not get edited for a very very long time to come) also there is no content on them, so they should be deleted. However, the other side is that they are labeled as "Stubs" and it is possible for someone to come along and help them. Also, <s>MagiTech (D20 Modern Equipment)</s> would look very bare without anything on it. So, they should not be deleted. Any input or opinions about whether this should stay or go would be helpful. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:04, 4 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
** I was the one that posted them for deletion. I was going through stubs myself, but I saw no real reason they should exist -- there isn't even content to improve, just a name. That and as you mentioned, they have not been touched since creation. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 19:13, 4 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
***I remember that MagiTech is something in Final Fantasy 6. MagiTech armour... I think it might be a copyright... oh, thats magitek. But I did find that there was a Magitech corporation. It might be a copyright, but I cannot say for sure. If it is, I would delete it... --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:29, 14 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
:Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:42, 14 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
* Made a useless page by accident. Feel free to remove. I'm unsure of the formatting, but the URL link is <s>Discussion_talk:Rating_a_level_adjustment</s> ...just the blank extra discussion page, the actual discussion on is fine. [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 15:55, 12 July 2007 (MDT)<br />
:Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:00, 4 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
* <s>Angel of Death: Talk</s> is a talk page on the wrong namespace. Please delete after the post has been moved. --[[User:Pwsnafu|Pwsnafu]] 20:33, 26 July 2007 (MDT). My first attempt at moving lead to a mistake. Please delete [[Talk:Angel of Death]] as well. Sorry. --[[User:Pwsnafu|Pwsnafu]] 20:56, 26 July 2007 (MDT)<br />
:Deleted. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 04:22, 27 July 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*[[W/w/w/index.php|This needs to be deleted. It's filled with spam, spam, spam, spam, baked beans, spam, and spam.]] -- [[User:Flession|Flession]] 20:19, 22 July 2007 (MDT) -- page was emptied and blocked by Green Dragon. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 21:58, 23 July 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
<s>Could someone add the prestige classes with "shen" in their names? (i.e. dragon shen)</s> - Page with a question as a title, using a prestige class preload. --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 17:37, 4 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
:Deleted —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 19:50, 4 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*<s>Ikki (DnD Campaign Setting)</s> - No content whatsoever, so should be deleted. [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 19:11, 16 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:*See [[Talk:Ikki (DnD Campaign Setting)]] --[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] 21:41, 16 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:26, 27 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
* <s>Image:SiegfriedArtwork.gif</s>: This is a copyrighted image from http://www.soularchive.jp/, whose [http://www.soularchive.jp/terms-e.html Terms of Use] deny permission to copy graphics. {{Unsigned|Cuthalion|20:07, 21 April 2007 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
:Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:46, 22 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*<s>Image:Gold piece.gif</s> - See <s>Image talk:Gold piece.gif</s> --[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] 22:00, 20 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:33, 21 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*<s>Template:Example</s> - I meant to create this on [[wikirps:Template:Example|WikiRPS]]. Sorry. --[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] 17:56, 13 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:22, 16 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*<s>+1d6 caster level fore every arcane spell(DnD Character Optimization), +1d6 caster level fore every arcane spell (DnD Character Optimization) (replaced bad spelling with proper page name), Young Hero of Time (DnD NPC Class), Talk:Young Hero of Time (DnD NPC Class) (not an NPC class), Organizations (The Twelve Swords Supplemnt) (misspelling), Random Nation Country Rules (DnD Variant rules), Random Nation Country Rules (DnD Variant rules) (someone mistyped move page), Hellfire and shadow Dragon (DnD Monster), Talk:Hellfire and shadow Dragon (DnD Monster), Talk:Hellfire and shadow Dragon (DnD Creature), Hellfire and shadow Dragon (DnD Creature) (has new name and those have capitalization mistakes), The Sword of Dispair (DnD Equipment) (typo).</s> Thanks for clearing out [[Special:Doubleredirects]]. [[User:Armond|Armond]] 15:18, 10 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Deleted. [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:22, 10 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*<s>Nations (Twelve Swords Supplement)</s> - I have combined the content of this page with another, so this page is no longer needed. Delete Request by --[[User:EaTCarbS|EaTCarbS]] 13:10, 4 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:53, 5 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*<s>Brawler (DnD Class), Druid Variant: Exorcist (DnD Class), Liberator (DnD Class), Maverick (DnD Class)</s> -- Please delete these, '''''now''''', <small>flame censored by author</small> --[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] 07:13, 23 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:*You have made worthwhile contributions in good faith, however I cannot delete all of these yet. I deleted "Maverick (DnD Class)" because nothing linked to that page except this page and [[DnD Base Classes]] - which are both insignificant links. However, and before I can delete the other classes, please get rid of all the links to them via the "What links here" function. Once nothing links to them I can delete them without creating red links all over D&D Wiki. Thanks. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:55, 23 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::* Deleted all links to Brawler except "User Base Classes...". BTW, why are these being deleted? --[[User:Pwsnafu|Pwsnafu]] 18:06, 25 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::* I am deleting these is because the author asked for them to be deleted &mdash; I think fulfilling a authors request is reason enough (no reason to not grant authors wishes ''':)'''). Anyway, some of these still need to have their links removed so they can be deleted... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:23, 25 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::: I asked (or rather, demanded) to have these deleted because I was ticked at seeing banners on my work saying what a terrible job I had done. Thank you for honoring my request. Once the current [[Talk:Druid (Evaluational Base Class Layout)|standards discussion]] settles on conclusions, I'll be happy to put them back. --[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] 18:21, 12 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:10, 27 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*<s>Druid Protector (DnD Class), Druid Variant: Protector (DnD Class), Druid Exorcist, Liberator, Paladin Variant: Liberator (DnD Class)</s> - Deleted all links to Exorcist & Liberator. Candidates for deletion (redirects). BTW, when I removed links to Exorist from [[Talk:DnD Base Classes]], I had "Deletion Pending" in the Summary. Ignore that. --[[User:Pwsnafu|Pwsnafu]] 18:24, 26 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:10, 27 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*<s>Fighter Variant: Brawler (DnD Class), Brawler</s> - Redirects that need to be deleted (made them no longer function). --[[User:Pwsnafu|Pwsnafu]] 18:06, 25 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:23, 25 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*<s>Master Innitiative (D&D Fighter Feat), Talk:Selkan (DnDRace), Talk:Selkan (Dnd Race), Selkan (Dnd Race), Selkan (DnDRace), Master Innitiative (DnD Fighter Feat), Mercies Wrath (DnD SPell), Mercies Wrath (DnD Spell), Talk:Mercies Wrath (DnD SPell), Talk:Mercies Wrath (DnD Spell), Die Hard (SRD Feat), Overwhelming Critical(SRD Epic Feat)</s> - Misspellings found. <s>Psion Uncarnate (SRD Creature), Metamind (SRD Creature), Elocater (SRD Creature), Cerebremancer (SRD Creature)</s> - PrCs are not creatures. <s>Gold (SRD Creature), Babu (SRD Creature), Ogrillon (DnD Monster), Baller In Darkness (SRD Creature), Talk:Dragon, Base (DnD Monster), Thrild Swarm (DnD Monster), Creating A Pseudonatural Creature (SRD Epic Creature)</s> - Misspelled creature names. <s>Spike Armor (SRD Weapon), Hamemr, Gnome Hooked (SRD Weapon)</s> - Misspelled item name. <s>Talk:The Simbul's Spell Conjunction (DnD Spell), The Simbul's Spell Conjunction (DnD Spell)</s> - Copyright violation. -[[User:Armond|Armond]] 13:08, 20 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:*I deleted all the ones that have nothing linking to them. The blue ones need to be fixed (the links need to be linked to the correct location). Use "What Links Here" to find what links to the redirect in question. When you have fixed the links I will go ahead and finish deleting these. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:03, 20 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::*[[Dragon, True (SRD Creature)]] is locked, so I can't fix <s>Gold (SRD Creature)</s>. The rest are fixed. (Don't delete [[Special:DoubleRedirects]], though :P) [[User:Armond|Armond]] 08:49, 21 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:36, 21 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*<s>User:Armond/Assassin (DnD Class) and User:Armond/Deadly Assassin (DnD Class)</s>; name went through a bit of loop-de-loops before I decided on a final name. [[User:Armond|Armond]] 16:00, 19 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Deleted. [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 17:02, 19 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*<s>HALFLINGS (SRD Race), HUMANS (SRD Race), Wilder (SRD Creature), Treant,elder (SRD Epic Creature), Universal Solven (SRD Wondrous Item), Turn of Rebuke Undead (SRD Rules), Titan,elder (SRD Epic Creature), Thrallherd (SRD Creature), Tanglefood Bag (SRD Equipment), Steamp Mephit (SRD Creature), Soulknife (SRD Creature), Slayer (SRD Creature), Sharp-Shooting (SRD Divine Feat)</s> --[[User:Armond|Armond]] 12:25, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:*And the reason for deletion is...? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:43, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::*Misspelled double redirects. There's also a few classes listed as creatures. Note "TanglefooD Bag", "Universal Solven" (without a t), "Turn OF Rebuke Undead"... Little maintenance things like that. I've checked a couple of the "whatlinkshere" pages, and they're usually linked to by locked SRD pages. [[User:Armond|Armond]] 08:52, 14 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:26, 15 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*<s>Knight</s> and <s>Knight (DnD Class)</s> both redirect to [[Cavalier (DnD Class)]]. Should these be deleted so one could make a Knight class later? [[User:Armond|Armond]] 08:55, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 09:41, 13 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*<s>Blinding(SRD Armor Enhancement)</s> & <s>Skills I (MSRD)</s> Yet another typo in page making. [[User:Armond|Armond]] 22:03, 12 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:45, 12 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*<s>Broomstick (misspelled feat name), HALF-ELVES (SRD Race), HALF-ORCS (SRD Race), GNOMES (SRD Race), Forgery (SRD Skill)f, ELVES (SRD Race), DWARVES (SRD Race), Character Classes I (SRD) (unless that one's somewhat useful for some reason that I don't know about), Blinding(SRD Magic Armor Enhancement).</s> I'm gonna stop scanning the double redirects page now, please delete as many as possible. (Note these are all simply redirects to a redirect to the proper page.).<br />
<br />
::Deleted. [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:20, 12 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*<s>Board, Dire (SRD Creature), United States Colonial Marine Corps (Weapons/Armor/Equipment) and United States Colonial Marine Corps (D20 Modern Weapons/Armor/Equipment) as noone's going to type all that out when they're used to typing (D20 Equipment), The Clenched Fist of the Six-Fingered Hand (D20 Modern Monster CR 13) (combines two incorrect ways of naming a page...), Vengeful Magic Missile (Sor/Wiz 3 - D&D Spell)</s> (see previous).<br />
<br />
::Deleted. [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:15, 12 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*<s>Ember (terminology), Redgar (terminology), Krusk (terminology)</s> - These are proper names of NPCs found in the Player's Handbook and mentioned in other works which contain no OGC, so they are neither SRD nor OGC and should be removed from the wiki. --[[User:Rakankou|Rakankou]] 18:01, 11 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Deleted. [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:11, 12 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*<s>Half-life</s> - this page is unnecessary. The one active link on it can be reached through [[DnD Creatures]]. [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 19:28, 16 February 2007 (MST)<br />
:*This page also has nothing linking to it. I would highly suggest it to be removed as well. --[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] 21:33, 16 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Deleted. [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 11:49, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
*<s>User D20M NPC Classes</s> - This is not needed; there are no NPC classes in D20M. [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 19:27, 16 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Deleted. [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 11:47, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
*<s>User D20M NPC Classes by Type</s> - See above. [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 19:27, 16 February 2007 (MST)<br />
:*I feel that these should stay as they are to let people understand that they can '''create''' the pages if they wish to. --[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] 21:41, 16 February 2007 (MST)<br />
::*I feel you misunderstand. There are '''''no''''' NPC classes in D20 modern. The equivalent are called "ordinaries" and they are formed in a different way. There literally is not room for NPC classes. It would be entirely redundant and a misuse of the system to create some. --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 23:21, 16 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Deleted. [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 11:47, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
*<s>Ancient Deities (Hellas Supplement)</s> - The page is obsolete. The page being used instead is [[Deities (Hellas Supplement)]]. (This is one of my pages that I accidentally created). --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 12:06, 2 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Deleted --[[User:Xenophon|Xenophon]] 12:25, 2 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
*<s>Highest</s> - Obsolete redirect. I changed all the pages to redirect to the correct page ([[Highest (Carallion Supplement)]]). --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 17:45, 1 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Deleted. &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 18:59, 1 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
* <s>Dark Pope of the Final Church (D20 Modern Monster CR 11)</s> because it is a poorly named double of the [[Dark Pope of the Final Church (D20 Modern Monster)]] page. --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 15:16, 18 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::There are several others like this (with CR in the name, where it shouldn't be-- not good for standards); I'll list them all here later today or tomorrow when I get time (there are about 8 more that will also need the boot. The pages are all backed up and linked; the pages with cr in the name are now obsolete). --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 15:31, 18 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Done & okay with leaving them here later. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:02, 18 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
* <s>MyClass (DnD Class)</s> - This pages needs to be deleted because it is a direct copyright violation. - Delete request by [[User:Xenophon|Xenophon]] 16:29, 9 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Done. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:18, 9 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
* <s>Thiefling Character options</s> - This pages needs to be deleted because I missed something in changing the title, created another title, and as a result made a double redirect. - Delete request by [[User:Xenophon|Xenophon]] 04:13, 7 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Done. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 07:06, 7 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
* <s>IP address</s> - Nothing links to it. If needed users can link directly to Wikipedia. - Delete request by [[User:Xenophon|Xenophon]] 15:00, 6 December 2006 (MST)<br />
::Except this page ;). It's now gone. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:56, 6 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
*<s>Talk:Nerul's Shit Spray (DnD Spell or Power)</s> - the talk page needs to go just like the article. -[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:44, 5 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I will delete it once the discussion has resolved. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:01, 5 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Done. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:15, 5 December 2006 (MST)<br />
*<s>Death Attacks (Evaluation SRD)</s> - This pages needs to be deleted because it appears to be an obsolete redirect that is doubled. - Delete request by [[User:Xenophon|Xenophon]] 05:33, 6 November 2006 (MST). Deleted by [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 07:57, 6 November 2006 (MST).<br />
<br />
*<s>Vargas (Colossal+ weaponry) (DnD Character Optimization)</s>- This pages needs to be deleted because it appears to be an obsolete redirect that is doubled. - Delete request by [[User:Xenophon|Xenophon]] 05:33, 6 November 2006 (MST) Deleted by [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 07:57, 6 November 2006 (MST).<br />
<br />
*<s>Talk:Vargas (Colossal+ weaponry) (DnD Character Optimization)</s> - This pages needs to be deleted because it appears to be an obsolete redirect that is doubled. - Delete request by [[User:Xenophon|Xenophon]] 05:33, 6 November 2006 (MST) Deleted by [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 07:57, 6 November 2006 (MST).<br />
<br />
*<s>Parlour Tricks(DnD Special and Magical Feat)</s> - This pages needs to be deleted because it appears to be an obsolete redirect that is doubled. - Delete request by [[User:Xenophon|Xenophon]] 05:33, 6 November 2006 (MST) Deleted by [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 07:57, 6 November 2006 (MST).<br />
<br />
* <strike>Category:DnD Classes, Prestige</strike> and <strike>Category:DnD User Classes, Prestige</strike> - because [[:Category:Prestige Class]] and [[DnD Prestige Classes]] already fill these roles. &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 14:01, 5 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
* <strike>Talk:Additional B'er'den Feats (DnD Feats) - The page was deleted but its talk page is still there. I'm guessing the same is true for many of the other pages that have been deleted. &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 14:36, 18 August 2006 (MDT)<br />
* Rythmic Devourer (DnD Monster)</strike> Looks like it was meant to be added as a candidate a while ago. --[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 11:31, 31 July 2006 (MDT) &ndash; Deleted by [[User:Blue Dragon]]<br />
*<strike>(See '''[[Talk:Oneiros/Categories]]''' for discussion of the following deletes:)<br />
**Category: Age of Titans - Added "Setting" to new category name for clarity - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 09:23, 28 July 2006 (MDT)<br />
**Category: Carallion - Added "Setting" to new category name for clarity - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 09:23, 28 July 2006 (MDT)<br />
**Category: Desperado Desert - Added "Setting" to new category name for clarity - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 09:23, 28 July 2006 (MDT)<br />
**Category: Eiren, The Middle Lands - Added "Setting" to new category name for clarity - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 09:23, 28 July 2006 (MDT)<br />
**Category: Land of Eritun - Added "Setting" to new category name for clarity - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 09:23, 28 July 2006 (MDT)<br />
**Category: Land of Everlasting Winter - Added "Setting" to new category name for clarity - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 09:23, 28 July 2006 (MDT)<br />
**Category: Lands of Blamakar - Added "Setting" to new category name for clarity - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 09:23, 28 July 2006 (MDT)<br />
**Category: Realm of Vemyn - Added "Setting" to new category name for clarity - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 09:23, 28 July 2006 (MDT)<br />
**Category: Sewer Rats - Added "Setting" to new category name for clarity - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 09:23, 28 July 2006 (MDT)<br />
**Category: Thammun-Ra Desert - Added "Setting" to new category name for clarity - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 09:23, 28 July 2006 (MDT)<br />
**Category: Thyllors: Murkwall - Added "Setting" to new category name for clarity - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 09:23, 28 July 2006 (MDT)<br />
**Category: White Angel - Added "Setting" to new category name for clarity - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 09:23, 28 July 2006 (MDT)<br />
**Category: Wikiworld - Added "Setting" to new category name for clarity - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 09:23, 28 July 2006 (MDT)</strike> &ndash; '''All deleted by [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]]'''<br />
*<strike>Category:Campaign Setting</strike> - Simplified to just [[:Category:Setting]] - [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 14:09, 27 July 2006 (MDT) &ndash; Deleted by [[User:Blue Dragon]]<br />
*<strike>Template:GreenTable</strike> - Was suppose to be User subpage. - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 12:49, 27 July 2006 (MDT) &ndash; Deleted by [[User:Blue Dragon]]<br />
*<strike>Category:Gargatuan</strike> - Because I have an English degree and I still can't type - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 14:05, 26 July 2006 (MDT) &ndash; Deleted by [[User:Blue Dragon]]<br />
*<strike>Category:Terms</strike> - Not following my own guidelines on singular names - converted to [[:Category:Term]] - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 11:16, 26 July 2006 (MDT) &ndash; Deleted by [[User:Blue Dragon]]<br />
*<strike>Category:Rules</strike> - Ditto. Converted to [[:Category:Rule]] - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 11:16, 26 July 2006 (MDT) &ndash; Deleted by [[User:Blue Dragon]]<br />
*<strike>DnD Tremors Movies and self-made</strike> - Converted to Category - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 14:04, 25 July 2006 (MDT) &ndash; Deleted by [[User:Blue Dragon]]<br />
*<strike>DnD Darwin IV - Alien Planet Beasts</strike> - Converted to Category - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 14:04, 25 July 2006 (MDT) &ndash; Deleted by [[User:Blue Dragon]]<br />
*<strike>DnD Evolution</strike> - Converted to Category - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 14:04, 25 July 2006 (MDT) &ndash; Deleted by [[User:Blue Dragon]]<br />
*<strike>DnD Aliens</strike> - Converted to Category - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 14:04, 25 July 2006 (MDT) &ndash; Deleted by [[User:Blue Dragon]]<br />
*<strike>DnD Half-Life</strike> - Converted to Category - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 14:04, 25 July 2006 (MDT) &ndash; Deleted by [[User:Blue Dragon]]<br />
*<strike>Category:Movie Conversion</strike> - Making [[:Category:Conversion|Conversion]] and [[:Category:Movie|Movie]] separate categories - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 13:03, 25 July 2006 &ndash; Deleted by [[User:Blue Dragon]]<br />
* <strike>Category:CR1\6</strike> - Because I don't know how to work a forward slash... - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 09:55, 25 July 2006 (MDT) &ndash; Deleted by [[User:Blue Dragon]] &ndash; <span style="font-size: .9em;">'''Note: Forward slashes are not recommended, but can be accessed by escaping the encoding (two forward slashes in a row).'''</span><br />
* <strike>Category:Inhumans</strike> - Dupe of [[:Category:Inhuman]] (trying to keep new Cat. names singular) - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 07:47, 24 July 2006 &ndash; Deleted by [[User:Blue Dragon]]<br />
* <strike>User Race Group</strike> - Blank copy of [[User Race Groups]] (opposite problem from above) - Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 23:15, 24 July 2006 (MDT) &ndash; Deleted by [[User:Blue Dragon]]<br />
* <strike>Archer (DnD Class) </strike> - Deletion request by creator/ZeroTakenaka<br />
* <strike>Dragonwarrior (DnD Prestige Class) </strike> - Deletion request by creator/ZeroTakenaka<br />
* <strike>DnD Divine Feats, Epic</strike> - This page seems too redundant. There's already an "Epic Feats" page and a "Divine Feats" page. - Delete request by [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 21:22, 12 July 2006 (MDT)<br />
* <strike>DnD Least Legacy Feats, DnD Lesser Legacy Feats, and DnD Greater Legacy Feats</strike> - No need for this level of granularity, since all Legacy feats can be and are all listed on the [[DnD Legacy Feats]] page. - Delete requested by [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 21:22, 12 July 2006 (MDT)<br />
* <strike>B'er'den, Curled (DnD Race)</strike> Not a separate race from [[B'er'den (DnD Race)]]. See that race for further comments ''-Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 07:32, 13 July 2006 (MDT)''<br />
* <strike>Additional B'er'den Feats (DnD Feats)</strike> The feats on the page have been broken out to their own and categorized properly ''-Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 07:32, 13 July 2006 (MDT)''<br />
* <strike>DnD Race Groups</strike> Page has been turned into a category. See [[:Category:DnD Race Groups]] for more details ''-Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 07:32, 13 July 2006 (MDT)''<br />
* <strike>Catgirls (DnD Race Group)</strike> Page has been turned into a category. See <s>:Category:Catgirl Race Group</s> ''-Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 07:32, 13 July 2006 (MDT)''<br />
* <strike>Inhumans (DnD Race Group)</strike> Page has been turned into a category. See [[:Category:Inhumans Race Group]] ''-Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 07:32, 13 July 2006 (MDT)''<br />
* <strike>Moogles (DnD Race Group)</strike> Page has been turned into a category. See [[:Category:Moogle Race Group]] ''-Delete request by [[User:Oneiros|Oneiros]] 07:32, 13 July 2006 (MDT)''<br />
* <strike>New</strike> - Looks like this was meant to be a user page. Please wait till user has placed information elsewhere before deletion, please. - Delete request by [[User:Xenophon|Xenophon]] 05:37, 28 November 2006 (MST)<br />
:* Page not deleted; all it needed was to be moved. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:39, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
::* Page deleted because the title was not specific, and is not going to be referenced by anything. It is better to keep a title as non specific as "New" off of D&D Wiki. --[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] 21:32, 16 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
==Candidates for Deletion that were not Deleted==<br />
<br />
*[[Spellknife (DnD Class)]] - I have pretty much abandoned this, and I see no reason for keeping it. --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 15:55, 15 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*:Your name can be taken off. It is already a stub so one day someone may come along and finish it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:32, 16 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
*[[Twelve Swords (DnD Campaign Setting)]] - I'm no longer working on it, so theres no reason to keep it. --[[User:EaTCarbS|EaTCarbS]] 18:19, 16 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Should it just be made a stub and your name be taken off? I feel like it is such a waste to lose content... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:36, 16 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:: I agree. It's got some good content and maybe someone will take up the torch one day to complete it. Plus, you have lots of cool weapons for it, so it does seem like a waste to just delete it all. -- [[User:Flession|Flession]] 17:32, 19 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::That would work for me. I just dont have the time to work on it. If someone else wants to do it, then thats fine--[[User:EaTCarbS|EaTCarbS]] 16:07, 20 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
* [[Ring of sustanance (DnD Equipment)]] - Already exists in the SRD - Delete request by [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 13:43, 19 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:*See [[Talk:Ring of Sustenance, Greater (DnD Equipment)]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:56, 19 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
* [[When to Italicize and Capitalize (DnD Other)]] - This pages needs to be deleted because it has been merged with the new Help page [[Help:Standards and Formatting|Standards and Formatting]]. - Delete request by --[[User:Xenophon|Xenophon]] 12:48, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:* I'd actually recommend keeping the page seperate and creating a new page title "Standards and Guidelines" linked from the [[Dungeons and Dragons|DnD page]]. The "Standards and Guidelines" page would contain links to [[Help:Standards and Formatting]], [[When to Italicize and Capitalize (DnD Other)]], and [[Character Class Design Guidelines (DnD Other)]], and I'm sure there will be others who will come along with their own proposed guidelines, too. &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 16:48, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::* I actually merged the [[When to Italicize and Capitalize (DnD Other)]] into the [[Help:Standards and Formatting]] by use of <nowiki>{{:When to Italicize and Capitalize (DnD Other)}}</nowiki>. This page will not be deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:39, 30 November 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
<br />
<br />
Format:<br />
<nowiki>* [[Page to be Deleted]] - This pages needs to be deleted because... - Delete request by ~~~~</nowiki><br />
[[Category:Meta page]]</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Environment_(Ricasa_setting)&diff=258310Environment (Ricasa setting)2008-05-31T15:59:33Z<p>EldritchNumen: added footer</p>
<hr />
<div>As one might expect from the mishmash layout of Ricasa's terrain, the creatures you can find are quite varied, particularly from region to region. This is most notable in the northwest regions, where the terrain jumps in variety like a quilt stitched like a drunk, but to a certain degree it's notable all around the continent. So let's take a look at what you can expect to run into, and how you can expect to find them.<br />
<br />
== The Ocean ==<br />
<br />
Of course, the most important part of any Ricasan country is its seaport access. Almost 40% of the continental foodstuffs came from the oceans at one point or another, and it's a pretty solid bet that any adventure or quest will eventually wind up coming sufficiently close to the sea for something nasty to try and drag characters off into the deeps.<br />
<br />
Ricasan ocean life varies in size and variety depending on where you are on the continent. The Bay of Kolvet, for example, is one of the most thoroughly patrolled and actively watched bodies of water known to exist- you won't find giant squids terrorizing any stretch of coastline if the local Navies have anything to say about it. About the most dangerous creature you'll find in the Bay is probably a medium-sized shark.<br />
<br />
The Orcopa Ocean in the west is similarly patrolled by the Styaleni, though it can get quite vicious if you venture out beyond their patrol limits. The Sea of Dreams in the south, however, is notorious for its vast array of strange sealife- everything from merfolk to sea elves have been reported as sighted in the Sea of Dreams, though few have ever been validated. Some areas are heavily patrolled against threats- such as Pyrite Bay and the waters off the White City- but the warm waters of the south can be quite dangerous to a ship without a decent mage.<br />
<br />
The northern oceans are similarly dangerous, acting as both the launching point for the armies of the Northlands and the dumping ground for all the experiments their mages can cook up. The only saving grace is that the majority of the ocean is frozen solid to a depth of almost fifteen feet for a good three months of the year, and to a depth of eight for another four. It is best to hug the coastline if you have to travel this area at all, and avoid it by going overland if at all possible.<br />
<br />
And then there is the Sea of Souls, which did not earn its name based on whimsy. The eastern ocean is extremely deep, and from its depths and long-lost caverns spawn an array of creatures terrifying both in their size and ferocity. Any good storyteller in Opridenik or Malania can tell you a dozen horror stories about that vast expanse, and though the coastline is relatively safe, no-one can ever be quite sure as to what will happen.<br />
<br />
== The Far Northwest- Calthoras, Northern Styalenuth, Northern Capraht ==<br />
<br />
Northwest Ricasa is a gigantic shield of granite and iron, sitting as a nigh-impenetrable wall against the armies of the north. This does not mean that it is anywhere near safe, however- the cave-studded mountains, deep gorges, and trackless wastes of the northeast provide myriad hiding places for creatures suited to the terrain and the consistently cool climate. Packs of wolves, bands of northern savages, and the occasional giant can all be found searching the landscape for sustenance, and the caves and warrens hide an even greater variety of creatures, including some you might not have suspected. Many an army has broken here, and as a result the remnants take fondly to the cave systems- kobolds, goblins, and orcs being the big three names.<br />
<br />
The Northwest is always a harsh environment, particularly in winter- heavy snow is almost guaranteed during the winter months, and from the start of Zethon almost to the middle of Olida there is guaranteed to always be [[SRD:Weather#Snow|snowing]], at the very least, with high likelihood of the weather worsening to heavy snow or snowstorms (though full-fledged blizzards are rare). Snow begins piling up right from the start of Zethon, up to a maximum depth of 1d4+4 feet- a figure which increases by another foot should a snowstorm occur at any time during winter. In other seasons, however, the Northwest is remarkably easy to traverse, being as it is mostly exposed rock and thin soil.<br />
<br />
== The Barren Westlands- Central and Southern Styalenuth, Southern Capraht, Farthest Western Serlithana ==<br />
<br />
As the mountains of the north shrink, the land grows richer- meaning it goes from bare shale and sand to thin, rocky silt. Life is quite difficult in the hilly westlands and as a result little can be found here- the rule has become that the small survive, as the larger creatures who once inhabited the area have either moved on or died off due to lack of food.<br />
<br />
Wild game is scarce all throughout the Westlands, especially in Capraht, where every speck of arable land has been claimed as such. As the country begins to turn green once more down south, where the Cictora and Cicada Rivers cut through the Westwold Hills, the game begins to come back- though you won't find much on the Styaleni side of the border.<br />
<br />
Weather in the Westlands is similar to that of the Northwest, albeit much less severe- nothing worse than heavy snow has ever been recorded in this area. However, high winds are common on the relatively flat expanses along the shoreline, and in the summer heavy rains are not uncommon.<br />
<br />
== Bands of Green- Calthoras/Canadia Border, Canadia/Capraht Border, Kalantar ==<br />
<br />
Very little heavy woodland exists in Ricasa- though the existing swathes are constantly trying to claim a larger space for themselves, the rabid axes of the western woodcutters are just as constantly slicing away at the deciduous forests for more wood, to act as both fuel and material for the post-Trial War-reconstruction efforts. As a result, very little wood remains in natural-growth forests, and much of the wood is either bought from Kalantar or Bastion, or harvested from organized "tree farms", the newest of which are just beginning to come to fruition.<br />
<br />
Those natural forests which remain are either in isolated clusters along the Canadese and Styalenti seashores, lining the river valleys of southern Styalenuth, or accumulated mostly along the western and northern edges of Canadia, with the largest being the superbly dense Laculis Forest on the Canadia-Calthoras border. The species that once lived in the woodlands have either died out, adapted to life on the plains, or moved gradually either up or down the remaining forests to reach the Laculis or Kalantar respectively. This has resulted in extremely high concentrations of tiny-to-medium creatures in the Laculis Forest, making it a highly dangerous trek.<br />
<br />
Those forests connected to Laculis or Kalantar are by this pint very nearly empty of any major life save for humans- concealing defensive outposts in wooded terrain is a tactic much beloved of Canadese defense tactics. The seashore forests and valley forests contain what you might normally expect from any deciduous forest- assorted semi-harmless critters, the occasional wolf or bear, an owlbear or two, and every so often, a member of the old Black Armies who's "gone native". The forests of the Cicada and Cictora valleys are also favorite hideouts for criminals fleeing justice of any one of the surrounding governments, though the police forces of the associated countries are by now quite familiar with their layouts.<br />
<br />
Kalantar, on the other hand, is quite the different matter. The elves are intent on maintaining the great woods there as a sort of natural preserve, of the days when the forests had a much wider expanse, and enact ridiculously harsh penalties on any loggers, hunters, or poachers who encroach upon the woods without their strict permission. Some logging is done in Kalantar, on the "corner" between Canadia, Capraht, and Kalantar (see also: Greenvale County), but this is kept under extremely heavy supervision.<br />
<br />
It is not known precisely what creatures exist in Kalantar, since the elves know that those creatures could cause as much damage to the exterior balance as loggers could to their interior. Most wildlife larger or more dangerous than a deer is confined to the deep forests, away from the set paths through the land, but even the elves dread having to journey that deep in, as rumors abound of creatures being affected by the land's magic and growing to enormous proportions.<br />
<br />
Ricasan forests are as a rule quite thick- only a select few forests in the chain-rims are sparsely wooded. By and large forests in Ricasa are either mediumly thick or extremely dense, with heavy amounts of thick undergrowth scattered throughout. As a side effect, however, the thickly-woven canopy shields the occupants from the weather, reducing all weather effects by one stage (snowstorm becomes heavy snow, heavy snow becomes normal snow etc.). For the basic weather effects, the negative modifiers are halved.<br />
<br />
One partial exception to this rule is the thunderstorm. If a lightning bolt strikes anywhere in a Ricasan forest, it is almost certain to cause fire a la [[SRD:Forest_Terrain#Forest_Fires_(CR_6)|Forest Fire]] (roll a 1 or a 2 on a d8), and in snow storms the chance is even worse (1 to 3).<br />
<br />
== The Great Swathe- Central Canadia, Serlithana, Western Lamelloth ==<br />
<br />
As has been priorly stated, Ricasa is flat. Very, very flat. On a clear day, a sharp-eyed man can stand in the lighthouse tower of Seiocol and make out the outline of the White City, clear across the continent. This wouldn't be possible, however, were it not for the Great Swathe.<br />
<br />
Stretching from Sagewall in the Canadese north all the way to Goldport on Pyrite Bay, the Great Swathe is a vast expanse of plain, dotted by rivers and covered in the legendary assortment of grasses known to the plain- shufflestick and drifteye, sabergrass and wild wheat, cropbrush and sporeflower.<br />
<br />
The plains make for marvelously relaxing travel, as the grasses blow this way and that depending on the varying breezes- that is, until you put your foot in a rat den and fall facefirst into a buried hornet's nest. Though the grasses may deceive you, the plains carry a stunning amount and variety of wildlife, and a lot of it is stuff you wouldn't expect to find there- displaced forest creatures, Alliance and Insider crazies, feral bands of old army monsters, summoning mistakes gone wrong, bands of pirates, bandits, or raiders- basically, bring a friend, there's plenty for everyone.<br />
<br />
=== Special Note: Southeastern Serlithana ===<br />
<br />
South-eastern Serlithana, as has been noted before, has recently come under the dominion of the Pirate King, Feldiris. As an indirect result the grazelands and drumlins of the area have become populated by and large with Feldiris' special shock troops (emphasis on shock), settling in for their long campaign- and possibly life. Several valleys have been converted by physical and magical might into artificial swamps and marshes, home to creatures that most Ricasans can barely imagine in their nightmares. Worms, lizards, crocodiles, vipers, and oozes are all to be found here, along with the bands of semi-feral lizardmen that the pirates hauled across the sea as disposable troops (and who have proven anything but). Be well on your guard when traveling this area- though the locations are few in number, make a wrong step and you might suddenly find yourself staring something particularly nasty and acidic in the face.<br />
<br />
=== Special Note: Southwest Canadia/Northeastern Serlithana ===<br />
<br />
A particular band of land along the innermost rim of the Bay of Kolvet might well seem like the most comforting place on earth- here the warm southern breezes collide with the cool air sweeping off the bay, forming a sort of localized "hotspot" for winds. It's a very pleasant effect indeed, and ideal for working with aerial-based creatures like eagles or air elementals.<br />
<br />
Just don't get comfortable. The air colliding here makes it a particularly nasty corridor for weather- storms can come and go in the blink of an eye, and the ones here are particularly fierce. With nowhere to shelter on the open plains, you'll catch the worst of them- especially if you get unlucky enough to witness the incredibly rare phenomenon known as a "tornado". Pray you don't- the things move faster than anything of this world can run and they're hellishly unpredictable.<br />
<br />
== The Golden Land- Lamelloth ==<br />
<br />
For all intents and purposes, Lamelloth is identical to the Great Swathe in terrain. The only difference is that creatures in Lamelloth are extremely rare, having been hunted down aggressively by the government and the farmers themselves. Most of the time, a trek through Lamelloth will be a boring one- unless you happen to come across a creature either too tough or too big for the local groups to handle right off. That could get exciting quickly.<br />
<br />
== Darkened Hills- Northernmost Lamelloth, Bastion, Southernmost Malania ==<br />
<br />
The forests return with a vengeance here- the Bastites have been extremely careful about keeping handles on their woodlands, as their survival relies on the thick woods as a natural barrier.<br />
<br />
The result is that logging has not been as heavily advanced as in Canadia, and as a result of that, the woods here are much thicker overall than the surviving forests of the west- and much more heavily populated. Unlike the west, however, finding remnants of past invading armies in Bastion or Malania is rare, partly because the warring of that region has historically always been internicine (I.E., among themselves).<br />
<br />
Bastion hill country is not to be taken lightly. The rough terrain combined with the hampering pine forests will cause problems for even the most agile adventurer, and when you've got a bear pounding up the trail the last thing you need is to trip and fall. Land travellers heading to Malania should always approach with caution.<br />
<br />
== Bowl Of The Gods- Malania and Opridenik ==<br />
<br />
The Markaean Peninsula is noticeably tilted, even from afar; the land starts at sea level on the Bay coast of Malania and rises up to nearly a hundred feet high- higher in places- on the Great Cliffs opposite. Very little of the land is flat, thusly, and while the odd topography exposes minerals that make mining a heavy industry, it also inhibits animal life.<br />
<br />
Thus, on the surface at least, Malania and Opridenik are relatively safe to travel. While the native life has never been completely stopped from being a threat, it doesn't come at you in waves like in the Laculis Forest or on the Great Swathe. Provided you stay aboveground and keep to the roads, a trek from Sanjinsky to Arcane Point should be rather uneventful- unless one of the notorious squalls blows up off the Bay (rain and wind).<br />
<br />
== Honeycomb of Rock- Opridenik ==<br />
<br />
Underground, though, it is quite another matter. The Oprid dwarves have a tendency to follow the ore as they dig their tunnels, resulting in played-out holes being abandoned. And, predictably, these soon filled up with animal life- some of it aboveground creatures seeking food or shelter, but primarily creatures that lived underground anyways. As a result, the deeper reaches of Cove City have become a security and safety nightmare for the inhabitants, and a great danger for anyone who ventures outside the central city.<br />
<br />
Though dangerous, this can also prove profitable- the Oprids are always looking for someone to help clear out the mines, and they always pay well.<br />
<br />
== Arcane Point ==<br />
<br />
Speaks for itself. While the Arcane Point is technically one of the securest locations on the continent (as well as one of the calmest due to the constant weather-shield spell), it can be very hazardous for someone who ventures in too far. In addition to the normal hazards appropriated with magic-users, some sections of the cliff caverns beneath the tower have been used in the past as dumping grounds for test subjects or failed experiments. Enter at your own risk.<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
Back to [[Main Page]] &rarr; [[Dungeons and Dragons]] &rarr; [[DnD Campaign Settings|Campaign Settings]] &rarr; [[Ricasa (DnD Campaign Setting)|Ricasa]]<br />
[[Category:DnD]]<br />
[[Category:User]]<br />
[[Category:Setting]]<br />
[[Category:Supplement]]<br />
[[Category:Ricasa Setting]]</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Elves,_Ivory_(3.5e_Race)&diff=258309Elves, Ivory (3.5e Race)2008-05-31T15:56:40Z<p>EldritchNumen: minor spellcheck and footers</p>
<hr />
<div>{{author<br />
|author_name=Ganteka<br />
|date_created=30 May 2008<br />
|status=work in progress<br />
<br />
}}<br />
{{x0<br />
|la=+1<br />
|ecl=2nd<br />
|type=Humanoid (elf)<br />
|ability_adjust=+2 Strength, +2 Dexterity, &minus;2 Constitution<br />
|size=Medium<br />
|favored_class=Any<br />
|desc=Half elf-deeka<br />
}}<br />
<br />
=Ivory Elves=<br />
<br />
Deeka can crossbreed with Humans and Elves to have an offspring known as an Ivory or an Ivory Elf, named for the color of their skin. These half-breeds never quite fit into their parent’s societies, but are most accepted into churches who understand what it means to have an Ivory fighting on their side. An Ivory has strength greater than its parents by combining the best of both worlds. An Ivory is only as long lived as a human. Ivory Elves live as long as Half-Elves.<br />
<br />
This increase in physical strength and prowess is due to Hybrid Vigor, a common occurrence between two closely related species, where the offspring is tougher than either of its parent species.<br />
<br />
==Personality==<br />
<br />
Ivories raised in Deekan Society, tend to behave more like their Deeka parent. However, when raised outside Deekan cities, they tend to be reserved and thoughtful, but with no less perseverance and determination.<br />
<br />
==Physical Description==<br />
<br />
Ivories have sleek ivory skin, striking platinum blond hair and cold pale eyes. They also retain the small shoulder protuberances of their Deekan parentage. Ivory Elves also have more sylvan features and are slightly shorter than their human-bred cousins. They grow to slightly over-tall Human height, but are very statuesque. The unfamiliar often can confuse them with Celestials or Aasimars. There was a tale of an Ivory-Drow that was without weakness to light or dark, had gray skin and white hair and fought with determined malice, but this rumor has never been substantiated outside of bardic tales.<br />
<br />
==Relations==<br />
<br />
Ivory elves are welcome among humans, elves and deeka lands, and are fairly universally accepted in cultured lands.<br />
<br />
==Alignment==<br />
<br />
Ivory elves have no predetermination toward a preferred alignment.<br />
<br />
==Lands==<br />
<br />
Ivory elves live in either homeland of their parents.<br />
<br />
==Religion==<br />
<br />
Ivory elves practice religion as either of their parents.<br />
<br />
==Language==<br />
<br />
Ivory elves speak Common, Elven and Deeka.<br />
<br />
==Names==<br />
<br />
Ivory elves can have names from either of their bloodlines, depending on who they were raised with. If orphaned, Ivories often get named after celestial beings and angels.<br />
<br />
==Racial Traits==<br />
<br />
* +2 Strength, +2 Dexterity, &minus;2 Constitution: Ivory elves are strong and nimble, but not as rugged as a human.<br />
* Humanoid (elf): <br />
* Medium-size: As medium size creatures, ivory elves have no special bonuses or penalties due to their size.<br />
* Ivory [[base land speed]] is 30: <br />
* Bright-light Vision (Ex): Ivory are able to see in conditions of bright or blinding light without any difficulty.<br />
* Low-Light Vision: An ivory elf can see twice as far as a human in starlight, moonlight, torchlight and similar conditions of poor illumination. they retain the ability to distinguish color and fine detail under these conditions.<br />
* Immunity to [[sleep]] spells and similar magical effects, and a +2 racial bonus on saving throws against enchantments spells of effects.<br />
* Immunity to Magical Blinding (Su): Ivory eyes are very resistant, and magical blindness has no effect on them.<br />
* Racial Skills: +2 on Jump. +2 on Perform(sing) as ivory elf voices are beautiful and they take pride in their ability to sound like the heavens.<br />
* Endurance and Diehard: Ivories gain the Endurance feat and the Diehard feat. They can take a lot of punishment and keep going.<br />
* [[light]]: once per day, quickenened&mdash; Caster level is total character level. The save DC is Charisma-based.<br />
* Elven Blood: For all effects related to race, an ivory elf is considered an elf.<br />
* [[Automatic Languages]]: Common Elven and Deeka. [[Bonus Languages]]: Auran, Celestial, and Sylvan.<br />
* [[Favored Class]]: Any.<br />
* [[Level Adjustment]]: +1<br />
<br />
==Vital Statistics==<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"<br />
|+ Table: <!-- insert race name --> Random Starting Ages<br />
|- style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
! Adulthood || Simple || Moderate || Complex<br />
|- style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| 15 years || +1d6 || +2d6 || +3d6 --><br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"<br />
|+ Table: Ivory Elf Aging Effects<br />
|- style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
! Middle Age<sup>1</sup> || Old<sup>2</sup> || Venerable<sup>3</sup> || Maximum Age<br />
|- style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| 62 years || 93 years || 125 years || +3d20 years<br />
|- style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| colspan="5" class="foot" |<br />
# At middle age, &minus;1 to Str, Dex, and Con; +1 to Int, Wis, and Cha.<br />
# At old age, &minus;2 to Str, Dex, and Con; +1 to Int, Wis, and Cha.<br />
# At venerable age, &minus;3 to Str, Dex, and Con; +1 to Int, Wis, and Cha.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="d20"<br />
|-<br />
|+ Table: Ivory Elf Random Height and Weight<br />
|- style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
! style="text-align: left;" | Gender || Base Height || Height Modifier || Base Weight || Weight Modifier<br />
|- style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | Male || 5' 0" || +2d10 || 110 lb. || &times; (2d4) lb.<br />
|- class="even" style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | Female || 4' 8" || +2d10 || 90 lb. || &times; (2d4) lb.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
Back to [[Main Page]] &rarr; [[Dungeons and Dragons]] &rarr; [[DnD Races|Races]]<br />
[[Category:DnD]]<br />
[[Category:User]]<br />
[[Category:Race]]<br />
[[Category:Humanoid Type]]<br />
[[Category:LA1]]<br />
[[Category:ECL2]]</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Heart-Reachers_(3.5e_Race)&diff=258308Heart-Reachers (3.5e Race)2008-05-31T15:55:26Z<p>EldritchNumen: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{author<br />
|author_name=Kirk_Schink<br />
|date_created=5/30/08<br />
|status=In-progress,needs testing<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{x0<br />
|la=+3<br />
|ecl=1st<br />
|type=M/L Outsider<br />
|ability_adjust=+4 to str,+2 to int,-4 to char<br />
|size=M/L<br />
|favored_class=Palidin<br />
|desc=Some race<br />
}}<br />
<br />
=Heart-Reachers=<br />
<br />
==Personality==<br />
<br />
They are very distant from every one, almost like they don't belong. They spend at least two hours a day meditating.<br />
<br />
==Physical Description==<br />
<br />
They are between 5'6" and 7'2" tall, weigh from 140 to 250 lbs, they ALWAYS have one blue eye and one green eye, their skin color ranges from a pale white to a walnut brown, every Heart-Reacher has a 2" scar above their dominant eye.<br />
<br />
==Relations==<br />
<br />
They are hated by every race, with the exception of Elves, Dwarfs, and Drow, Because they can't die, mostly.<br />
<br />
==Alignment==<br />
<br />
Always lawful, they have a deep sense of order, even if they feel they must destroy every thing.<br />
<br />
==Lands==<br />
<br />
Any. When you can't die, mostly, nothing seems to hot or to cold.<br />
<br />
==Religion==<br />
<br />
They either worship Heironeous, Hextor, or no god at all.<br />
<br />
==Language==<br />
<br />
They speak common, but can talk to any being by reaching out an taking hold of its heart, not literally, use your senses!!<br />
<br />
==Names==<br />
<br />
Their names are whatever they wish them to be once they reach 30, but before the their parents either call them G, N, of E.<br />
<br />
==Racial Traits==<br />
<br />
* +4 to strength, +2 to int, and -4 to charisma: Their daily ritual of meditation requires them to do 2 fingered pull-ups while they think about their role in the world, which has built a strong body an sharp mind during their child years. They are deeply hated for their almost eternal life, so most beings treat them like scum.<br />
* Humanoid(outsider)<br />
* M<br />
* Heart-Reachers base land speed is 60'<br />
* Immortal Blood(Ex): Heart-Reachers can only die if they are killed by another Heart-Reacher in single combat.<br />
* Regeneration(Ex): Heart-Reachers can heal very quickly, they heal 1d10 HP per a level every round.<br />
* Tough skin, Weak scar(Ex) : Heart-Reachers get a + 6 natural armor bonus to must their body, but get a -11 to their scar.<br />
* Heart-Reach(Ex) : Heart-Reachers can think about a beings heart and transmit, and receive, messages directly into a beings brain, they also can hear someone's every thought.<br />
* [[Automatic Languages]]: Common, Mind speak<br />
* [[Favored Class]]: Paladin<br />
* [[Level Adjustment]]: +2<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
Back to [[Main Page]] &rarr; [[Dungeons and Dragons]] &rarr; [[DnD Races|Races]]<br />
[[Category:DnD]]<br />
[[Category:User]]<br />
[[Category:Race]]<br />
[[Category:Outsider Type]]<br />
[[Category:LA0]]<br />
[[Category:ECL1]]</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Heart-Reachers_(3.5e_Race)&diff=258307Heart-Reachers (3.5e Race)2008-05-31T15:54:33Z<p>EldritchNumen: fixed categories; minor spellcheck</p>
<hr />
<div>{{author<br />
|author_name=Kirk_Schink<br />
|date_created=5/30/08<br />
|status=In-progress,needs testing<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{x0<br />
|la=+3<br />
|ecl=1st<br />
|type=M/L Outsider<br />
|ability_adjust=+4 to str,+2 to int,-4 to char<br />
|size=M/L<br />
|favored_class=Palidin<br />
|desc=Some race<br />
}}<br />
<br />
=Heart-Reachers=<br />
<br />
==Personality==<br />
<br />
They are very distant from every one, almost like they don't belong. They spend at least two hours a day meditating.<br />
<br />
==Physical Description==<br />
<br />
They are between 5'6" and 7'2" tall, weigh from 140 to 250 lbs, they ALWAYS have one blue eye and one green eye, their skin color ranges from a pale white to a walnut brown, every Heart-Reacher has a 2" scar above their dominant eye.<br />
<br />
==Relations==<br />
<br />
They are hated by every race, with the exception of Elves, Dwarfs, and Drow, Because they can't die, mostly.<br />
<br />
==Alignment==<br />
<br />
Always lawful, they have a deep sense of order, even if they feel they must destroy every thing.<br />
<br />
==Lands==<br />
<br />
Any. When you can't die, mostly, nothing seems to hot or to cold.<br />
<br />
==Religion==<br />
<br />
They either worship Heironeous, Hextor, or no god at all.<br />
<br />
==Language==<br />
<br />
They speak common, but can talk to any being by reaching out an taking hold of its heart, not literally, use your senses!!<br />
<br />
==Names==<br />
<br />
Their names are whatever they wish them to be once they reach 30, but before the their parents either call them G, N, of E.<br />
<br />
==Racial Traits==<br />
<br />
* +4 to strength, +2 to int, and -4 to charisma: Their daily ritual of meditation requires them to do 2 fingered pull-ups while they think about their role in the world, which has built a strong body an sharp mind during their child years. They are deeply hated for their almost eternal life, so most beings treat them like scum.<br />
* Humanoid(outsider)<br />
* M<br />
* Heart-Reachers base land speed is 60'<br />
* Immortal Blood(Ex): Heart-Reachers can only die if they are killed by another Heart-Reacher in single combat.<br />
* Regeneration(Ex): Heart-Reachers can heal very quickly, they heal 1d10 HP per a level every round.<br />
* Tough skin, Weak scar(Ex) : Heart-Reachers get a + 6 natural armor bonus to must their body, but get a -11 to their scar.<br />
* Heart-Reach(Ex) : Heart-Reachers can think about a beings heart and transmit, and receive, messages directly into a beings brain, they also can hear someone's every thought.<br />
* [[Automatic Languages]]: Common, Mind speak<br />
* [[Favored Class]]: Paladin<br />
* [[Level Adjustment]]: +2<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
Back to [[Main Page]] &rarr; [[Dungeons and Dragons]] &rarr; [[DnD Races|Races]]<br />
[[Category:DnD]]<br />
[[Category:User]]<br />
[[Category:Race]]<br />
[[Category:Outsider]]<br />
[[Category:LA0]]<br />
[[Category:ECL1]]</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Bar_Name_Chart_(DnD_Other)&diff=258306Bar Name Chart (DnD Other)2008-05-31T15:52:26Z<p>EldritchNumen: footer, author template</p>
<hr />
<div>{{author|author_name=Ganteka|date_created=30 May 2008|status=}}<br />
<br />
==Bar Name Chart==<br />
<br />
The + Prefix Adjective + Suffix Noun + Location Type: roll a d20 for each column, then put it all together. Quick and Easy<br />
<br />
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="d20"<br />
|-<br />
|+ Table: Easy Bar Name Generator<br />
|- style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
! style="text-align: left;" | # || Prefix Adjective || Suffix Noun || Location Type<br />
|- style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 1 || Slippery || Eel || Inn<br />
|- class="even" style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 2 || Frozen || Boar || Tavern<br />
|- style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 3 || Golden || Maiden || Bar<br />
|- class="even" style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 4 || Silver || Oak || Grotto<br />
|- style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 5 || Grand || Unicorn || Saloon<br />
|- class="even" style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 6 || Stout || Lion || Pub<br />
|- style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 7 || Green || Dragon || Hotel<br />
|- class="even" style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 8 || Shining || Bull || House<br />
|- style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 9 || Royal || Court || Keep<br />
|- class="even" style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 10 || Purple || Goose || Eatery<br />
|- style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 11 || Red || Horse || Hole<br />
|- class="even" style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 12 || Blue || Griffin || Nest<br />
|- style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 13 || Black || Tower || Place<br />
|- class="even" style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 14 || White || Knight || Pit<br />
|- style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 15 || Whispering || Serpent || Bazzar<br />
|- class="even" style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 16 || Brooding || Barrel || Cantina<br />
|- style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 17 || Dancing || Table || Oasis<br />
|- class="even" style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 18 || Ghostly || Stone || Hall<br />
|- style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 19 || Sad || Goat || Stage<br />
|- class="even" style="white-space: nowrap;"<br />
| style="text-align: left;" | 20 || Marble || King || Enclave<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
Back to [[Main Page]] &rarr; [[Dungeons and Dragons]] &rarr; [[DnD Other|Other]]<br />
[[Category:DnD]]<br />
[[Category:User]]<br />
[[Category:Other]]</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Twilight_Web_(3.5e_Environment)&diff=258305Twilight Web (3.5e Environment)2008-05-31T15:48:11Z<p>EldritchNumen: spell check</p>
<hr />
<div>=Twilight Web=<br />
<br />
The twilight web is the home plane of [[Arachne (DnD Deity)|Arachne]]. It is a mighty beacon to the foes of Lolth, a place where they can unite and prepare to do battle against the demonspider.<br />
<br />
== Plane Traits ==<br />
=== Physical Traits ===<br />
*'''Gravity:''' Normal Gravity (on walkways)<br />
<br />
*'''Time:''' Normal<br />
<br />
*'''Size:''' Infinite<br />
<br />
*'''Morphic:''' Sentient<br />
<br />
=== Magic, Alignment, and Energy/Elemental Traits ===<br />
*'''Elemental Dominance:''' None<br />
<br />
*'''Energy Dominance:''' None<br />
<br />
*'''Alignment Trait:''' Chaotic Good<br />
<br />
*'''Magic Trait:''' Normal<br />
<br />
=== Other Traits ===<br />
'''Plane Links:''' The Twilight web is strongly coterminous with the Daemonweb, which it is strongly opposed to.<br />
<br />
'''Plane Inhabitants:''' The plane is inhabited by [[Arachne (DnD Deity)|Arachne]], and her followers; drow and various celestial monstrous spiders.<br />
<br />
'''Features of the Plane:''' The Twilight web as a mirror image of the demonweb, except, of course, that whare the demonweb is terrible and evil, the twilight web is good and beautiful. Like the demonweb, it is made of 20ft wide walkways that are made of gigantic spider silk (which is of the golden color of twilight). The twilight web does not have the surrounding fog of the demonweb.<br />
<br />
'''Plane Encounters:''' For random encounters in the twighlight web, use the heavenly encounter table, replacing guardinals with celestial monstrous spiders of an appropriate challenge rating.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
Back to [[Main Page]] &rarr; [[Dungeons and Dragons]] &rarr; [[DnD Environments|Environments]].<br><br />
Back to [[Main Page]] &rarr; [[Dungeons and Dragons]] &rarr; [[DnD Campaign Settings|Campaign Settings]] &rarr; [[Aëthár; Soul of the Blade (DnD Campaign Setting)|Aëthár; Soul of the Blade]]. &rarr; [[Religion and the Planes (Aëthár; Soul of the Blade supplement)|Religion and the Planes]]<br />
{{Aëthár; Soul of the Blade Supplement}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:DnD]]<br />
[[Category:User]]<br />
[[Category:Environment]]</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=All_D20M_Classes&diff=257412All D20M Classes2008-05-26T09:32:58Z<p>EldritchNumen: </p>
<hr />
<div>Back to [[D20 Modern]]->[[D20 Modern Classes]]<br />
----<br />
<br />
<br />
These are all of the Classes on D20 Modern.<br />
<br />
<br />
To add your own Class to D20 Modern, click '''[[Add New D20 Modern Class|here.]]'''<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:D20M]]<br />
<br />
----<br />
<DPL><br />
category=Class<br />
notcategory=DnD<br />
notcategory=Unearthed Arcana<br />
notcategory=SRD<br />
notcategory=Rule<br />
notcategory=Racial Paragon Class<br />
notcategory=NPC Class<br />
order=ascending<br />
mode=category<br />
</DPL></div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=256762Talk:Main Page2008-05-22T19:54:37Z<p>EldritchNumen: /* Search Function Broken */ formatting</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Archives<br />
|label1=Discussions 1&ndash;30<br />
|label2=Discussions 31&ndash;44<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== 4th edition ==<br />
<br />
I don't really want to recreate the rumours and excitement concerning the upcoming 4th edition, but it looks like we need to think about a way to handle it here. It's pretty sure that there will be two editions in parallel use, at least for a while, so we need a way to separate editions. Tagging articles [[:Category:3.5]] and [[:Category:4.0]] wouldn't be too hard, what I'm concerned about is article lemmata for articles that exists in different versions for different editions. <br />
<br />
Also, it's not clear yet whether there will be a 4th edition SRD. I hope there will be one. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 08:50, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Might be a good idea to put SRD 3.5 articles with a template underneath (this is only a suggestion, not an attempt to have a million templates per page):<br />
<br />
:{| style="text-align: center; font-size:0.9em;" width="100%"<br />
| [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|40px]]<br/>This material is published under the [[V3.5 rules]].<br/><small>[[Main Page|&rarr;More]]</small><br />
|}<br />
<br />
:Although, there might be too many templates if we do this. perhaps we could replace the SRD template to this for 3.5 articles:<br />
<br />
:{| class="messagebox protected" style="border:2px solid #99B; padding:0px; font-size:0.9em;"<br />
|-<br />
| valign="top" | [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|45px]]<br />
| This material is published under the '''[[Open Game License v1.0a]]'''. The [[GNU Free Documentation License]] does not apply to this page. This material is for the D&D [[V 3.5 rules]].<br />
|}<br />
<br />
:We don't really need to mark homebrew stuff- it should work for 4.0 rules anyway. Whatre can I find news on the 4th edition, anyway? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:10, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Have you been at the WotC Homepage lately? Did you notice something? --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 09:48, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::If 4e is really coming out we can most likely just slap on a small template on all 4e things or all 3.5e things. Also, the categories you said above will work. I do not see it as too much of a problem... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:55, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::According to my reasearch, it ios not out until 2011 (rather silly really; why advertise it four and a bit years before its release), so we really do not have to bother with it yet, anyway. {{Unsigned|Sam Kay|10:04, 16 August 2007 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
::::::Boo! Hsssss! I had a browser tab open for the last ten minutes of the countdown of the [http://www.wizards.com/dnd D&D] page. Once it finished, I got "Service Unavailable". About as disappointing as 3.0 psionics. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 16:35, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Lol ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:38, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::4th edition is definitely coming. We really need to sit down, argue, butt heads, and work out the namespacing issues now. Thankfully, 3E has a namespace already. We have lots to sort out. Wikiworld will instantly be 4th compatible, as I haven't bothered with stats for most of the writeup. The new MIC style items should also be compatible. There are interesting times ahead. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 18:39, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::It has been stated that the PHB will be out May '08 MM June '08 and DMG July '08 {{Unsigned|Quill|19:11, 16 August 2007 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
::::::::::Yes, we have a year to prepare but it makes it easier later if we start thinking about it now. Btw., I'm still waiting for the WotC Homepage to survive sudden massive attention so I can see the official WotC Press release... --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 03:22, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Just do what I suggested and replace the OGC tgemplate with:<br />
:::::::::::{| class="messagebox protected" style="border:2px solid #99B; padding:0px; font-size:0.9em;"<br />
|-<br />
| valign="top" | [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|45px]]<br />
| This material is published under the '''[[Open Game License v1.0a]]'''. The [[GNU Free Documentation License]] does not apply to this page. This material is for the D&D [[V 3.5 rules]].<br />
|}<br />
<br />
:::::::::::It is alot easier to mark 3.5 in this way. You could also add an image to the template to mark it, I suppose. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:30, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::I vote to leave the V3.5 on the wiki pemanently (unless the wiki runs out of memory), as some people will still use V3.5. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:39, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Btw, [http://rustmonster.net/2007/08/16/dd-4th-edition-announced-gen-con/ here] it says that Wizards announced to continue the OGL. Good decision. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 09:45, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:Can we get a 4E Info/Rumor link up on the landing page? (Though we may as well link it to ENWorld. They will have the best coverage.) [http://www.enworld.org/index.php?page=4e ENWorld 4E Page] It hasn't been updated yet, but it will be. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 14:19, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Great! it will be nice to have 4.0e on the wiki.--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:27, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::A few things. First off we need to figure out if the homebrew material will be compatible with 4e, if it is we are well off. If it is not we need to figure out how we are going to categorize the 3.5e and the 4e homebrew information separately. Oh, and yes, D&D Wiki has enough space to keep the 3.5e material - nothing need ever be deleted to save space on D&D Wiki. Secondly, if we want a link to 4e information from ENWorld then, I feel, that we should add it as a news item. Dmilewski can take care of this if this is the communities decision. Thirdly we need to figure out when the 4e SRD is coming out to see how much time we have to prepare for it. About the SRD (3.5e and 4e); we need to decide if we want a different namespace for the two SRD editions or if we want to organize them by their identifiers. Anyway, if the homebrew information is compatible we are looking at not too much work (and a much more useful and successful D&D Wiki). Let us hope... ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:10, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::I think ther homebrew stuff will mostlky ber compatable with 4e, but if not we will have to work to update the best stuff... --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:22, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Either the homebrew material is almost 100% good-to-go or it is not. We cannot have a medium on D&D Wiki. The reason we can not have a medium is because many many people will not switch over to 4e for a long time (or ever!) and we do want want these people to lose D&D Wiki as a recourse. If the two editions are not compatible we will have to have two separate pages like [[Dungeons and Dragons]] and we will have to have 3.5e classes, races, etc and 4e classes, races, etc. Again, we need to really know if they will be compatible or not (and if someone has any information please cite the source). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:32, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yeah, I know, I was meaning as they are now... I have had a look at the articles on WotC website, and I seem to remember that the playtest report mentioned that a player was playing a psyon (because it was 3.5e) to see if it was compatible.--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:42, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I volenteer to help updating homberew stuff to 4e should the need arise (hopefully it won't). --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:54, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::I think that conversion of each section should be considered on a case-by-case basis. For example, magic items may only need a level assigned to them. That's an easy conversion worth doing. Classes and prestige classes will need to be entirely rewritten as trees, maneuvers, or such, if they are worth translating at all. <br />
<br />
::::::::My current belief is that we will need to split the content. That hoses the entire redirect initiative. (That was a reservation of mine with the redirect initiative. All the pages that I did for the SRD were hard-referenced. I used no redirects.) <br />
<br />
::::::::Campaign environments will be easiest to convert. Many simply implement the existing system, then list some house rules. For example, LotR and Wikiworld are both concept heavy, rules light. Wikiworld has always been rules light, as I wanted Wikiworld to work with any game system. I suggest that Sam keep LotR rules light, so as to keep it universal.<br />
<br />
:::::::::I was at GenCon when they made the announcement of 4e. According to Wizards of the Coast, the 3.5e material will be compatible with a minimum of modification. There were no details given at the time, however, so what that means, I'm not sure. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 14:04, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Many classes and (both base and prestige) might be obsolete under the new rules- if the same effect can be made just by using talents on one of the other classes. I think we'll have to make a big review of everything and check it for 4e compatibility, maybe putting a 4e Compatible template and a 4e Incompatible template (and nothing on pages that haven't nbeen checked yet, obviously). [[User:MorkaisChosen|MorkaisChosen]] 08:25, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Or we could just keep 3.5e material 3.5e material, since not everyone is going to switch right away... Maybe keep it for a couple years than change it to 4e. Thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:16, 4 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
I read on the Wizards page that one thing they're thinking of implementing with all the online stuff they're using in 4th ed is a wiki to allow home brew stuff. If that's true, it may be best to just keep this site in 3.x to avoid competition with the "official" wiki. I'm still uncertain about all that though. Any thoughts? --[[User:Banyan|Banyan]] 23:07, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I don't think a little competition will hurt. If Wizards opens their own wiki, that's an excellent idea, but it doesn't mean we should give up this project here. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 00:57, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I wouldn't bother with the "official wiki" anyway. This one is better. Anyway, why would we be scared of competition? It is not like we are trying to make money, or anything. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:00, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Would someone like to contact them and ask them if this is true? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:35, 26 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
==New Edition Issues==<br />
<br />
The following questions are both technical and procedural. There is no correct answer. These questions are here to collect upcoming issues with the wiki and decisions that should be considered. Please add to the list.<br />
<br />
===General architecture===<br />
<br />
How best to manage a wiki filled with multiple editions and systems (3E, 4E, Modern, Etc.)<br />
<br />
:I am very open to discussion, but I feel that the best way to manage different systems is to make the different edition pages very obvious. For example, we could have all namespace v4 pages come with a slightly darker page background, or something similar. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:22, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I agree. The Wizards message boards use a different skin for each game. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 10:57, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::I am against the changing of the skin, however I think namespaces are the way to go. We could label the namespaces as SRD3.5e, SRD4e, 4e, 3.5e, D20M, etc. What do you guys think about this idea? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:11, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::People will be far too confused if they want to know whether the article is 3.5 or 4.0, and they constantly have to be checking namespaces. It will be much easier if the page background is slightly darker for 4.0, or something similar. I am not talking about a different feel, just a difference. There is a difference :) &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 18:00, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Why not have two menu pages, one for each edition, and label all pages with 3.5 and 4.0? --[[User: Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:02, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Sam Kay, do you mean namespaces? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:04, 26 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Yeah... I did. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:23, 1 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
===Namespaces===<br />
Should we move current SRD pages to a 3E namespace?<br />
<br />
:I assume you mean 3.5E namespace, and I feel that we need to wait a bit until the structure is clear and known to all, but I feel that it definitely needs to happen before 4E comes out. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:23, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
How do we want the namespaces to interact?<br />
<br />
:Why not have two D&D menus: 3.5, and 4.0. That way, you would know whether you where in 3.5 or 4.0. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:33, 3 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
What should we do with articles that are invariant between 3E and 4E (assuming there are any)?<br />
<br />
:This brings up another question: It would be great if there was a way to allow edits on a 3.5E to be reflected, or maybe a reflection would be requested, onto a 4E page. This way the races or whatnot would remain the same. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:25, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I've been wrestling with related questions on [[WikiRPS]]. It's easy to have small (or even large) pieces of shared text, using a template. But what if the bulk of the text is shared, but just the numbers scattered throughout the text are different (for instance)? As far as I know, the only way to do it is to modularize the text into templates as much as possible. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 11:02, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
Redirects point to 3E SRD. Is there a way to have namespace relative redirects, where <nowiki>[[foo]]</nowiki> inside the <nowiki>[[SRD]]</nowiki> context points to <nowiki>[[SRD:Foo]]</nowiki> while <nowiki>[[foo]]</nowiki> in the 4E context points to <nowiki>[[SRD4:Foo]]</nowiki>. <br />
<br />
:I don't think it's possible, but I'm willing to be proven wrong. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 09:55, 21 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::It would be possible with a few minor hacks. However, this will lead to a very confusing website. I am against the idea. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:18, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
===Templates===<br />
<br />
What templates should be used to tag 3E and 4E pages?<br />
<br />
===Homebrew===<br />
<br />
Should homebrew rules be tagged by edition?<br />
<br />
:I strongly feel so. Everything is specific to a version if it falls back on D&D. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:26, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::That depends on whether it is edition specific or not: WotC declaired that 3.5e would be compatable with 4.0e --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:19, 1 September 2007 (MDT)--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:19, 1 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Im new here just signed up today but was reading through this and had something to say. According to the Dnd podcast 4ed is not fully compatible with 3.5, They imply that if you want to use a lot of stuff it will have to be updated. In fact they go so far as to say that you may even have to recreate things from the ground up. So separating old material and new material will be nessacary. I'd suggest tagging everything now 3.5. then creating a menu with two separate sections 3.5 and 4 and go through a process of reviewing and or editing the old material and copy it over to the new namespace.[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 07:16, 5 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Not nessassaraly- look as CSs- they are mostly background stuff, therefore, they have no <br />
need of a tag for either 3.5 or 4. Deities might not, depending on rule changes. Enviroments will not, as it is mostly descriptive stuff. And they said that it would a be a case-by-case thing. Plus, changing the DnD category to 3.5e would take forever. there are about 4000 articles (I think) here. Better to leave them as DnD, and add 4e. Which has been done. And anyway, I said "compatable" not "fully compatable". They mean slightly different things: one means that some suff may need minor changes, others would need alot, the other means that you could just drop it into a game. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:36, 5 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
Should campaigns get their own namespace, or belong to their intended edition?<br />
<br />
:I feel that campaigns should not get their own namespaces because it would remove the items in the campaign from D&D Wiki linking schemes, etc. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:26, 22 August 2007 (MDT)''<br />
<br />
===Site conversion===<br />
<br />
How best to automate changes?<br />
<br />
Should 3E redirect be systematically replace with hard page references?<br />
<br />
:I'm not sure I understand the question. Can you give an example? &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 09:55, 21 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I think it means that rather than mentions of "darkvision" being linked to the darkvision page it says what page information about darkvision can be found at in the core rule books. If so, I am against the idea. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:09, 6 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Another 4e Option ==<br />
<br />
I can't help but feel that the cleanest solution would to be just host a completely separate wiki specifically for 4E, and just circumvent all the aforementioned issues. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:30, 21 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I agree&mdash;having a separate wiki would be very clean, but it may not be as useful, since one would have to switch between the wiki for different versions of D&D. However, I am starting to like the idea... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:24, 21 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Well, I think the ease of having a separate wiki would probably be more valuable than the "convenience" of having them together. Also, my understanding is that 4E is not nearly so compatible with 3.5E. So, perhaps the "clean slate" concept would be much better. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 10:02, 22 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::From what I'm reading it seems like it'll about as compatible as 2e is to 3e.<br />
:::Also, let's not forget that the above issues are merely the ones of which we can conceive. With projects this size, more issues always arise after implementation.<br />
:::4ed20wiki.com anyone? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 19:36, 27 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Wizards did say 4e would be compatible with 3e with a minor amount of modification. Why not have two sub-main pages within this wiki? On the main page you have links to 3rd edition D20 and 4th edition D20. Then each edition could have it's own sub-main page just like our current main page... That would be ''like'' two wikis but without the flicking from wiki to wiki, having two accounts, and the possibility of reduced number of edits on each wiki. Personally, I think it would be better to have one wiki with separate sections. We already have modern and D&D with separate sections on one wiki, so why not do it with 3e and 4e? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:16, 28 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree w/ Sam, we should just include a sub-set for D&D 4E like we did for d20 Modern. That way people can have just one account and since 3.5 will be compatible w/ 4E people can still look at all of our 3.5 Stuff and port it over to 4E. Just Create a Dungeons and Dragons 4E Page and a 4ESRD and everything's fine. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 11:21, 28 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::I know that the "official" announcement was that 4E would be compatible with 3E, however, I've listened to the Podcasts, read much of the forum boards, and tried to pay attention to what is out there and I don't think it will be that compatible. In fact, Dave Noonan said on the D&D Podcast that there won't be a simple process to take a 3E character and just equate it to 4E. The level progression is different, the spread of powers associated with each level will change for each of the classes, and many of the class abilities (especially spell casting) are being changed greatly. Also, monsters are being reworked extensively, and many of the mechanics are being revised, rewritten, or scrapped entirely. I have a feeling that the compatibility will be simply that you can take a story line from a 3E adventure and use it, but the mechanics, though familiar, are not the same. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 09:55, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I still think one wiki would be best. Plus, I have also been reading the announcements, and I think a lot of the things can already be achieved with variants: the saves working like ACs, for example, add 10 to each save, take 10 from the DC, and roll a D20 and add the DC, compare to save. Easy. Critical spells? I have already done a variant for that before they announced it in Design and development. It is on this site under the title [[Spellcasting (DnD Variant Rule)|Spellcasting]]. So 3E-4E conversion could be a case of slight modification using variant rules. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:31, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::I'm not sure I see exactly how variants address the issue of hosting materials for two different versions of the d20 System. Are you suggesting that for every 4E rule component that's different from the corresponding 3.5 rule, it be put under the [[DnD Rules]] or a SRD Variant section? And if so, would this be in addition to or instead of hosting 4E SRD in it's own space?<br />
::::::::And since the d20 Modern section was brought up, I never really cared for it being hosted next to the d20 stuff. Admittedly, it hasn't been a problem, but that could be due to the fact that there's far fewer users using that section than the d20 section (if the amount of user-submitted material is any indication). Whether or not 4E material has it's own wiki, I'm definitely against the 4E d20 Modern and d20 Future being hosted on the same wiki.<br />
::::::::With the issue of multiple accounts, there's a way to have only one account apply to both wikis. I created an account on a [http://www.wikia.com Wikia] site a while ago, and it works with all wikis there. [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue]] would know how complicated such a thing would be to accomplish, and if it'd be worth while. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:20, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::The answer to your question is no, I was merely stating that I think 3E will be compatible with 4E with a minimal of rule conversion. If we can have one account on two seperate wikis, would it be possible to have a single user page (and talk page) for '''BOTH''' wikis? I knows you have seperate pages on wikia... and have links between wikis work as an "inside" link rather than an "external link"? If so, then having two wikis '''Would''' be more... better. Erm... More... practical. Although if we could have a united main page for both that lead to each seperate wiki, that would be good too. About 4E modern and D20 future, starwars ect, ect, yadda yadda yadda, I am not really bothered about them. So long as we have 3E and 4E D&D (and 3E modern would be good, although we could '''completely''' replace it with 4E modern), then I am happy. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 15:25, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::I have strengthened and decided my view, I am against two wikis for a number of reasons. One is that people would have two user pages, two talk pages, and two recent changes lists would exist. It would become a lot to handle. Another reason is that it would divide visitors between two sites, making it look like dandwiki.com is actually not doing as well as it would be, therefore making it not as popular on google, etc. Another reason I am against it is that people will choose one wiki they like and stick with it, disabling half of our growing user base. It would stop prompting people to join random discussions as much, and stop prompting them to help out as much. Another reason is that structure changes would have to be done twice, the same template made two times, one for each wiki. It seems, to me, like a lot more problems would arise than good would come out of it. I am against making two wikis.<br />
::::::::::A solution I see to this problem is namespaces. We could have namespaces such as 3.5e, 4e, 3.5eSRD, and 4eSRD to eliminate confusion as to which version something is. I think namespaces would be the best solution to this problem, not separate wikis. Maybe we should vote? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:00, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Sure. Why not? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 21:25, 31 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Done. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:19, 31 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::If anyone can see a way to make the voting table below clearer please do. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:32, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:I voted for everything. That's because I believe that we will need our whole toolbox to sort this out.<br />
:First, we need to identify the two idea complicating this discussion and table them. I believe that D20 Modern will be best served with it's own sister wiki. Simply by separating it, we greatly simplify our discussion. It then becomes its own discussion (which it deserves). Campaigns also deserves their own discussion. <br />
:This greatly simplifies our problem. <br />
:We already know that we will need new templates for 4.0. (Fact: see the new creature layout block.) We will also need new page preloads. Layout differences will help us tell one page from another. The new class pages will look different than the old class pages simply by being laid out differently. That does the same job as a skin. We also have footer and header templates that can go into a preload and existing pages.<br />
:Namespaces are powerful tools to help us sort out what is what, even at a glance. They provide an absoluteness that chains through everything. The new SRD will most definitely be in a new namespace. For contributor content, I don't see a powerful enough need for a separate namespace when layouts and templates are already providing us good service. Page titles also convey information. '''Page Title (DnD Page)''' is different from '''Page Title (4E Page)'''. <br />
:Categories will be directly impacted by namespaces, but the purpose of categories is not in separating pages, but in collecting like pages. If we try to separate pages too much using Categories, all we do is create a complicated set of categories. We have page titles and namespaces to help a user identify what page goes with which system. These should be sufficient.<br />
:Finally, there is ignorance. If we make the wiki too complex for contributors, we will lose contributors. Any schema that we invent must be apparent to our average contributor.<br />
:That's alot, isn't it?<br />
:My belief is that we should make a new namespace for the new SRD, and let the body of the wiki sort itself out with layouts, footers, and linking. Most sections are clearly one edition or the other. The trouble sections (D20 Modern and Campaigns) need their own discussions to sort out. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 07:52, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::If I didn't know better, I'd swear you were putting together an argument for separate wikis. I think this statement sums it up:<br />
<br />
:::''If we make the wiki too complex for contributors, we will lose contributors.''<br />
<br />
::There's going to be plenty to worry about with just dealing with one edition without having to worry about how keep the editions separate, and too many of the solutions depend on the users maintaining the separation. Right now we have users assigning incorrect categories or neglecting categories, putting non-SRD material in the SRD namespace, not using the preloads, not putting the " (DnD xxxx)" identifier (or putting the wrong identifier) when they create a page, and so on and so on. Trying to maintain a separation between editions is going to add to the problem. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:45, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Nothing on this earth will stop the symptoms above. Ignorance will always exist. I believe the above are symptoms of too-few editors. We have needed editors patrolling their own areas for a while. We must also admit to ourselves that editing is not very interesting to most of our contributors. I really don't know how to address that issue.<br />
:::One reason that I don't want separate wikis is that our Campaign section is always among the most popular sections. How do I maintain Wikiworld across two wikis? If our solutions won't work well for campaigns, we will hurt ourselves.--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 15:09, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Also, on the incorrect editing, most random people who post here don't know all the catagories or how to properly code a wiki. I still don't know all the catagories but I usually go find a page that does and copy and paste. So the incorrect editing will always be a problem. I also firmly stand behind the idea of just one wiki, everything in one place. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:28, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree with Dmilewski. Why was the last sysop elected more than half a year ago? It's because we have a large issue with people not wanting to edit the infrastructure of this site. The last editor that really edited the infrastructure was [[User:Mkill|Mkill]] (albeit with some very controversial edits), who since that time has left D&D Wiki. The infrastructure is not perfect here, many many things need to be improved or are currently wrong, but why is no one stepping up and fixing them? Is D&D Wiki to complex for people to handle? Should we dumb it down? And how do the questions I just asked pertain to 4e material?<br />
:::::Actually, I think the questions I just asked are the core of this issue. A new 4e wiki will eliminate all the issues with people not wanting to edit the infrastructure, and that is why it seems so appealing. It will make a new slate, without D&D Wiki's insane hierarchy (which, by the way, only exists because average users do not edit the infrastructure or help other people's creations on D&D Wiki), and without all of the work that needs to be done on D&D Wiki that is not getting done (publications, dplc's for races, modernizing classes layouts, linking orphaned pages, etc, etc). D&D Wiki has issues, and a new 4e wiki will remove them all... but I don't like to run from my problems.<br />
:::::Yes, D&D Wiki needs some major changes to become what I envision it to be; to become what everyone envisions it to be, but I feel we can accomplish these changes within this current wiki, and just this current wiki. Problems will arise from adding a new edition, but we can solve these problems, we will need to solve these problems... and, of course, the best way to solve these problems is to solve the problem with the average user not editing the infrastructure, because that is where I feel it all stems from. If the average editor feels that D&D Wiki does not just need more content, but rather needs infrastructure help, organizational help, help with making things look good, and help with making everything balanced, then with everyones hard work all the problems on D&D Wiki will soon disappear, creating an environment where adding a new edition will be as smooth as adding a new race. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:29, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Well not everyone wants to just go on a site and edit the way it works just for fun. They might add something but I wouldn't expect them to edit it. Maybe you should try on the equipment page to when you add a new item show some of the various templetes you can use such as the author one and the various catagories you can use. This might help because then you can just copy and paste what you need. I do agree that if we had more people editing and making things right the first or second time then this place would run much smoother. Now I would like to step up and help edit and my area would be the equipment section as I spend most my time there and I am most familar with it. You still might have to make more minor edits to what I have done but I garentee you that there will be less of them. Also, all I would be doing is standardizing and making minor edits as I do not know how to code much more than that; I could learn but that will take time. If you would like me to try to do that I will, it's just anywhere else and I'm not going to be nearly as useful. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 21:18, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I really didn't for my post to be a ''"plea for help"'' (even though it may have come off like that... ''':P'''), but if you want to do something which requires little or no wiki-syntax knowledge thats helps out [[DnD Equipment]] please drop a note on my user-talk page and I will help you find something that needs to get done on [[DnD Equipment]]. Anyway... back to the subject on hand..... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:57, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::When does the vote end? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:38, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Does the 5th of December sound okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:45, 2 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Yeah. I think everybody who wants a vote has voted or will have done by then. We can always send a MOI to people who havent voted. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:26, 3 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Okay, the vote is over. Thanks to everyone that voted, and it appears that we will not be making a separate wiki for 4e material (or holding a book burning convention) but rather organize the different edition by way of categories, namespaces, and possibly changing the identifier. Agiain, thanks to everyone that voted ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:05, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::So, when are we going to start setting it up for 4e? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:40, 15 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Feel free to start whenever you have time... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:04, 15 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:I'd love to, but what do we call the new pages... "4E Dungeons and Dragons", "4E D20 Modern", "4E DnD Base Classes"? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:03, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Or "Dungeons and Dragons (4E)?" There's still a few more details that need to be decided. In what namespace will user content be? Main or "4E"? How do we deal with items independent of rules versions (i.e. maps, campaigns and the like)?<br />
::Personally, I think we can mirror the 3.5 section by replacing all the instances of "DnD" in all the identifiers with "4E" instead (e.g. "4E Character Options," "4E Feats," "4E Creatures," etc...), and the landing page can just be "Fourth Edition." (I always though "Dungeons and Dragons" and "DnD" were bit of misnomers in this context.) —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:37, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Ok. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:33, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I'll start setting it up under 4E Homebrew, 4E Feats, etc. We can move them if need be. If we have stuff under 4E as you suggested, I think DnD should be replaced with 3E or 3.5E for the 3.5 stuff... Thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 02:18, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Started to set it up- see [[4E Homebrew|this page]]. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:17, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== The 4e Movement ===<br />
<br />
I looked over the page and I feel there are a couple kinks to be worked out. First off do we want the pages being labeled as "4E" or "4e"? Secondly, which pages do we want to work with both editions? Should these pages keep the "DnD" while all the other pages would adopt a 3.5e or 4e, respectively, identifier? Thirdly, should we change the descriptions of the sub-pages to say which edition they cover or would that be redundant? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:35, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I think 4e, Maps, campaign settings, possibly deities (depending on changes), Environments, Possibly Quests and Disscussion could be shared, yes, they keep DnD, rest become 3.5e or 4e, yes the rest need to say edition sub-pages cover. Any thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:34, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Yes. How can we make the newly implemented dpl on [[Dungeons and Dragons]] (thank you so much, Sledged) work with non-specific edition pages in all the main categories (for DM's, for Players, or General)? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:27, 24 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Give pages that work for both two categories? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:08, 27 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::[[DnD Campaign Settings|Campaign Settings]], [[DnD Links|Links]], [[DnD Guidelines|Guidelines]], etc. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:37, 27 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Ok, I have done everything except the spells section and the SRD. I have made a 4e version of the pages that I was not sure of (quests and deities), and linked to both (we delete the 4e one if not required or remove the category if the 4e one is required). What do you think? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:27, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::One thing is that everything could be piped so it does not say "4e" all the time. I feel that if one is already on the 4e landing page then having 4e before everything would just come off as repetitive. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:19, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::What do you mean? Like 4e Homebrew/Classes/Base Classes? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:51, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Not exactly. I was refering to things like [[4e Deities]] being piped to [[4e Deities|Deities]]. It just seems repetitive to be on the 4e page and have everything say 4e before it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:43, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Ok. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:18, 25 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::[in a robotic voice] TASK COMPLETE. Are there any more tasks to be done on the 4e Homebrew section? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:24, 27 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Other than the spells section I really do not see anything else. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:20, 28 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Good. Shall we set up the 4e SRD section in the same way so we can just get on with transcribing it when 4e comes out? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:58, 3 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::I read somewhere that WotC will not be releasing a 4e SRD. I think we need verify or disprove this and then decide what to do from that point. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 09:47, 4 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:[http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4news/20080108a 4E SRD and OGL]. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:46, 4 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::"All of the material included in the OGL Designer’s Kit will be available for free starting on June 6, 2008. Parties who find the cost prohibitive can begin developing their products at that time." I guess that means we're able to have the SRD for 4e! --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 07:20, 5 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
===Vote===<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" style="text-align: left;"<br />
|+ 4e Solution &mdash; Voting (Please use "#" and extra lines to separate)<br />
! rowspan="2" | For making a new wiki to encompass 4e material !! colspan="6" | For keeping D&D Wiki as a whole, encompassing all editions !! rowspan="2" | Launch a book-burning party which has the goal of burning every 4e book<br />
|-<br />
! Think namespaces are the solution to 4e material !! Think categories are the solution to 4e material !! Think changing the identifier is the solution to 4e material !! Think changing the background color/skin is the solution to 4e material !! Think templates are the solution to 4e material !! Think that more than one of the aforementioned solutions is the best solution for 4e material (Please say which ones would work best together)<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
# [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] (w/ New Skin)<br />
# [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] (What in the current wiki would we want to link to with 4e? That is the only reason I see for keeping it together... Besides usernames I suppose.)<br />
| <br />
# [[User:Sol|Sol]] <br />
# [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]]<br />
| <br />
# [[User:Trogdor|Trogdor]]<br />
|<br />
|<br />
|<br />
|<br />
# [[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] (Namespaces (for SRD material), Categories, Changing the identifier (for homebrew material))<br />
# [[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] (Namespaces, Catagories)<br />
# [[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] (All the above)<br />
# [[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
# [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] (Namespaces, Skin)<br />
# [[User:Pirate-Sorcerer|Pirate-Sorcerer]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
# [[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
# [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
|<br />
# [[User:xidoraven|xido]] (lacking respect for corporate global capitalism)<br />
# [[User:Othtim|othtim]] - I *like* ''finger of death''.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
::The option to destroy all D&D4e books in the world is not an option. I am upset about this --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 19:20, 30 November 2007 (MST))<br />
<br />
:::LOL! Of course we can't take that action, even if we want to! It is probably unlawful or something. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:12, 1 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::That option has been added ''';)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:09, 2 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::'''LETS GO N' BURN THINGS!!!''' [loads AK47] '''UPRISING AGAINST THE 4E MENACE!!!''' --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:28, 3 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::So... tempted... to burn.... withholding... vote til I can... stop talking... like... Shatner... -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 14:49, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== New Look ==<br />
<br />
I feel that it is high time that we had a new look for the [[Main Page]], for a number of reasons. One is to make it easier for the average user to understand how D&D Wiki is organized, another is so the [[Main Page]] looks nicer. Below is my proposed idea, which is still in the works. Also, I have a couple of questions about it. One, should we use DPL2C to determine the number of items in an area. For example around <DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items exist in [[Dungeons and Dragons]], should we display that below? Also, should we have bullets in front of the link to [[Dungeons and Dragons]], the [[System Reference Document]], etc? Does it look better or worse with them present? Finally, how is the wording of everything? What could be improved? (P.S. the below idea is not mine, it was stolen from [[User:Sledged|Sledged]]'s hard work making [[Dungeons and Dragons]] look nice&mdash;I do not want to take credit which I do not deserve) --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:23, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Yea, the above does look much nicer than the current Main Page, and I do agree it needs an update. As for showing how many things you have in each, that's not necessary but is interesting to see that we have 2900 Homebrew Items, if anything that might bring people in to see that this is a pretty big site and not just some random long forgotten website. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:33, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I have added the number of items to the new look. Any other ideas? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:28, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::This definitely clarified what information is contained in the sections. I would agree with implementing it. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:34, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Let's absolutely add this. The main page definitely needs more information. I like it! &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:48, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I think that if we have 3.5e and 4e on this site, we should have the main page sperating out 3.5e and 4e, and pages for 3.5e and 4e like the above. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:56, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yes, I agree. But that can be added once 4E comes out... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:30, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I'm going to implement this now because I think it is so much better (and I want it as soon as possible). Please, though, continue to post comments here about any revisions we could do to make it look better! &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:32, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::Yeah, I like it. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:38, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::I removed the "d20M" in that SRD link since it is already under the header of d20M. However, I agree, it looks very good and thanks for implementing it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:48, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="column"<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
; <big>Dungeons and Dragons</big><br />
* [[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
; <big>d20 Modern</big><br />
* [[D20 Modern|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=D20M<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[Modern System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=MSRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
|}<br />
<br />
====Main Page after 4e comes out====<br />
<br />
When 4e does come out, we could change it to this:<br />
<br />
; <big>Dungeons and Dragons</big><br />
* [[Dungeons and Dragons| 3.5e Homebrew Content]] | [[4e Homebrew| 4e Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[System Reference Document|The 3.5e System Reference Document]] | [[4e System Reference Doccument|The 4e System Reference Document]] | [[UA:Variant Rules|Unearthed Arcana]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD|Unearthed Arcana<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
<br />
; <big>d20 Modern</big><br />
* [[D20 Modern|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=D20M<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[Modern System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=MSRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
<br />
Any thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:23, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Or this...?<br />
:; <big>Dungeons and Dragons</big><br />
:; Revised 3rd Edition<br />
:* [[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew]] <div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
category=3.5e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:* [[System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]] | [[UA:Variant Rules|Unearthed Arcana]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD|Unearthed Arcana<br />
category=3.5e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:; 4th Edition<br />
:* [[4e Homebrew|Homebrew]] <div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
category=4e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:* [[System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD<br />
category=4e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
<br />
:; <big>d20 Modern</big><br />
:* [[D20 Modern|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=D20M<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:* [[Modern System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=MSRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:17, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Yeah, that is better than mine. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:52, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Is everyone okay with that look once 4e comes out? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:12, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I actually prefer Sam's layout although perhaps UA could have it's own line. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 07:36, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I think Green Dragon's looks better. Sorry Sam ''';-)''' --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 08:38, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I don't mind. As I said earlier, I prefer GDs. I've had a thought; I think we could, and probably should, put the link to the 4th edition homebrew (and possibly the SRD, though we can't put it up yet, for obvious reasons) on the main page, because, as people in ENworld have proved, we have enough preveiw material from the PHB Lite (derived from the pregenerated characters and rogue preview) to make some powers, the 1st level for classes, and odd things here-and-there. As ENworld is already doing odd bits of 4e homebrew based on previews, we might as well provide a place for it to go now, rather than later. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:37, 18 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Please see [[Talk:Main Page#4th Edition Link|below]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:17, 5 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Should we make CAPTCHA's present after an IP edits? ==<br />
<br />
Recently a high level of automated spam has been attacking D&D Wiki in the form of inserting nonsense and gibberish into random pages. An example would be [[DnD Flaws]] as of 04:08, 1 November 2007 (MDT) as edited by [[Special:Contributions/200.226.134.53|200.226.134.53]] (permanent link [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=DnD_Flaws&oldid=159600 here]). I think the easiest way to stop this problem would be to provide [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captcha CAPTCHA's] every time an IP makes an edit. The only reason I am asking this is because I am not sure if it would be more beneficial or more harmful to have CAPTCHA's. Do you guys think that IP's would still correct spelling errors if they had to enter a CAPTCHA or would they deem it to difficult? Would it, even if the amount of edits performed by IP's decreased, be worth it? Any ideas would be appreciated. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:41, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Well, if they were just doing it because they were bored then having to spell the correct word to finalize the edit might prevent some people because they are just waaay to lazy. It would also prevent if anyone wanted to create a bot to spam content. Although, it would be annoying for me to have to do that every time I wanted to say, update my User Page with another new item. If you could disable it for users and not IP's, I think that would be a good try to cut down on the spam. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:31, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::The CAPTCHA's would ''only'' be for IP edits, not for when a user edits something. Anyway, that would be terrible if a user had to enter a CAPTCHA to edit something (the reason they would not have to is because to create an account one has to enter a CAPTCHA...) Also, as you may have noticed, all the recent spam attackes have been automated, so hopefully if this is implemented it should help with the problem... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:44, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::So yea, try it and we'll see if the spam goes down. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:24, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::I agree with this completely. Should I go ahead and put them in, or should we wait for more users to comment? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:33, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Go for it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:41, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yeah. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:52, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Okay, it has been added. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 20:50, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::For some odd reason, i have had a captcha come up after all my edits today, despite the fact the captcha is only supposed to come up when an IP edits something (and I am logged in). Why is this, and can someone sort it please? Thanks. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:03, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::This should not be happening. I would recommend doing the following: log out, clear your browser cache, clear your browser history, clear all cookies relating to D&D Wiki, restart your browser, and then log back in and see if it is still giving you troubles. If it is, then I will definitely look into this problem further. I am sorry for the inconvenience that this is causing you, and will try to get it sorted out as soon as is possible. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 13:50, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::It has not worked. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 15:39, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Maybe you're an IP in disguise... ''':P'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:17, 4 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Err... no. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:55, 5 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Okay... Can I change your password (through the database) and login as you to asses the problem? I would like to see what is happening and hopefully give [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] enough information to fix this very strange problem. Would this be okay with you? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:41, 5 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:Yeah, sure. Can you change my password back afterwards though, please? Thanks. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:11, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Am I the only one getting the problem? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:23, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::No, I also experienced this today with my edits. Although, I'm behind a corporate firewall here, so I don't know if that has anything to do with it. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 09:25, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::No, I've gotten one after every edit I've made, even if it was just adding one letter. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:15, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Oops... I guess the setting was set so sysops were the only ones who did not have to give a CAPTCHA whereas everyone else did. The issue should now be fixed, and sorry about that... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:22, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::Much better. ''':D''' Now I can reformate the equipment section in peace. Which as an update I've finished nearly all the back to footers and have all but the magic weapons and over half the wondrous items updated to the MIC format. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 20:42, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Yeah, sorted. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:59, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Glad to hear it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:44, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Move towards new DPL ==<br />
<br />
Hello all, this site is running on a very outdated version of DPL, which has caused several hacks to have to be thrown together, and is potentially not allowing things to get done. When I upgraded this wiki to v11, I upgraded DPL as well, but most all pages that used DPL immediately stopped working. Is there an interest for me to get a test wiki running, and people can figure out how the DPL should be working, and then implement it? Or should we instead stick with what we have and wait until we really need the next version? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:07, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I honestly have no idea what the DPL is. So could someone tell me what it is and/or what it does? Then I could answer your questions. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:27, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::What are the new features of the new DPL version? For most purposes, the DPLs seem to be working well, but I know we've especially had to hack some DPL2 stuff. Would the new version fix this? [Watsyurname529, DPLs are dynamically assembled lists generally based off of category tags, e.g. [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_Base_Classes&action=edit this code] yields [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/User_Base_Classes this page].] &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 18:21, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I feel that we should implement the new dpl version. The DPL2 (at least according to [[User:Sledged|Sledged]]) would make it so we would not need three main different modifications of the dpl to be running on this site, the dpl, dplc, and the dpl2c (full list [[Special:Version|here]]). I think it would help D&D Wiki greatly to implement the newest version of the dpl, and make things easier for a new user to understand. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:48, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::There's a demo site for DPL with a manual [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page here].<br />
::::Is there a way to get a list of all the pages using dpl*? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 16:29, 8 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::[[MediaWiki:Pages using DPL]] is what True Orphans uses. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 18:17, 8 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::It's only listing the pages in the main/default namespace. What about the SRD pages? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 14:58, 13 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::The extension that page is for specifically excludes all SRD dpl pages, so those have never been added to that dpl list. We will have to compile a list on our own for SRD pages. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:54, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I see. Also, when I said "pages using <tt>dpl*</tt>," I meant also the <tt>dpl2c</tt>, <tt>dplc</tt>, and <tt>dpl2cu</tt> tags. I don't see any of the pages using those tags listed. If those pages can be identified before hand, it'll make an upgrade a bit easier. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:48, 15 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::To answer [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]]'s first question. This wiki is running version 0.7.7 of DPL2. The latest version is 1.5.2, so there is a significant number of changes. For brevity, I'll just list a few of the new features that apply to this wiki:<br />
:::*You can specify your own format for the output. For example you could list each result as a row in a table instead of getting the standard three column output.<br />
:::*In conjunction with the previous feature, DPL2 pull content from the listed pages for displaying as part of the output.<br />
:::*You can get results based on pages names and page content in addition to categories and namespaces. For instance, all the [[DnD Prestige Classes|user PrCs]] are assigned to the category beginning with the first letter of the page title. Those categories can be completely removed because DPL2 lets you return pages whose title's first letter matches one specified in the DPL2 call.<br />
:::*DPL2 can used to compensate for user error. Broken links like the one titled "Anima and Animus Mage" on the [[DnD Prestige Classes|user PrCs page]] can be eliminated.<br />
:::*With the latest version of DPL2 (an one other specific extension) users can create spell/feat/monster/etc filters like the one seen [http://www.penpaperpixel.org/tools/d20spellfilter/ here].<br />
:::*It can be used as a parser function (which I personally prefer over tags).<br />
:::*Pages that are linked to only from DPL calls are not listed as [[Special:Lonelypages|orphaned pages]].<br />
:::—[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 14:58, 13 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Okay, lets do it. What are the changes that need to be made to dpl pages to make this not be broken when implemented? What is the best way of going about this change? Should we change the pages first, then implement it, or implement it then fix all the errors on the dpl pages? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:54, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::There's one more complication to take into consideration; All the pages with the <tt>dpl*</tt> mod tags (<tt>dpl2c</tt>, <tt>dplc</tt>, and <tt>dpl2cu</tt>) have to be changed, not just list pages. So we'll have to go through all the class pages (base, prestige, npc, and racial paragon) and NPC pages. I think Blue's suggestion of a test wiki is the best way to do it. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:48, 15 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::It might not be necessary to set up a test wiki. I [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Issue:No_More_Globals submitted a request] over at the [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page DPL2 site] to transition all the globals to class members. If Gero decides to adopt it, the latest version and the currently installed version can be installed side-by-side without one conflicting with the other. The only caveat is that the line that reads<br />
<br />
::::::<pre>$wgParser->setHook( "DPL", array( __CLASS__, "dplTag" ) );</pre><br />
<br />
::::::in the new version will have to be commented out. This will disable using new version as a tag extension, but it will still be available as a parser function call; <tt>{<nowiki/>{#dpl:}}</tt>. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:23, 21 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::And [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page DPL2] version 1.6.0 (no more globals) has been released. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 09:42, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Okay, I upgraded to the latest version. Let me know if there are any errors. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 12:18, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== A Small Sample ===<br />
<br />
So here's a sample list of the user base classes, which I've limited to the 'A's:<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" style="text-align: left;"<br />
|+ Homebrew Base Classes with Descriptions<br />
|- {{#vardefine:odd|0}}<br />
! Name !! style="text-align: center;" | Balance<sup>[[#1|1]]</sup> (out of 10) !! Type<sup>[[#2|2]]</sup> !! Description<sup>[[#3|3]]</sup><br />
{{#dpl:category=DnD<br />
|titlematch=A%<br />
|category=User<br />
|category=Base Class<br />
|include={Balance}:1,{x0}:type:desc<br />
|mode=userformat<br />
|format=,¦- ²{#vardefine:odd¦²{#ifexpr: ²{#var:odd}²¦0¦1}²}²²{#ifexpr: ²{#var:odd}²¦¦class="even"}²\n¦ [[%PAGE%¦²{#replace:%PAGE%¦(DnD Class)¦}²]]\n,,<br />
|tablerow=¦style="text-align: center;" ¦ ²{#if: %%¦%%¦NR}²,\n¦%%,%%\n<br />
}}|-<br />
| colspan="7" class="foot" |<br />
# <span id="1">Shows how balanced a certain Class is, the number is out of 10. The Balance rating is from the actual Class's page; it is not made on this page. More information [[Balance System|here]].</span><br />
# <span id="2">A general category the Class fits into. e.g. Strong Spellcasting, Combat Focused, etc.</span><br />
# <span id="3"> A concise description of the Class-- should advertise the Class.</span><br />
|}<br />
—[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 13:59, 27 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I like it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:27, 29 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:: The Alchemist... I don't know if i would consider it a spell caster --[[User:Cerin616|Cerin616, Drew]] 15:58, 11 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Better now? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:20, 11 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== 4,000th Item! ==<br />
<br />
Whoo! I just posted the 4,000th homebrew item on this site! Amazing how much stuff we've got on here. Just want to say congrats to everyone who's posted/edited here. Also here is the 4,000th item: [[Fried Frying Pan (DnD Equipment)|Fried Frying Pan]] --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:29, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:If that number is correct.... ''':P'''. I think we may actually have more, they are just not categorized (that number is actually the number of items in [[:Category:DnD]]). Although, I agree. Congratulations all! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:51, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Hey, it says 4000 Items on the main page and that's good enough for me ''':P''' to you too, lol. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 20:56, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Meh... ''':)'''. Also, if you want to make that number more accurate please take a look at the [[Special:TrueOrphans|TrueOrphans]] (which may not be true&mdash;I think [[MediaWiki:Pages_using_DPL]] needs to be updated...). However, feel free to categorize those things and, overall, make things on D&D Wiki be linked to! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:14, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
==Sidebar Change==<br />
Dungeons and Dragons or Homebrew?<br />
<br />
The side bar has an option called "Dungeons and Dragons" that takes you to the Homebrew section. This seems to me to be misleading and should be changed to "Homebrew." This is not that big of a deal, but it would be more consistant. --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 15:09, 18 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Actually, there's more than just homebrew material there (though the vast majority of it is homebrew). It also contains OGC from source books like ''Unearthed Arcana'', ''Relics and Rituals'', ''Creature Collection'', ''Monster Manual II'', and such. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:38, 21 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Currently on the [[Main Page]] we call that entire section "Homebrew Content" even though it has more than just that (as [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] pointed out above). If we want to be nitpicky, that is also a problem. Anyway, the reason it is called "Dungeons and Dragons" on the sidebar is that the sidebar cannot have any real wiki-syntax. The ideal organization for that would be something like:<br />
::D&D<br />
:::[[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew]] (even though it's not all homebrew...)<br />
:::[[System Reference Document|SRD]]<br />
::D20M<br />
:::[[D20 Modern|Homebrew]] (even though it's not all homebrew...)<br />
:::[[Modern System Reference Document|MSRD]]<br />
::However, that is not possible. Since that is not possible we try to do the best we can, and that is the current way. Actually, this post has given me an idea... Maybe another box, labeled "D&D" and one labeled "D20M" could exist, with the links in them... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:43, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I just changed it. What does everyone think? Better? Worse? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:45, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I dont mean to be picky. I also dont mean to make extra work for ya all. I just through out ideas when I have them. I like the change, but I also like the reasons given above for why it was the way it was. That is why I like wiki format. I hardly ever make changes, but I do add my ideas to disscution.--[[User:Mander|Mander]] 22:44, 29 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I hesitate to bring it up, but I think it might be worth mentioning; The D&D section could be split up into "homebrew" and "published OGC" sections. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:07, 30 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::First off you were not a bother at all, [[User:Mander|Mander]]. The sidebar is very easy to change and it's always great to improve things. Anyway, I feel that as soon as we have enough published OGC material (we are reaching it though, if one counts NBoF as "published") then we should definitely spit "DnD" up into published OGC and Homebrew. However, right now I do not think we have enough... Maybe when all the UA material is posted we can give it a shot, but until then I do not think we have enough OGC content. Your thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:48, 4 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::: So many acronyms, so few ranks in knowlege-acronyms...--[[User:Mander|Mander]] 01:30, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Age of the internet. Soon everything we be reduced to acronyms, IMHO. [[Help:FAQ#What are OGL, OGC, SRD, and GNU FPL?|OGC]], [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/welcome DnD], [http://datadeco.com/nbofeats/ NBoF], and [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/881560000 UA] (which I really should finish transcribing). —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 02:31, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Actually, speaking of acronyms, it would be helpful to have a list of all the D&D acronyms in [[DnD Other]] (I am sure a list exists on the internet, it just needs to be copied over). Also, sorry about using all those acronyms above. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:31, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
New question: Shouldn't the [[UA:Variant Rules|UA Transcript]] be linked in the sidebar? -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 17:02, 16 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:It should. What should we call it, Unearthed Arcana, UA, Variant SRD, or what? Ideas? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:48, 16 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Maybe UA: Variants? -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 08:34, 17 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::: Or "UA Variant Rules." Either one works for me. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:00, 17 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I have added it. Does it look okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:45, 18 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Looks great! -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 17:01, 21 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Maps? ==<br />
<br />
:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:Dungeons and Dragons#New Section: Maps?]]<small> It dealt with Homebrew specific material, not everything on the site --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:52, 4 December 2007 (MST)</small><br />
<br />
== Tavern Schedule ==<br />
<br />
Should a small Tavern Schedule be placed on the main page on the right side (floating)? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:40, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I think this is a good idea to increase use of the tavern, but it would be best if days that already had events planned were highlighted, a different text color, the only days with links, etc. They need to stand out; otherwise, I have to click each day to even see if there is anything that day. It almost seems to me that a mini-program/extension is needed to code that to make it more useful... still, the calendar is a great idea. That is the best suggestion I have heard to increase usage of the tavern. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:35, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::The days that have events are blue. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:43, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Much better. I like it. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 20:24, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== New Logo ==<br />
<br />
{| align="right" class="d20"<br />
|-<br />
! Submitted Logos:<br />
|-<br />
| ''Please submit your own logo!''<br/>[[dndmedia:Special:Upload|Upload it!]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:D&D logo-test1.png|frame|From Maria C.]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:D&D logo-test2.png|frame|From [[User:Xidoraven|Xidoraven]]]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:D&D logo-test3.png|frame|Variation 1]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:D&D logo-test4.png|frame|Variation 2]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:Logo.png|frame|Current logo]]<br />
|}<br />
<br />
=== Official Updates ===<br />
<br />
Here is what will happen. A two week submission period will start now, after this time when more logos or variations have been submitted, a one week voting period will take place. So, right now, please upload all the variations of these logos or your own D&D Wiki logo and in two weeks time the D&D Wiki community will decide what the logo will become. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:57, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:The voting for which logo should become D&D Wiki's logo will start February 9th. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:13, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== Voting ===<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" style="text-align: left;"<br />
|+ New Logo &mdash; Voting (Please use "#" and extra lines to separate votes)<br />
! [[Image:D&D logo-test1.png]]<br />
! [[Image:D&D logo-test2.png]]<br />
! [[Image:D&D logo-test3.png]]<br />
! [[Image:D&D logo-test4.png]]<br />
! [[Image:Logo.png]]<br />
|-<br />
! From Maria C.<br />
! From [[User:Xidoraven|Xidoraven]]<br />
! Variation 1<br />
! Variation 2<br />
! Current logo<br />
|-<br />
| <br />
#<br />
| <br />
# [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]]<br />
# [[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]]<br />
# [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]]<br />
# [[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]]<br />
# [[User:Young DM|Young DM]]<br />
# [[User:Arohanui|Arohanui]]<br />
# [[User:Othtim|Othtim]]<br />
# [[User:Mask man|Mask man]]<br />
# [[User:kreik|kreik]]<br />
# [[User:EaTCarbS|EaTCarbS]]<br />
# [[User:Lordsnarf|Lordsnarf]]<br />
| <br />
#[[User:Silver Dragon|Silver Dragon]]<br />
| <br />
#[[User:Hawk|Hawk]]<br />
#[[User:Pirate-Sorcerer|Pirate-Sorcerer]]<br />
#[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]]<br />
#[[Summerscythe]]<br />
#[[User:Wackymynd|Wackymynd]]<br />
#[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]]<br />
#[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]]<br />
| <br />
#<br />
|}<br />
<br />
Everyone agree that we have reached a consensus? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:16, 24 February 2008 (MST)<br />
:Looks like we have to me 11/1/6 Xidoraven has a pretty big lead. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 23:40, 24 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I believe that the vote looks pretty definitive. Please let me know if anyone ever gives you problems from Wizards.com or Hasbro, Inc. I am currently working with them in a professional capacity, so I will be able to speak for my work myself, and in direct communications to them. If they want my business, they will not harass this site for being loyal consumers and fans of a popular product line. Best of wishes to you all.<br />
::GD, if you have any more input on what we talked about before, please let me know by email. I am having a hard time getting back here to check on my pages right now. -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 08:03, 25 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Changed. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:24, 26 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Looks good, everyone. Thanks for the support, and let me know if you need any other design ideas, since you may feel the need in the future to reconsider color usage, etc. Are there any ideas for what would be placed in the background area, if not the current Player's Handbook image? -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 00:39, 11 March 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
=== General Discussion on Submitted Logos ===<br />
<br />
We have had two submissions for a new logo. One of them is from [[User:Xidoraven|Xidoraven]], and the other is from Maria C. Both of them are shown below, and we should decide to either keep the current logo or change to one of these. Please leave feedback. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:04, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I like the second one. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 15:05, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I vote for Xidoraven's. I like colorful. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 15:06, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I wonder what the first would look like with a bit more color. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 15:10, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I really like the dragon on the first logo, however I feel that the wording on that logo may be a little hard to read. So, I think it may look very nice if both the trial logos were merged into one. The "D&D Wiki" would be cut out of the first logo and the "D&D Wiki" text from xido's image would be pasted over it, albeit a little smaller. Does anyone think this idea has some merit? Is it worth exploring further? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:35, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Variation 2 is great! I give that my vote. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 16:23, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
:::::On second thought... I like Variation 1. Arrrg... It is difficult because the logo seems too big with the dragon, yet too small at the same time. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 16:24, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I like variation 2, except the logo should be moved a bit down and right so that the entire graphic is a bit more square (lest the words encroach on the dragon picture)... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 06:06, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Variation 2 OR Xidoravens. Either way, it's really cool! A new logo for a new edition... --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:46, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Variation 2 has me as well. Also, if anyone wants to compile their own variation or make their own logo please do! We need all the options we can get! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:56, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::My wife votes Xidoravens ''':P'''. I'm actually really not sure. I like Variation 1, 2, and Xidoravens... Perhaps we should set up an official vote? --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 18:01, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Is there going to be an "official vote" (whatever that may mean)? Variation 2 is my preferences, and I agree that it would likely look even better with the dragon picked out in red and gold. Also, whichever one is chosen, is it kosher for me to slap the logo up places (such as my blog) linking back to the wiki, as a means of promotion? --[[User:Arohanui|Arohanui]] 01:03, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::I've gotta agree, but with xido's colors, I wouldn't mind seeing the dragon colored as a [[SRD:Half-Dragon|half-gold dragon]] [[SRD:Red Dragon|red dragon]]. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 21:39, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::First off I agree, if the dragon was given some color this entire logo could come out very sharp. Secondly, xido, tell me if I am wrong. You are basically saying that you would be okay to work with the dragon image if Maria C. has the same intentions you have of modifying D&D iconic images for a good cause. Since I cannot speak for Maria C. I will contact her and ask her to join this discussion to help discuss her logo and the final outcome of D&D Wiki's logo. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:19, 25 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::I agree with Blue Dragon. As for my vote for the logos, I like the two combinations, particularly the second one. -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 09:37, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:I also have to say, I really like the dragon in the middle of Xido's logo. I think that using his for the top logo, and then Maria's for a softer logo, potentially on the main page, could be used. However, I feel that a voting period should exist. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:30, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Definitely Version two and It shouldn't be changed a bit the black and white dragon behind the blazing dnd wiki looks awesome but as a second choice id go for Xidoraven's logo by itself<br />
<br />
:::I like Xidoraven's original logo. [[User:Kimmuriel|Kimmuriel]] 18:39, 14 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::: Xidoraven for prez! --[[User:Othtim|Othtim]]<br />
<br />
:::::I would make a terrible president. I would prefer project coordinator, or community shaman, but not something as pop-culture as presidente. ;) -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 07:18, 16 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
Okay, how do i put my name on variation 2, that my fav :D - [[User:Zombiecow|Zombiecow]]<br />
<br />
=== Authors Comments and Discussion ===<br />
<br />
Font size is highly important in a logo concept, especially when they are sized down this much. I designed the font spacing and proportions with that in mind. Also, though I enjoy the integration of the two (trust me, my inner artist is inspired - not jealous), it seems a little busy, and the dragons look dim compared to the heavy vibrancy I put into the original 4e-based concept. I know it sounds haughty and rude, but I choose my own. If Miss Maria would be willing to revise her concept, I think they would more accurately meld. Her design would need the words removed fully, and would require a splash of color (like a layer over it, that appears like watercolor, or an expressive way of 'filling in the lines'). The logo I created has heavier contrast even than that of the original 4e logo design. I had not anticipated it being integrated with another black-and-white (or blank) portion. Had I known, I might have prepared an alternative. -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 21:30, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:As a second thought: Here's my other dilemma.<br />
:I do not know Miss Maria, but I know that her artwork is based on Lockwood's, and that is a blatant copyright infringement of one of the most controversial materials produced by Wizards: Commissioned Artwork. ([http://wizards.com/dnd/images/MM35_gallery/MM35_PG76.jpg])<br />
:I am well aware of the fact I pulled a concept from 4e D&D corporate design, knowing full well that it might bring a lawsuit upon me. I am also communicating with the makers of Scrabulous (Scrabulous.com) currently, because I feel that what is happening right now with their product is an issue in international business ethics. I openly state that my work is a mere pseudo-forgery of Wizards own internally-produced corporate graphics, but I appreciate and respect Mr. Lockwood for being such a professional artist in his field, and cannot openly condone utilizing his work in our own endeavors. If the piece was just a tad different from the Red Dragon's stance or appearance, I could see over-looking it, but this is something that is necessary for an artist to understand up-front. I openly admit to pirating the official 4e logo design from Wizards for a good cause, but I would hope that Miss Maria would be able to do the same in her position.<br />
:That being said, the general concensus on what constitutes 'unique artwork' is at least 15% difference from the original piece. Though she has flipped the image on its vertical axis, and turned detailed painting into rough black outlines, I would think it would need just a ''tad'' more work done to it to be considered anything other than outright plagiarism. If Miss Maria is aware of my own intentions, and has the same goals of her own, then I can look the other way. I would prefer to go down alone if I am to go down as an artist. At least this way, no one can say that you paid me for my services, but that I instead gave them openly as a professional operating in the open-source markets under the GNU license.<br />
:That's my last piece. -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 22:09, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Hello, this is Maria. First of all, I am not Miss Maria as you have taken a fancy of calling me. Second, I created this wood engraving without the knowledge of what's copyrighted and what is not. Green Dragon is family friend and has been nagging me for months to create a logo understanding that I am a graphic design artist. He handed me d&d books and asked me to make a logo. So I choose something cool, changed it, carved it, printed it, modified it on the computer. Green Dragon did not give any advice for this, only that it needed to be done. I wasn't told of anything so I am sorry for the copyright infringement. I also created this logo not for a profit such, but for this 'community' which may be considered a good cause since I get not one thing out of it. And xudo, you need to work on being respectful. You seem jealous that someone else has submitted artwork and that you aren't the only one with fame. 'Artists' are so competitive and always trying to be the best with their noses in the air. -Maria {{Unsigned|Xuthukzaklath|15:16, 25 January 2008 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
:::As a friendly site note to all, I vote that the attacks should stop. This should be a logo design competition in which '''the best''' logo is chosen. There is no need to either of the creators to bicker. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 09:35, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I highly agree, BD.<br />
::::I just wanted to make my comments publicly known. I have absolutely no problem with the mods of this site asking multiple artists for their ideas. I am glad that you have put forward as well. That is how professional art works. Everyone puts forward what they have to give, and then the leaders decide which works best for what they'd like to portray the project. In this case, there were two options, plus the idea of combining. I have not a single problem with any of those ideas, and in fact wish for the mods to make their own decision. As an artist, I may seem biased. In fact, my words (including the word 'blatant') may have had a negative ring or tone to them, but I assure you that my mental inflection did not.<br />
::::I only want to make everyone aware that I have taken multiple considerations into effect in stealing elements of Hasbro's corporate logo in order to promote this open-source site's mission of helping the public. I have a SERIOUS issue with Hasbro & Mattel's current intellectual property campaign at the moment, as well as their business ethics toward third-party producers of copyrighted content. This is because of the legal drama happening with Scrabulous.com. It is for this reason that I am openly providing my professional services to the mods of this site, in order to help them, just as you, Maria, have done. I respect your position and comments. Please just know that I wanted my input to be put out there, in case you were not aware of the legal implications of that particularly recognizable image (the red dragon literally is '''''the most''''' reproduced dragon in D&D as of this year, in terms of rulebook, supplemental, and related material to the D&D brand line. To utilize this image would be a very risky and potentially harmful venture. That is my only point here. If you are okay with that risk, I am okay with it. But please note that the reasons for THAT piracy is not in any way the same as the professional stance I am making by utilizing corporate branding material from Hasbro, as opposed to the very highly recognizable works of Mr. Lockwood, whom I revere admirably as an artist.<br />
::::On a sidenote, I assumed that being a Maria, that you are a female. I could be wrong here. In the state of Louisiana, where I have recently moved to, it is customary for men in particular to respectfully call a woman of any form (whether married, divorced, single, or otherwise) 'Miss Whoever'. I was merely trying to be courteous. I hope I have not offended. That was not my intent.<br />
::::Thanks for understanding, all, and I hope that the Mods can make an adequate decision on the logo design. I would not like to seem biased, so I will leave it all up to you, having said my piece. Best wishes, -- [[User:70.172.234.38|70.172.234.38]] 19:59, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::PS - I don't want to seem pushy, but I have always had a hard time voting on this site. Perhaps making a username profile on Elftown.com, and seeing the way their own polls are set up might give you ideas for future changes. Privacy features, public features, wiki-features, and a pseudo-html are all able to be used there. I have had some really good success with hosting polls on Elftown to get input or for contests of any multiple-choice form. -- [[User:70.172.234.38|70.172.234.38]] 19:59, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== Legality of Images ===<br />
<br />
As to the copyright issues, I believe that the background of our skin is a WoTC copyrighted image. I feel that if we receive a cease and desist letter they will be removed, but beyond that, I feel that it should not be a major issue. Also, I have another interesting idea. I think that Xidoraven's is powerful, and in that sense alone looks quite nice. Would there be any major consideration to have the background of the main page be this dragon, or something similar? A watermark, so to speak? The second combination could also potentially be modified by Xidoraven, seeing that he would know what to do for D&D Wiki's purposes. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 09:40, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Actually, both the skin and the logos would be covered under the free use clause of international copyright law, as it is neither being used to make money nor infringes the copyright holder's ability to sell goods. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:53, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Sam, I just want to say a quick word about free use (I know you like it, so I won't be too harsh). Essentially, the clause is the "wiggle room" in an otherwise extremely strict copyright law and allows for things like academic criticism, etc. However, exactly what constitues "fair use" and what constitutes "unfair use" is loosely defined in the law, and it is important that you know that the United States judicial system has historically ruled very strictly against those parties who (in their eyes) abuse the clause. So, we should tread a bit softly. However, as was said above, if we (Green Dragon, actually) is issued a cease and desist order from any company (such as those owning HALO and LotR, for example, or especially from Hasbro) then we will have to delete the content. Basically, I just want it to be noted that fair use is limited, especially within the widely respected bounds of legal precedent, so don't be too sure that certain images, etc. can be freely used under "fair use." Further, the likelyhood of abuse increases as more information is added. Thus, if I were to quote a line from the PHB as evidence in an argument, that would certainly pass litmus. The more direct and derivative information that is added, though, the more likely it is that infringement will ensue. (Please also note that all material and information derived from a copyrighted source is also [partially] owned by that source, which includes information and rules we might create for use in, for example, the HALO setting). A final note: Wizards of the Coast is renowned for its aggressive pursual in copyright infringement cases after inherited issues involving TSR, Palladium, and certain other companies, a historical precedent that everyone here should be aware of. In any case, please keep in mind that so long as there are no legal actions served we should be okay (this site is not for profit thus far, though if we begin to earn revenue from advertising this will importantly change), but&mdash;if the issue comes to a head&mdash; we will most definitely be on the losing side and will have to remove content or face court action. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 09:22, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I was aware of that. I had to do quite abit of research into it when I did LotR. I do think, however, that as there are Wikias for both LotR and Halo, neither of which have yet been sued, the CSs in question should be fine. Although the dragon thing is a definatly something we should think over carefully. Although, as we are only considering a logo, the risk is small (I think). So, yes, those things are fine for now and we can remove them if we get into trouble. The biggest problem with free use is definatly it's vagueness. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:05, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Protection of Pages ==<br />
<br />
You know this isnt much of a wiki since everything is editblocked.if someone vandalizes a page u REVERT it [[User:Zau|Zau]] 03:12, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:? Of course we revert it! Why should we let our work be spoiled by vandal? All wiki's revert vandallism. The point of a wiki is to work together to improve the whole thing, rather than to reck the whole thing by vandalism. And about those editblocked pages- those are mostly SRD, which is official material that we aren't allowed to whimsically edit. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:49, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I have unlocked this page to IP edits, we will see what happens. Also, the SRD's protection is up in the air right now, if all goes well with the new UA material on D&D Wiki (which, even though it is OGC, is only protected from IP edits) then the SRD may very well become protected only from IP edits as well. If you are referring to specific GNU FLD homebrew pages that are protected, they are only protected because the author of the page is question has asked them to be protected. They will never become un-protected unless the author wishes this to happen. I hope this helps answer your question as to why so many pages on D&D Wiki are protected. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:03, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Index of True Dragons ==<br />
<br />
:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:True Dragon Index#Location?]]<small> as it dealt with that page. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 09:25, 8 February 2008 (MST)</small><br />
<br />
== Published Settings ==<br />
<br />
Hi I was wondering does anyone know whether it would be legal to publish information about old dnd settings on here or homebrew stuff for those settings ie: planescape or spelljammer? also would it be legal to do the same for the still in print settings like forgotten realms and eberron? and would anyone else be interested in stuff like this? [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 22:42, 7 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:New settings = no. Not allowed, as they aren't under the OGL (I think...). Old ones I'm not sure about. -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 22:28, 8 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Probably not. The old stuff isn't under the OGL. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:03, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::If it is licensed under the [[OGL]] please add them, however I do not think any of them are... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:43, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I'm pretty sure It is technically not allowed unless we want to make fun of them in which case it falls under fair use in the copyright acts of the world lol. Does anyone know how we could find out for sure? [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 06:42, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::They cannot be added. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:08, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Semantic MediaWiki ==<br />
<br />
I do not pretend to understand this nor what it would take to implement but would it be possible to use something like [http://ontoworld.org/wiki/Semantic_MediaWiki] to create forms to make adding entries for new users easier. there are a number of entries that need to be formatted if a form formatted the entries for them this problem may be fixed. Although it would only help at page creation its a start. Any thoughts?<br />
<br />
I should point out the form wouldn't replace editing the code directly just allow another option for those who have no idea how to format. Which means those who like to stare down the face of a page of code (myself included) could still do so. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 02:25, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I've briefly grazed over that extension, and I've yet to take it for a test run, but I think you're right that there may be some useful nuggets along with the semantic forms extension (which requires semantic wiki). I'd been meaning to ask [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] or [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] to take it for a spin in development environments and give input on it. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:36, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I think it would be useful only problem is that it needs to be added to dnd wiki then someone has to make the forms, it's a fair amount of work. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 21:29, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_MediaWiki About]. Not sure if this is really what we are looking for... It, as far as I can tell, would just help with dynamic categories and act a little like the dpl2c feature we currently use. I think an external script for adding things (as [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] is working on) may be a better option. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:10, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::My apologies I was unclear on what I meant I'm lucky Sledged knew what I meant. Its not the semantic wiki itself that I am interested in but the [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Semantic_Forms Semantic forms extension]. As far as I understand it it allows you to 'simply' create a form to fill out and will take care of the wiki coding for you. If you scroll down to the Special Pages heading and look at the examples it will give you a better idea of what this is. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 23:24, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree with you, that is a very interesting extension, and I could see it being very useful here on D&D Wiki. The only problem I see is that, although impressive, it requires a Semantic Wiki as a prerequisite. I am not sure I would want D&D Wiki to become a Semantic Wiki, although the decision is not mine it is the communities. Maybe someone could change the code so a Semantic Wiki is not needed and it can work within the normal MediaWiki environment? That would make it quite a bit more appealing ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:59, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I have not read all the material and probably wouldn't understand most of it anyway I believe it would be beyond my ken, my knowledge of wikis and php is limited. What would be involved in implementing this do you think? What would 'becoming a semantic wiki' do? You seem to have reservations I'm just wondering if there are draw backs you foresee? [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 06:25, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::I gave a look at Semantic Wiki and I think it is a great idea. In my experience as a technical writer, duplication of information is one of the Prime Evils. Namely, here was the criteria that led me to really want to add dpl to races and now feats:<br />
:::::::*All information about a particular topic should be in the same location.<br />
:::::::*Updating information should update other pages that use that information.<br />
:::::::Where I work, we use a form of documentation source files called DocBook. DocBook is much like this wiki where information must be repeated because there is no inclusion mechanism. There is another form of documentation source, which we are considering switching to after the next release of our software. This format is called Dita. Dita allows you to segment information into sections which can be included directly by other pages. This concept is partially similar to Semantic Wiki, but I would argue, less powerful. Semantic Wiki allows you to tag information as a particular type of information. It might be a little more work to create a page, but all of the sudden we have so much more power to categorize our information.<br />
:::::::On a race page, for example, we can have a "quick synopsis" type of data which users would use for a sentence that describes the race. The page could also have an "ability score adjustment" type of data and a "level adjustment" type of data. All of the x0 templates I put on the top of race pages would be unnecessary at this point. The advantage being: if a user updates the source of the race (ie: changes the Ability score adjustments from +2 str to +2 con), it will automatically change the race table without requiring the x0 template at the top of the page to be changed. This means that the information displayed in the tables will always be true to the source.<br />
:::::::The big problem with Semantic Wiki is that it would be a LOT of work from the startup. Probably a few months of work if we want to fully integrate it. So no matter how great I think the idea is, it is probably not a feasible or worthwhile one to integrate.<br />
:::::::Now [[User:Hawk|Hawk]], you seem to be interested in the same thing that I am (and in fact something I have been working on). You want some sort of form based generator that will automatically format the pages after you supply some information. I have almost finished an NPC Generator, which should be promising. I just need to add in spellcasting, epic spellcasting, and special abilities. Forms can always be done directly in php and linked to. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 07:14, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::This forms extension allows you to not only create a page but edit it using the forms as far as I can tell. I do not know if your PHP pages can do that but if they do it creates a slight issue on the off chance that someone is editing the page on the wiki and on the form the wiki edit would be wiped over when you save the form as it is working directly with the database (I assume). Where as using this forms extension your still working within the wiki and it will prompt you like normal that there is a conflict (yet again I assume) and the situation can be remedied. I do not know exactly what semantic wiki does but the benefits of the forms extension as I understand them are:<br />
::::::::* Creation and editing of pages through forms<br />
::::::::* Users can create their own forms 'easily'<br />
::::::::* Those new to wiki's can use these forms and the page will be automatically wikified which means very little formating will be required afterwards.<br />
::::::::* The fact your filling in a form rather than code means that it's less daunting for the new user and they are more likly to contribute.<br />
::::::::* Organization of Dnd Wiki can easily be improved as categories can be added automatically to entries by use of the forms.<br />
::::::::[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 08:01, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::What I have been working is only for initial creation, though at some point I would like to have an "import feature". If we had it all form based, however, people would not learn wiki syntax, which is a powerful syntax in its own right. Is that a bad thing? I'm really not sure. Templates can also automatically add categories though.<br />
:::::::::I still don't understand exactly how a wiki works on the back end, and I am actually going to toy with Media Wiki and Semantic Wiki (with the forms extension) tonight. I will see if I can integrate an application with the wiki directly, while still preserving the wiki ways (as an edit not an overwrite). I will also see how easy it is to create a semantic wiki form. Not that my input is even close to the be-all and end-all of this discussion, but I would like to share what I learn with the community. I hope that Semantic Wiki is very easy to use and the forms feature is as well. Good call making note of it! --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 10:28, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Personally I love coding I'm a nerd I admit it lol, but what it keeps coming down to for me is not everyone does and allowing those people to add and edit their creations on here would be awesome. And the forms extension seems to be the quickest, easiest and most effective way of doing that. Let me know how you go with the testing it will be interesting to see if it performs as well as I am hoping. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 10:36, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Did you end up trying this out Aarnott? [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 21:09, 21 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Short answer: yes. Long answer: I think I messed up on the install because I'm getting some strange errors thrown during runtime (like when I access the localhost server). I'm going to uninstall everything today and retry it (no work or school today -- yay!). Third time is a charm ''':)'''. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 08:37, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::So it ended up being an easy thing to install and I was just being dumb ''':P'''. I have got a few form examples working and I think it is a really sweet extension, but there is a major problem that really limits the Semantic Form usage. The form must be used to fill a template (at least from my knowledge using their built-in form generator). This poses a problem if we wanted to have users fill in a race page for example. They could only fill out the author template and x0 template (or Race template if we replace that), but the point stands that there are limitations. Semantic Wiki on its own though looks like a really great extension and the forms extension would be good to use at least for some pages. All the work I have done with races, for example, can be made a lot better by tagging particular parts of an article. If we can get the form extension working in the ideal way, then new users will never create a poorly formatted page. I say go for the installs. They definitely don't hurt and in fact I will start a project to tag all the races so we can get rid of templates to store information. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 11:30, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:Okay, we can give it a go. I will have [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] install it when he answers me back. Also, I am a little confused as to what you are saying above. Can we or can we not get rid of the [[Template:x0]] on the races' pages with this extension? I thought this made it so one can "tag" certain parts of an article and have those "tags" show up on a different page as well (like a split [[Template:x0]] (just like [[DnD Deities|Deities]] is currently organized)). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:38, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::We can get rid of any templates we use that duplicate information already in the article (such as x0). What happens is we create properties which are used to identify information. So in the case of a Race, we would have a property called "Ability Score Adjustments" or something like that and tag the section directly in the article that refers to the ability score adjustments. Instead of using dpl to grab template information, we use semantic wiki to grab the "Ability Score Adjustment" directly from the page. The main advantage in my opinion is that when you update a page, you only have to change information once and then the tables update. It will be some work though (thus why it would become a project for me), but Semantic Wiki does not change existing wiki functionality, which is a very good thing. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 11:45, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I installed WAMP (appache server + php + mysql latest stable versions) on my vista ultimate machine last night and then installed media wiki semantic and the forms extension I had no trouble it installed perfectly (apart from me stupidly trying to instal semantic forms with a mysql user that didn't have permission to create tables). I have been fiddling around a little havnt had much time though. Here's what i've figured out:<br />
:::# You create properties like string, page or date first<br />
:::# Then create templates (using the template making tool that comes with the forms) I made a author template and a very quick deity template.<br />
:::# then you make a form. You pick Author click add. then you click deity and click add (you can create forms which use more than one template!)<br />
:::# name the form then save<br />
:::# when you go to the form it will ask for a page name type one in like "MyDeity (DnD Deity)" hit enter<br />
:::# you are then taken to the form you fill it out it makes the page as per the templates it works as described !!! :O<br />
:::# you can even edit the page again using the form !!!<br />
::: [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 19:11, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
::::There is one thing though semantic wiki adds a box at the bottom of the page "Facts about..." if it can be removed i'd be happier. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 19:16, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
:::::I just realized it would be relatively easy to turn our current preloads into templates add a few bits of code you have a compatible template to make a form for and if you edit the template EVERY SINGLE CREATURE, DEITY OR CLASS (that uses that template) IS EDITED AS WELL!!! meaning we decide we want the classes to look like (insert format here) we can instantly change them all at once!!! [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 19:36, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::The problem lies in the fact that we will have to change every single homebrew page. I'm up for the challenge (as long as it takes), but help will be nice if you are willing ''':)'''. It does seem pretty nifty though. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 20:20, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::I do not want this extension if the "Facts about" (or whatever it is called) is present. Is there a way to remove it? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:07, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I am more than happy to help. What we need is to create the forms and templates so that all new entries use them. then start changing things over slowly, On the plus side if it takes awhile to convert the old stuff its not so bad as they will look exactly as they do now until we get to them. Perhaps we should consider moving this discussion onto it's own page before this page gets so large it destroys the Internet. I would also suggest holding off on installing it until we've fiddled some more to see what effect it has on the wiki like the damn facts about table. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 22:10, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::I should point out the facts about table is only present on pages that use semantic data so if we did instal it it wouldnt effect anything until we started to make pages with semantic data on them. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 22:14, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::This is an image of an author table I created useing a form [http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/6099/66402195ri6.jpg]<br />
::::::::::Notice it looks exactly the same as our current author table. Below is the form:<br />
::::::::::[http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/5454/36613376en2.jpg] [http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/766/83147904gr7.jpg] <br />
::::::::::Notice on the form the date field it is contextual so all dates on author pages will have the same format so yet more consistency [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 23:03, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::First off, what is that operating system your using... please don't say Vista ''';)'''; Ubuntu überalles. Anyway, again, is there anyway to remove the "facts about" box? If that can be removed this will be installed right away. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:47, 24 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::I'm afraid so I use (and like) Windows Vista Ultimate Version 6.0.6000 Build 6000. Ok I have figured out how to get rid of the factbox (that's its official name) you need to edit "SMW_Settings.php" in the folder "[wiki folder]\extensions\SemanticMediaWiki\includes". this line "$smwgShowFactbox = SMW_FACTBOX_NONEMPTY;" needs to be changed to "$smwgShowFactbox = SMW_FACTBOX_HIDDEN;" and this line "$smwgShowFactboxEdit = SMW_FACTBOX_NONEMPTY;" needs to be changed to "$smwgShowFactboxEdit = SMW_FACTBOX_HIDDEN;". Pages that were created with semantic data on them before you change these lines seem to keep the factbox for some reason on my machine so those settings should be changed as soon as the extension is installed. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 23:35, 24 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::I've put my project of wikifying entries on hold until we figure all this out because if we decide to edit the old entries so they use the forms templates I'll be doubling up on work. If we make semantic templates out of the preloads the articles made with forms will look like our current entries but if we want the old entries to get layout updates automatically like the new entries will be able to we will have to change all the old entries. As [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] says it will be a mammoth task but in the end I think the benefits are worth it. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 23:45, 26 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:Is there an ETA for Blue Dragon to put this on the server? I'm eager to work on using the Semantic features! --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 12:36, 27 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::It should be done now! ''':)''' &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 22:45, 28 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I say lets start with [[LA 8 Races]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:22, 28 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Okay, so [[Form:DnD Equipment]] was created, however the category issue and the identifier issue still needs to be solved. Any ideas on how to fix these problems? Also, I feel this would be a lot easier if two edit boxes worked on a form, however it seems they do not. Any ideas on how to circumvent this, or can two of them work on a form somehow? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:16, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::: Sorry GD but I don't have a clue what your asking. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 05:39, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::[[Form:DnD Equipment]] now includes categories, I do not know all the categories for subtype ie: outfits armor etc and the way i've written it you can only have one type category and one subtype category if someone wants to find a way around that be my guest and could someone who knows all the categories add a list to [[Property:Item Subtype]] for me the list should be written like [[Property:Item Type]]. I made some properties for the author template so we could use the new semantic search functionality to search for say all pages with me as the author but the template wasn't working properly after I added them so I reverted the edit I'll try to get it to work later but if someone else wants to try be my guest. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 07:04, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::P.S. Sorry about littering the recent changes pages with all those edits its hard to tell what an edit will do when your working on a template and form at the same time and changes to a form cant be seen through the preview button (because you only see the page title input box). also feel free to delete the page entitled test. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 07:09, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::P.P.S. I have added code to Category:Equipment so that any page using that category will have a tab at the top "Edit with form" which will send you to the equipment form. This will allow novices to edit their page without having to edit code and will allow us to edit the old pages so they use the form now. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 07:34, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::I have deleted the "Edit with Form" option &mdash; I want people to learn wiki syntax. Blue Dragon also implemented this, however I am not a fan. Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:55, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Are you sure you want to enforce that? The whole purpose of wiki-markup is so that users don't have to know HTML to created and edit pages. Semantic Forms takes it one step further by narrowing the amount of wiki-markup a user has to use. It seems a bit counter-intuitive to actively require users to learn the wiki syntax. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:23, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::This "edit with form" thing might help improve the formatting of pages made by new or non-users. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:55, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:Damn you [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ''';)''', you're very right. Okay, I guess we can have them... It's just that I do not want a generation of users not learning wiki syntax; that could be detrimental to D&D Wiki. However, what is the goal of D&D Wiki? It's to provide a place where users can submit homebrew content so it can be played in other D&D campaigns. Editing with forms will just help make the goal of posting things and fixing things on D&D Wiki easier. I guess we should have it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:29, 29 February 2008 (MST) <br />
<br />
::For me it's more about letting people add and edit content easily without having to learn the entire wiki syntax in one hit. If they want their creations to look good they still have to learn syntax for stuff like equipment as there is no standard format for the item description etc so at current we just have an input box, but if they don't bother with syntax as a lot of creation i've wikified didn't then the form has done most of the wikifying for us. Does that mean I can put the edit with form tab back up? --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 19:04, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I say go for it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:26, 2 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== SMW and DPL ===<br />
<br />
There's been a request for [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page DPL] to be able to access SMW properties. I'm keeping an eye out for when this gets implemented. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:19, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Once the semantic data is implemented it would be possible to replace the dpl generated tables with inline queries, if anyone is interested in doing that we would not need the DPL to be able to access SMW. I'm not sure how the DPL works exactly but SMW inline queries are done each time someone looks at a page so if the DPL doesn't do this using SMW inline queries may put more strin on the server for more information goto the SMW [http://semantic-mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Inline_queries manual] --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 18:59, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I'll have to play around with it and see the level of flexibility compared to DPL. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 04:35, 1 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Had trouble using the queries on my test wiki but I suspect that may be because i'm not as smart as I like to think. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 06:10, 1 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I made a query at [[LA 8 Races]], but I am getting SRD Matches for some reason. I think it is using an implicit OR rather than an implicit AND for the category matches, even though the documentation claims it uses AND by default. I do know a way to fix the table, but it is not elegant because it will stop working if we add semantic syntax to the SRD. I'll keep looking for an answer... --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 07:30, 1 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Featured Articles ==<br />
<br />
Hi everyone time for major change to the wiki idea number two (number one being semantic forms). I guess it's not a major change so much as a new 'thing'. I was wondering what would everyone think about having a article featured on the main page say every month. We nominate articles for featuring, people would support or oppose the articles then first day of the month one could be chosen to be on the main page until the next month. The articles would be finished work, well formated etc etc. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 06:23, 3 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:We could also go that step further and have a Process closer to wikipedias where you nominate an article it becomes 'featured' but does not necessarily get added to the main page. each month or week or whatever someone decides which one gets put up / you can request a featured article be considered for the main page. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 06:40, 3 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Er... I know why you brought this up; it really is a standard across most wiki's. Therefore it makes me lean towards implementing it... Anyway, if this is to get implemented I do not want an obtrusive template, like the one on Uncyclopedia. Any thoughts for a good template? P.S. I like the second implementation more. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:37, 3 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::{| style="text-align: right; width: 100%; border: none;" <br />
| This is a [[Featured Articles|Featured Article]]! [[Image:Cscr-featured.png|30px]]<br />
|}<br />
:::Thoughts?<br />
:::--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:33, 3 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::How do you handle projects? Does LotR count as one or a few hundred? Does the ''title page'' of LotR count? --[[User:Pwsnafu|Pwsnafu]] 17:38, 3 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::The main reason I was thinking about it is it puts some of our best work on the front page which draws in visitors instead of going through all those links to find something cool it's right there you can read it then people are more likely to go searching for more. It's also a recognition of your hard work having it on the main page. I like your little Featured article template is it for the talk page or the actual page if it's for the actual page perhaps it could be centered that way it blends in more being between the table of contents and the author template. We'd need some guidelines or criteria for making a page featured, and some one to arbitrate the process (and make final decisions) we can call him/her the Article Master or AM (like DM lol). we need to get some ideas rolling then maybe take a vote? --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 19:06, 3 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::Pwsnafu: I'd say for something like that it would be best to feature the main page of a project, not all subpages would need to be as good but there would still be a standard of quality for the entire project. Conversely a particularly good subpage which can stand on it's own could also be featured. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 19:10, 3 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::I've just been stareing at the main page for awhile and so far I haven't thought of much in the way of how we could format it. About the only thing I can think of would be move the tavern schedule down next to the news and then use that blank space next to the menu for the featured articles. EDIT: personally I'd be for moving the tavern schedule to its own page. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 19:29, 3 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::[[Featured Articles]] --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:42, 4 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::I'm all for it, if it means that even wanton visitors can get a more inside view of the site at first glance. It might persuade some of them to stick around and lord knows dandwiki can use more contributors :O. --[[User:Sulacu|Sulacu]] 10:01, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Yes! --[[User:Penske|Penske]] 15:27, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Now we just need some featured articles :P. Hard to judge the true value of a system if it isn't used. --[[User:Sulacu|Sulacu]] 18:29, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Gygax Gone at 69 ==<br />
<br />
[[:Category:Gary Gygax|Gary Gygax]], co-creator of D&D with [[:Category:Dave Arneson|Dave Arneson]], passed away Tuesday, March 4th, 2008, at the age of 69. Read coverage on it at [http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2008/03/report-gary-gyg.html Wired], [http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2008/03/farewell_gary_gygax_the_dungeo.html BBC News], [http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080304/ap_en_ot/obit_gygax Yahoo! News], [http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?no_d2=1&sid=08/03/04/1750206 /.], and many other news sites. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 09:18, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:[[Discussion:The Passing of a Giant - RIP Gary Gygax]] --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 09:21, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Submitted for Your Approval ==<br />
<br />
I present the new [[Form:DnD Spell|form for submitting (non-epic) spells]], Courtesy of Semantic MediaWiki and Semantic Forms. [[Special:EditData/Form:DnD_Spell/User:Sledged/Atonement|Here]]'s what it looks like with the fields populated. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 15:30, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Hm... I wish you could make it work more like [[Form:Rating]] where it uses a template which, once saved, goes to the normal wiki formatting. Can this be done with spells as well? It's just that I do not really want the formatting of all the spells changed to this new "standard". --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:18, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::If that is what is wanted all you have to do is add <tt><nowiki>subst:</nowiki></tt> in the form code next to any templates you want to be substituted onto the page. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 20:33, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Just be aware that if <tt>subst:</tt> is added, you'll lose the option of using the form to edit the page once it's been created. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:21, 6 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::It is a price I would be willing to pay. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:44, 6 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Okay, there's a problem with <tt>subst:</tt>. Part of the way to form works is that it looks at the template to see what properties it has and which parameters are associated with each property. When you use <tt>subst:</tt>, it's looking for the page <tt>Template:subst:template name</tt> instead of <tt>Template:template name</tt> and it makes the form useless as a result. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 14:37, 6 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Wiki Criticism ==<br />
<br />
This is the most useless Wiki I have ever found on D&D. I'm sick of homebrew rubbish. I'm trying to find info on Mask and Olidamarra (spelling?) and I can't find anything good) {{unsigned| 68.193.215.240}}<br />
<br />
:Admittedly, this probably isn't the best wiki to go to for official WotC material, but that doesn't make it useless. What's wrong with homebrew? WotC seems to encourage it, and the only real difference between good homebrew and published material is that the former is sold in books. --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 05:40, 14 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::We are not allowed to have information about Gods and Goddesses on D&D Wiki. They are reserved as product identity. Sorry about that. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:27, 14 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Should be in [[Deities and Demigods]], no? If you want even more information than that, you're likely looking into some very specific Forgotten Realms books. --[[User:Sulacu|Sulacu]] 18:51, 20 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== WotC Website Material ==<br />
<br />
It occurred to me as I was answering a question about what material we have on the site...would we be able to host material from the wizards site? [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/arch/psi The Mind's Eye], for instance, has some interesting things, and I would love to see things like it on the wiki. --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 19:16, 18 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Hm... Can we http://ww2.wizards.com/Company/Default.aspx?doc=SiteLegalNotice? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:19, 19 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::According to section 2, "You are granted a limited, non-sublicenseable license to ''access'' and use the Site and ''electronically copy'' (except where specified as prohibited) and ''print to hard copy portions'' of Site Content for your ''personal'', noncommercial use only; provided, that you preserve any copyright, trademark or other similar notices contained in or associated with such Site Content. Such license is subject to these TOU and does not include: [...] (ii) the collection and use of any product or service listings, pictures or descriptions; '''(iii) the distribution (electronic or otherwise), public performance, or public display of any Site Content;''' [...] downloading (other than the page caching) of any portion of the Site, any Site Content or any information contained therein, except as expressly permitted on the Site; [...]"<br />
::In other words, I think not. Hosting anything more than links here violates the spirit of the first, italicized part (my emphasis) and also several of the explicit prohibitions (especially the bolded one, also my emphasis added). So... probably not. And WotC has a history of taking a very hard line against IP infringement, copyright suits, etc. &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:33, 19 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Well once you sift through a little legal phrasing, that's pretty clear...their terms of use explicitly forbid it, since a wiki definately counts as public display. Oh well ''':/'''. --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 16:50, 19 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::The shame is that this material will disappear. When I was documenting Wizard's past products, I found that many items had dropped off their site. They are poor caretakers of their own material. The academic in me want to preserve their own web content for their own good.--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 18:10, 19 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
==Feats==<br />
<br />
How about an area under the Featured Article for a 'Feat of the Day' with a link to a feat... --[[User:Calidore Chase|Calidore Chase]] 19:14, 19 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:If you go that route, you can just as well try to implement such a component feature for other groupings of data. Spell of the Day, NPC of the Day, etc. --[[User:Sulacu|Sulacu]] 18:54, 20 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I agree, no such special section for feats is necessary, they can become featured as well ''';)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:44, 21 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Link of the day? kinda like a word of the day feature... --[[User:Calidore Chase|Calidore Chase]] 08:10, 7 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Other Netbooks ==<br />
<br />
Does anyone know where to find the other netbooks from FanCC? I'd be interested in seeing them, possibly up on the wiki. {{Unsigned|Gruegirl|22:00, 23 April 2008 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
:I am not sure, sorry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:12, 29 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== 4th Edition Link ==<br />
<br />
I've had a thought; I think we could, and probably should, put the link to the 4th edition homebrew (and possibly the SRD, though we can't put it up yet, for obvious reasons) on the main page, because, as people in ENworld have proved, we have enough preveiw material from the PHB Lite (derived from the pregenerated characters and rogue preview) to make some powers, the 1st level for classes, and odd things here-and-there. As ENworld is already doing odd bits of 4e homebrew based on previews, we might as well provide a place for it to go now, rather than later.<br />
<br />
Also, my gaming group has started a 4e campaign with the Pre-Generated characters, and everything is ''so'' much more better than 3.5. The fighter felt more like a fighter than in 3.5. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:26, 26 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Although as the deadline is drawing nearer and nearer I am leaning towards using the same revised 3e pages and just changing the identifier/creating a namespace for them. The voting (please see above discussion) outlined that the community would prefer that we distinguish 4e from 3.5e with just namespaces and categories. I know you have spent a lot of time on the 4e pages, however do we really need them? Is there any way we could utilize the current pages with 4e? Thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:16, 5 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Won't be playing 4e for quite a while. Checkbook ain't so hot right now. So I would personally prefer keeping a 3e section and a seperate 4e section. --[[User:Calidore Chase|Calidore Chase]] 08:13, 7 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::I don't think it would be possible anyway. I think it would be easier and less confusing to keep them seperate... --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:23, 7 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::I have had a look over the [[4e Homebrew]] page and checked it, and I think it is as ready as it can be before 4e comes out; we just need a preload for classes and dragons and we're fine (not enough info right now!); so as it's two weeks this friday I feel that we should put up the link for the 4th edition homebrew (but not the SRD!) ''now'' for the reasons I stated above. I don't think that we could combine the 3e and 4e sections, and I feel that it would be easier to use if they where seperate. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:57, 21 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Random Link ==<br />
<br />
Would it be possible to add a random link to the navigation links too the side? This will allow for a more rounded out site over all. Eg. people are able to fix and contribute to content that they may not normally get to see. This will also allow DM's to make more interesting characters. --[[User:Sabre070|Sabre070]] 00:21, 6 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I like the idea of a random page link too. Course there is one in the special pages link on the side and you could add one to your user page (as I have). --[[User:Calidore Chase|Calidore Chase]] 08:09, 7 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
==Featured User==<br />
How about a link to a particularly good user page. There are a few out there and it may encouraage others to create pages of their own. Maybe have a pool of good user pages that the link is randomly derived from. --[[User:Calidore Chase|Calidore Chase]] 08:07, 7 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I vote no. --[[User:Othtim|Othtim]] 17:56, 16 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Any particular reason? --[[User:Calidore Chase|Calidore Chase]] 19:25, 16 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Perhaps because it could be taken as a glorification of the user chosen. [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 19:54, 16 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::A little recognition isn't a bad thing. It would also be a way for newcomers to see what they can do for their user page. --[[User:Calidore Chase|Calidore Chase]] 20:41, 16 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I am against it because it would further clutter the [[Main Page]] and I do not feel it would be used as much as, say, the FA link. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:21, 16 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::: I'm just imagining how it'd work:<br />
::::::: ''Sledged is a wiki admin who likes templates, optimizations, and long walks on the beach. Come visit his user page.''<br />
:::::: Gives me a little chuckle. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 22:28, 16 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Ooh, I like long walks too... --[[User:Calidore Chase|Calidore Chase]] 17:38, 17 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
==Search Function Broken== <br />
Most searches return no pages; even a search as simple as "magic" gives an "nothing found" screen. [[User:Noname|Noname]] 21:13, 20 May 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Not that big of a problem... just search externally and it works fine. Just click a few extra times and your done. Nice to have it working again, but until then let's not make a huge deal of it. [[User:Palantini|Palantini]] 20:52, 21 May 2008 (MDT)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Main_Page&diff=249869Main Page2008-04-21T14:02:18Z<p>EldritchNumen: minor grammatical fix</p>
<hr />
<div>{| width="100%" style="margin: 0; border: 1px solid #000000; text-align: left; color: #FFFFFF;"<br />
| width="65%" rowspan="1" valign="top" style="padding: .5em .5em; margin: 1em;" |<br />
<div style="margin: 0; background:#663300; font-size: 120%; font-weight: bold; border: 1px solid #000000; text-align: left; color: #FFFFFF; padding: 0.2em 0.4em;">Welcome To D&D Wiki!</div><br />
{|<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
|- style="vertical-align: top;"<br />
| <br />
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="column"<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
; <big>Dungeons and Dragons</big><br />
* [[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[Wizards of the Coast Open Game Content|Wizards of the Coast's Open Game Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD|Unearthed Arcana<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[Publication List]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Unfinished list of all d20 products in every edition. Help us compile it. (<DPL2C><br />
category=Publication<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
<br />
; <big>d20 Modern</big><br />
* [[D20 Modern|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=D20M<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[Modern System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=MSRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
<br />
; <big>Community</big><br />
* [[Special:TheTavern|The Tavern]]&nbsp;<small>|&nbsp;[[Tavern Schedule|schedule]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Pull up a stool, traveler, and join us in conversation.</div><br />
|}<br />
|}<br />
| width="35%" rowspan="1" valign="top" style="padding: .5em .5em; margin: 1em;" |<br />
{{:Current Featured Article}}<br />
|-<br />
| colspan="2" |<br />
{| width="100%" style="margin: 0; text-align: left; color: #FFFFFF;"<br />
| width="50%" rowspan="1" valign="top" style="padding: .5em .5em; margin: 1em;" |<br />
<div style="margin: 0; background:#663300; font-size: 120%; font-weight: bold; border: 1px solid #000000; text-align: left; color: #FFFFFF; padding: 0.2em 0.4em;">[[Image:hp_news.gif|right]]Recent News:</div><br />
{{News}}<br />
|}<br />
|}</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=249430Talk:Main Page2008-04-19T20:33:35Z<p>EldritchNumen: /* WotC Website Material */ my two cents</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Archives<br />
|label1=Discussions 1&ndash;30<br />
|label2=Discussions 31&ndash;44<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== 4th edition ==<br />
<br />
I don't really want to recreate the rumours and excitement concerning the upcoming 4th edition, but it looks like we need to think about a way to handle it here. It's pretty sure that there will be two editions in parallel use, at least for a while, so we need a way to separate editions. Tagging articles [[:Category:3.5]] and [[:Category:4.0]] wouldn't be too hard, what I'm concerned about is article lemmata for articles that exists in different versions for different editions. <br />
<br />
Also, it's not clear yet whether there will be a 4th edition SRD. I hope there will be one. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 08:50, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Might be a good idea to put SRD 3.5 articles with a template underneath (this is only a suggestion, not an attempt to have a million templates per page):<br />
<br />
:{| style="text-align: center; font-size:0.9em;" width="100%"<br />
| [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|40px]]<br/>This material is published under the [[V3.5 rules]].<br/><small>[[Main Page|&rarr;More]]</small><br />
|}<br />
<br />
:Although, there might be too many templates if we do this. perhaps we could replace the SRD template to this for 3.5 articles:<br />
<br />
:{| class="messagebox protected" style="border:2px solid #99B; padding:0px; font-size:0.9em;"<br />
|-<br />
| valign="top" | [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|45px]]<br />
| This material is published under the '''[[Open Game License v1.0a]]'''. The [[GNU Free Documentation License]] does not apply to this page. This material is for the D&D [[V 3.5 rules]].<br />
|}<br />
<br />
:We don't really need to mark homebrew stuff- it should work for 4.0 rules anyway. Whatre can I find news on the 4th edition, anyway? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:10, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Have you been at the WotC Homepage lately? Did you notice something? --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 09:48, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::If 4e is really coming out we can most likely just slap on a small template on all 4e things or all 3.5e things. Also, the categories you said above will work. I do not see it as too much of a problem... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:55, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::According to my reasearch, it ios not out until 2011 (rather silly really; why advertise it four and a bit years before its release), so we really do not have to bother with it yet, anyway. {{Unsigned|Sam Kay|10:04, 16 August 2007 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
::::::Boo! Hsssss! I had a browser tab open for the last ten minutes of the countdown of the [http://www.wizards.com/dnd D&D] page. Once it finished, I got "Service Unavailable". About as disappointing as 3.0 psionics. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 16:35, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Lol ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:38, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::4th edition is definitely coming. We really need to sit down, argue, butt heads, and work out the namespacing issues now. Thankfully, 3E has a namespace already. We have lots to sort out. Wikiworld will instantly be 4th compatible, as I haven't bothered with stats for most of the writeup. The new MIC style items should also be compatible. There are interesting times ahead. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 18:39, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::It has been stated that the PHB will be out May '08 MM June '08 and DMG July '08 {{Unsigned|Quill|19:11, 16 August 2007 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
::::::::::Yes, we have a year to prepare but it makes it easier later if we start thinking about it now. Btw., I'm still waiting for the WotC Homepage to survive sudden massive attention so I can see the official WotC Press release... --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 03:22, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Just do what I suggested and replace the OGC tgemplate with:<br />
:::::::::::{| class="messagebox protected" style="border:2px solid #99B; padding:0px; font-size:0.9em;"<br />
|-<br />
| valign="top" | [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|45px]]<br />
| This material is published under the '''[[Open Game License v1.0a]]'''. The [[GNU Free Documentation License]] does not apply to this page. This material is for the D&D [[V 3.5 rules]].<br />
|}<br />
<br />
:::::::::::It is alot easier to mark 3.5 in this way. You could also add an image to the template to mark it, I suppose. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:30, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::I vote to leave the V3.5 on the wiki pemanently (unless the wiki runs out of memory), as some people will still use V3.5. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:39, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Btw, [http://rustmonster.net/2007/08/16/dd-4th-edition-announced-gen-con/ here] it says that Wizards announced to continue the OGL. Good decision. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 09:45, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:Can we get a 4E Info/Rumor link up on the landing page? (Though we may as well link it to ENWorld. They will have the best coverage.) [http://www.enworld.org/index.php?page=4e ENWorld 4E Page] It hasn't been updated yet, but it will be. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 14:19, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Great! it will be nice to have 4.0e on the wiki.--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:27, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::A few things. First off we need to figure out if the homebrew material will be compatible with 4e, if it is we are well off. If it is not we need to figure out how we are going to categorize the 3.5e and the 4e homebrew information separately. Oh, and yes, D&D Wiki has enough space to keep the 3.5e material - nothing need ever be deleted to save space on D&D Wiki. Secondly, if we want a link to 4e information from ENWorld then, I feel, that we should add it as a news item. Dmilewski can take care of this if this is the communities decision. Thirdly we need to figure out when the 4e SRD is coming out to see how much time we have to prepare for it. About the SRD (3.5e and 4e); we need to decide if we want a different namespace for the two SRD editions or if we want to organize them by their identifiers. Anyway, if the homebrew information is compatible we are looking at not too much work (and a much more useful and successful D&D Wiki). Let us hope... ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:10, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::I think ther homebrew stuff will mostlky ber compatable with 4e, but if not we will have to work to update the best stuff... --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:22, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Either the homebrew material is almost 100% good-to-go or it is not. We cannot have a medium on D&D Wiki. The reason we can not have a medium is because many many people will not switch over to 4e for a long time (or ever!) and we do want want these people to lose D&D Wiki as a recourse. If the two editions are not compatible we will have to have two separate pages like [[Dungeons and Dragons]] and we will have to have 3.5e classes, races, etc and 4e classes, races, etc. Again, we need to really know if they will be compatible or not (and if someone has any information please cite the source). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:32, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yeah, I know, I was meaning as they are now... I have had a look at the articles on WotC website, and I seem to remember that the playtest report mentioned that a player was playing a psyon (because it was 3.5e) to see if it was compatible.--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:42, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I volenteer to help updating homberew stuff to 4e should the need arise (hopefully it won't). --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:54, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::I think that conversion of each section should be considered on a case-by-case basis. For example, magic items may only need a level assigned to them. That's an easy conversion worth doing. Classes and prestige classes will need to be entirely rewritten as trees, maneuvers, or such, if they are worth translating at all. <br />
<br />
::::::::My current belief is that we will need to split the content. That hoses the entire redirect initiative. (That was a reservation of mine with the redirect initiative. All the pages that I did for the SRD were hard-referenced. I used no redirects.) <br />
<br />
::::::::Campaign environments will be easiest to convert. Many simply implement the existing system, then list some house rules. For example, LotR and Wikiworld are both concept heavy, rules light. Wikiworld has always been rules light, as I wanted Wikiworld to work with any game system. I suggest that Sam keep LotR rules light, so as to keep it universal.<br />
<br />
:::::::::I was at GenCon when they made the announcement of 4e. According to Wizards of the Coast, the 3.5e material will be compatible with a minimum of modification. There were no details given at the time, however, so what that means, I'm not sure. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 14:04, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Many classes and (both base and prestige) might be obsolete under the new rules- if the same effect can be made just by using talents on one of the other classes. I think we'll have to make a big review of everything and check it for 4e compatibility, maybe putting a 4e Compatible template and a 4e Incompatible template (and nothing on pages that haven't nbeen checked yet, obviously). [[User:MorkaisChosen|MorkaisChosen]] 08:25, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Or we could just keep 3.5e material 3.5e material, since not everyone is going to switch right away... Maybe keep it for a couple years than change it to 4e. Thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:16, 4 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
I read on the Wizards page that one thing they're thinking of implementing with all the online stuff they're using in 4th ed is a wiki to allow home brew stuff. If that's true, it may be best to just keep this site in 3.x to avoid competition with the "official" wiki. I'm still uncertain about all that though. Any thoughts? --[[User:Banyan|Banyan]] 23:07, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I don't think a little competition will hurt. If Wizards opens their own wiki, that's an excellent idea, but it doesn't mean we should give up this project here. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 00:57, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I wouldn't bother with the "official wiki" anyway. This one is better. Anyway, why would we be scared of competition? It is not like we are trying to make money, or anything. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:00, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Would someone like to contact them and ask them if this is true? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:35, 26 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
==New Edition Issues==<br />
<br />
The following questions are both technical and procedural. There is no correct answer. These questions are here to collect upcoming issues with the wiki and decisions that should be considered. Please add to the list.<br />
<br />
===General architecture===<br />
<br />
How best to manage a wiki filled with multiple editions and systems (3E, 4E, Modern, Etc.)<br />
<br />
:I am very open to discussion, but I feel that the best way to manage different systems is to make the different edition pages very obvious. For example, we could have all namespace v4 pages come with a slightly darker page background, or something similar. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:22, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I agree. The Wizards message boards use a different skin for each game. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 10:57, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::I am against the changing of the skin, however I think namespaces are the way to go. We could label the namespaces as SRD3.5e, SRD4e, 4e, 3.5e, D20M, etc. What do you guys think about this idea? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:11, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::People will be far too confused if they want to know whether the article is 3.5 or 4.0, and they constantly have to be checking namespaces. It will be much easier if the page background is slightly darker for 4.0, or something similar. I am not talking about a different feel, just a difference. There is a difference :) &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 18:00, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Why not have two menu pages, one for each edition, and label all pages with 3.5 and 4.0? --[[User: Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:02, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Sam Kay, do you mean namespaces? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:04, 26 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Yeah... I did. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:23, 1 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
===Namespaces===<br />
Should we move current SRD pages to a 3E namespace?<br />
<br />
:I assume you mean 3.5E namespace, and I feel that we need to wait a bit until the structure is clear and known to all, but I feel that it definitely needs to happen before 4E comes out. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:23, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
How do we want the namespaces to interact?<br />
<br />
:Why not have two D&D menus: 3.5, and 4.0. That way, you would know whether you where in 3.5 or 4.0. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:33, 3 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
What should we do with articles that are invariant between 3E and 4E (assuming there are any)?<br />
<br />
:This brings up another question: It would be great if there was a way to allow edits on a 3.5E to be reflected, or maybe a reflection would be requested, onto a 4E page. This way the races or whatnot would remain the same. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:25, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I've been wrestling with related questions on [[WikiRPS]]. It's easy to have small (or even large) pieces of shared text, using a template. But what if the bulk of the text is shared, but just the numbers scattered throughout the text are different (for instance)? As far as I know, the only way to do it is to modularize the text into templates as much as possible. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 11:02, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
Redirects point to 3E SRD. Is there a way to have namespace relative redirects, where <nowiki>[[foo]]</nowiki> inside the <nowiki>[[SRD]]</nowiki> context points to <nowiki>[[SRD:Foo]]</nowiki> while <nowiki>[[foo]]</nowiki> in the 4E context points to <nowiki>[[SRD4:Foo]]</nowiki>. <br />
<br />
:I don't think it's possible, but I'm willing to be proven wrong. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 09:55, 21 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::It would be possible with a few minor hacks. However, this will lead to a very confusing website. I am against the idea. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:18, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
===Templates===<br />
<br />
What templates should be used to tag 3E and 4E pages?<br />
<br />
===Homebrew===<br />
<br />
Should homebrew rules be tagged by edition?<br />
<br />
:I strongly feel so. Everything is specific to a version if it falls back on D&D. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:26, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::That depends on whether it is edition specific or not: WotC declaired that 3.5e would be compatable with 4.0e --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:19, 1 September 2007 (MDT)--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:19, 1 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Im new here just signed up today but was reading through this and had something to say. According to the Dnd podcast 4ed is not fully compatible with 3.5, They imply that if you want to use a lot of stuff it will have to be updated. In fact they go so far as to say that you may even have to recreate things from the ground up. So separating old material and new material will be nessacary. I'd suggest tagging everything now 3.5. then creating a menu with two separate sections 3.5 and 4 and go through a process of reviewing and or editing the old material and copy it over to the new namespace.[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 07:16, 5 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Not nessassaraly- look as CSs- they are mostly background stuff, therefore, they have no <br />
need of a tag for either 3.5 or 4. Deities might not, depending on rule changes. Enviroments will not, as it is mostly descriptive stuff. And they said that it would a be a case-by-case thing. Plus, changing the DnD category to 3.5e would take forever. there are about 4000 articles (I think) here. Better to leave them as DnD, and add 4e. Which has been done. And anyway, I said "compatable" not "fully compatable". They mean slightly different things: one means that some suff may need minor changes, others would need alot, the other means that you could just drop it into a game. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:36, 5 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
Should campaigns get their own namespace, or belong to their intended edition?<br />
<br />
:I feel that campaigns should not get their own namespaces because it would remove the items in the campaign from D&D Wiki linking schemes, etc. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:26, 22 August 2007 (MDT)''<br />
<br />
===Site conversion===<br />
<br />
How best to automate changes?<br />
<br />
Should 3E redirect be systematically replace with hard page references?<br />
<br />
:I'm not sure I understand the question. Can you give an example? &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 09:55, 21 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I think it means that rather than mentions of "darkvision" being linked to the darkvision page it says what page information about darkvision can be found at in the core rule books. If so, I am against the idea. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:09, 6 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Another 4e Option ==<br />
<br />
I can't help but feel that the cleanest solution would to be just host a completely separate wiki specifically for 4E, and just circumvent all the aforementioned issues. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:30, 21 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I agree&mdash;having a separate wiki would be very clean, but it may not be as useful, since one would have to switch between the wiki for different versions of D&D. However, I am starting to like the idea... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:24, 21 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Well, I think the ease of having a separate wiki would probably be more valuable than the "convenience" of having them together. Also, my understanding is that 4E is not nearly so compatible with 3.5E. So, perhaps the "clean slate" concept would be much better. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 10:02, 22 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::From what I'm reading it seems like it'll about as compatible as 2e is to 3e.<br />
:::Also, let's not forget that the above issues are merely the ones of which we can conceive. With projects this size, more issues always arise after implementation.<br />
:::4ed20wiki.com anyone? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 19:36, 27 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Wizards did say 4e would be compatible with 3e with a minor amount of modification. Why not have two sub-main pages within this wiki? On the main page you have links to 3rd edition D20 and 4th edition D20. Then each edition could have it's own sub-main page just like our current main page... That would be ''like'' two wikis but without the flicking from wiki to wiki, having two accounts, and the possibility of reduced number of edits on each wiki. Personally, I think it would be better to have one wiki with separate sections. We already have modern and D&D with separate sections on one wiki, so why not do it with 3e and 4e? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:16, 28 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree w/ Sam, we should just include a sub-set for D&D 4E like we did for d20 Modern. That way people can have just one account and since 3.5 will be compatible w/ 4E people can still look at all of our 3.5 Stuff and port it over to 4E. Just Create a Dungeons and Dragons 4E Page and a 4ESRD and everything's fine. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 11:21, 28 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::I know that the "official" announcement was that 4E would be compatible with 3E, however, I've listened to the Podcasts, read much of the forum boards, and tried to pay attention to what is out there and I don't think it will be that compatible. In fact, Dave Noonan said on the D&D Podcast that there won't be a simple process to take a 3E character and just equate it to 4E. The level progression is different, the spread of powers associated with each level will change for each of the classes, and many of the class abilities (especially spell casting) are being changed greatly. Also, monsters are being reworked extensively, and many of the mechanics are being revised, rewritten, or scrapped entirely. I have a feeling that the compatibility will be simply that you can take a story line from a 3E adventure and use it, but the mechanics, though familiar, are not the same. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 09:55, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I still think one wiki would be best. Plus, I have also been reading the announcements, and I think a lot of the things can already be achieved with variants: the saves working like ACs, for example, add 10 to each save, take 10 from the DC, and roll a D20 and add the DC, compare to save. Easy. Critical spells? I have already done a variant for that before they announced it in Design and development. It is on this site under the title [[Spellcasting (DnD Variant Rule)|Spellcasting]]. So 3E-4E conversion could be a case of slight modification using variant rules. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:31, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::I'm not sure I see exactly how variants address the issue of hosting materials for two different versions of the d20 System. Are you suggesting that for every 4E rule component that's different from the corresponding 3.5 rule, it be put under the [[DnD Rules]] or a SRD Variant section? And if so, would this be in addition to or instead of hosting 4E SRD in it's own space?<br />
::::::::And since the d20 Modern section was brought up, I never really cared for it being hosted next to the d20 stuff. Admittedly, it hasn't been a problem, but that could be due to the fact that there's far fewer users using that section than the d20 section (if the amount of user-submitted material is any indication). Whether or not 4E material has it's own wiki, I'm definitely against the 4E d20 Modern and d20 Future being hosted on the same wiki.<br />
::::::::With the issue of multiple accounts, there's a way to have only one account apply to both wikis. I created an account on a [http://www.wikia.com Wikia] site a while ago, and it works with all wikis there. [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue]] would know how complicated such a thing would be to accomplish, and if it'd be worth while. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:20, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::The answer to your question is no, I was merely stating that I think 3E will be compatible with 4E with a minimal of rule conversion. If we can have one account on two seperate wikis, would it be possible to have a single user page (and talk page) for '''BOTH''' wikis? I knows you have seperate pages on wikia... and have links between wikis work as an "inside" link rather than an "external link"? If so, then having two wikis '''Would''' be more... better. Erm... More... practical. Although if we could have a united main page for both that lead to each seperate wiki, that would be good too. About 4E modern and D20 future, starwars ect, ect, yadda yadda yadda, I am not really bothered about them. So long as we have 3E and 4E D&D (and 3E modern would be good, although we could '''completely''' replace it with 4E modern), then I am happy. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 15:25, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::I have strengthened and decided my view, I am against two wikis for a number of reasons. One is that people would have two user pages, two talk pages, and two recent changes lists would exist. It would become a lot to handle. Another reason is that it would divide visitors between two sites, making it look like dandwiki.com is actually not doing as well as it would be, therefore making it not as popular on google, etc. Another reason I am against it is that people will choose one wiki they like and stick with it, disabling half of our growing user base. It would stop prompting people to join random discussions as much, and stop prompting them to help out as much. Another reason is that structure changes would have to be done twice, the same template made two times, one for each wiki. It seems, to me, like a lot more problems would arise than good would come out of it. I am against making two wikis.<br />
::::::::::A solution I see to this problem is namespaces. We could have namespaces such as 3.5e, 4e, 3.5eSRD, and 4eSRD to eliminate confusion as to which version something is. I think namespaces would be the best solution to this problem, not separate wikis. Maybe we should vote? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:00, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Sure. Why not? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 21:25, 31 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Done. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:19, 31 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::If anyone can see a way to make the voting table below clearer please do. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:32, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:I voted for everything. That's because I believe that we will need our whole toolbox to sort this out.<br />
:First, we need to identify the two idea complicating this discussion and table them. I believe that D20 Modern will be best served with it's own sister wiki. Simply by separating it, we greatly simplify our discussion. It then becomes its own discussion (which it deserves). Campaigns also deserves their own discussion. <br />
:This greatly simplifies our problem. <br />
:We already know that we will need new templates for 4.0. (Fact: see the new creature layout block.) We will also need new page preloads. Layout differences will help us tell one page from another. The new class pages will look different than the old class pages simply by being laid out differently. That does the same job as a skin. We also have footer and header templates that can go into a preload and existing pages.<br />
:Namespaces are powerful tools to help us sort out what is what, even at a glance. They provide an absoluteness that chains through everything. The new SRD will most definitely be in a new namespace. For contributor content, I don't see a powerful enough need for a separate namespace when layouts and templates are already providing us good service. Page titles also convey information. '''Page Title (DnD Page)''' is different from '''Page Title (4E Page)'''. <br />
:Categories will be directly impacted by namespaces, but the purpose of categories is not in separating pages, but in collecting like pages. If we try to separate pages too much using Categories, all we do is create a complicated set of categories. We have page titles and namespaces to help a user identify what page goes with which system. These should be sufficient.<br />
:Finally, there is ignorance. If we make the wiki too complex for contributors, we will lose contributors. Any schema that we invent must be apparent to our average contributor.<br />
:That's alot, isn't it?<br />
:My belief is that we should make a new namespace for the new SRD, and let the body of the wiki sort itself out with layouts, footers, and linking. Most sections are clearly one edition or the other. The trouble sections (D20 Modern and Campaigns) need their own discussions to sort out. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 07:52, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::If I didn't know better, I'd swear you were putting together an argument for separate wikis. I think this statement sums it up:<br />
<br />
:::''If we make the wiki too complex for contributors, we will lose contributors.''<br />
<br />
::There's going to be plenty to worry about with just dealing with one edition without having to worry about how keep the editions separate, and too many of the solutions depend on the users maintaining the separation. Right now we have users assigning incorrect categories or neglecting categories, putting non-SRD material in the SRD namespace, not using the preloads, not putting the " (DnD xxxx)" identifier (or putting the wrong identifier) when they create a page, and so on and so on. Trying to maintain a separation between editions is going to add to the problem. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:45, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Nothing on this earth will stop the symptoms above. Ignorance will always exist. I believe the above are symptoms of too-few editors. We have needed editors patrolling their own areas for a while. We must also admit to ourselves that editing is not very interesting to most of our contributors. I really don't know how to address that issue.<br />
:::One reason that I don't want separate wikis is that our Campaign section is always among the most popular sections. How do I maintain Wikiworld across two wikis? If our solutions won't work well for campaigns, we will hurt ourselves.--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 15:09, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Also, on the incorrect editing, most random people who post here don't know all the catagories or how to properly code a wiki. I still don't know all the catagories but I usually go find a page that does and copy and paste. So the incorrect editing will always be a problem. I also firmly stand behind the idea of just one wiki, everything in one place. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:28, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree with Dmilewski. Why was the last sysop elected more than half a year ago? It's because we have a large issue with people not wanting to edit the infrastructure of this site. The last editor that really edited the infrastructure was [[User:Mkill|Mkill]] (albeit with some very controversial edits), who since that time has left D&D Wiki. The infrastructure is not perfect here, many many things need to be improved or are currently wrong, but why is no one stepping up and fixing them? Is D&D Wiki to complex for people to handle? Should we dumb it down? And how do the questions I just asked pertain to 4e material?<br />
:::::Actually, I think the questions I just asked are the core of this issue. A new 4e wiki will eliminate all the issues with people not wanting to edit the infrastructure, and that is why it seems so appealing. It will make a new slate, without D&D Wiki's insane hierarchy (which, by the way, only exists because average users do not edit the infrastructure or help other people's creations on D&D Wiki), and without all of the work that needs to be done on D&D Wiki that is not getting done (publications, dplc's for races, modernizing classes layouts, linking orphaned pages, etc, etc). D&D Wiki has issues, and a new 4e wiki will remove them all... but I don't like to run from my problems.<br />
:::::Yes, D&D Wiki needs some major changes to become what I envision it to be; to become what everyone envisions it to be, but I feel we can accomplish these changes within this current wiki, and just this current wiki. Problems will arise from adding a new edition, but we can solve these problems, we will need to solve these problems... and, of course, the best way to solve these problems is to solve the problem with the average user not editing the infrastructure, because that is where I feel it all stems from. If the average editor feels that D&D Wiki does not just need more content, but rather needs infrastructure help, organizational help, help with making things look good, and help with making everything balanced, then with everyones hard work all the problems on D&D Wiki will soon disappear, creating an environment where adding a new edition will be as smooth as adding a new race. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:29, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Well not everyone wants to just go on a site and edit the way it works just for fun. They might add something but I wouldn't expect them to edit it. Maybe you should try on the equipment page to when you add a new item show some of the various templetes you can use such as the author one and the various catagories you can use. This might help because then you can just copy and paste what you need. I do agree that if we had more people editing and making things right the first or second time then this place would run much smoother. Now I would like to step up and help edit and my area would be the equipment section as I spend most my time there and I am most familar with it. You still might have to make more minor edits to what I have done but I garentee you that there will be less of them. Also, all I would be doing is standardizing and making minor edits as I do not know how to code much more than that; I could learn but that will take time. If you would like me to try to do that I will, it's just anywhere else and I'm not going to be nearly as useful. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 21:18, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I really didn't for my post to be a ''"plea for help"'' (even though it may have come off like that... ''':P'''), but if you want to do something which requires little or no wiki-syntax knowledge thats helps out [[DnD Equipment]] please drop a note on my user-talk page and I will help you find something that needs to get done on [[DnD Equipment]]. Anyway... back to the subject on hand..... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:57, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::When does the vote end? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:38, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Does the 5th of December sound okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:45, 2 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Yeah. I think everybody who wants a vote has voted or will have done by then. We can always send a MOI to people who havent voted. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:26, 3 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Okay, the vote is over. Thanks to everyone that voted, and it appears that we will not be making a separate wiki for 4e material (or holding a book burning convention) but rather organize the different edition by way of categories, namespaces, and possibly changing the identifier. Agiain, thanks to everyone that voted ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:05, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::So, when are we going to start setting it up for 4e? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:40, 15 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Feel free to start whenever you have time... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:04, 15 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:I'd love to, but what do we call the new pages... "4E Dungeons and Dragons", "4E D20 Modern", "4E DnD Base Classes"? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:03, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Or "Dungeons and Dragons (4E)?" There's still a few more details that need to be decided. In what namespace will user content be? Main or "4E"? How do we deal with items independent of rules versions (i.e. maps, campaigns and the like)?<br />
::Personally, I think we can mirror the 3.5 section by replacing all the instances of "DnD" in all the identifiers with "4E" instead (e.g. "4E Character Options," "4E Feats," "4E Creatures," etc...), and the landing page can just be "Fourth Edition." (I always though "Dungeons and Dragons" and "DnD" were bit of misnomers in this context.) —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:37, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Ok. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:33, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I'll start setting it up under 4E Homebrew, 4E Feats, etc. We can move them if need be. If we have stuff under 4E as you suggested, I think DnD should be replaced with 3E or 3.5E for the 3.5 stuff... Thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 02:18, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Started to set it up- see [[4E Homebrew|this page]]. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:17, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== The 4e Movement ===<br />
<br />
I looked over the page and I feel there are a couple kinks to be worked out. First off do we want the pages being labeled as "4E" or "4e"? Secondly, which pages do we want to work with both editions? Should these pages keep the "DnD" while all the other pages would adopt a 3.5e or 4e, respectively, identifier? Thirdly, should we change the descriptions of the sub-pages to say which edition they cover or would that be redundant? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:35, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I think 4e, Maps, campaign settings, possibly deities (depending on changes), Environments, Possibly Quests and Disscussion could be shared, yes, they keep DnD, rest become 3.5e or 4e, yes the rest need to say edition sub-pages cover. Any thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:34, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Yes. How can we make the newly implemented dpl on [[Dungeons and Dragons]] (thank you so much, Sledged) work with non-specific edition pages in all the main categories (for DM's, for Players, or General)? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:27, 24 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Give pages that work for both two categories? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:08, 27 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::[[DnD Campaign Settings|Campaign Settings]], [[DnD Links|Links]], [[DnD Guidelines|Guidelines]], etc. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:37, 27 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Ok, I have done everything except the spells section and the SRD. I have made a 4e version of the pages that I was not sure of (quests and deities), and linked to both (we delete the 4e one if not required or remove the category if the 4e one is required). What do you think? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:27, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::One thing is that everything could be piped so it does not say "4e" all the time. I feel that if one is already on the 4e landing page then having 4e before everything would just come off as repetitive. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:19, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::What do you mean? Like 4e Homebrew/Classes/Base Classes? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:51, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Not exactly. I was refering to things like [[4e Deities]] being piped to [[4e Deities|Deities]]. It just seems repetitive to be on the 4e page and have everything say 4e before it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:43, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Ok. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:18, 25 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::[in a robotic voice] TASK COMPLETE. Are there any more tasks to be done on the 4e Homebrew section? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:24, 27 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Other than the spells section I really do not see anything else. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:20, 28 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Good. Shall we set up the 4e SRD section in the same way so we can just get on with transcribing it when 4e comes out? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:58, 3 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::I read somewhere that WotC will not be releasing a 4e SRD. I think we need verify or disprove this and then decide what to do from that point. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 09:47, 4 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:[http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4news/20080108a 4E SRD and OGL]. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:46, 4 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::"All of the material included in the OGL Designer’s Kit will be available for free starting on June 6, 2008. Parties who find the cost prohibitive can begin developing their products at that time." I guess that means we're able to have the SRD for 4e! --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 07:20, 5 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
===Vote===<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" style="text-align: left;"<br />
|+ 4e Solution &mdash; Voting (Please use "#" and extra lines to separate)<br />
! rowspan="2" | For making a new wiki to encompass 4e material !! colspan="6" | For keeping D&D Wiki as a whole, encompassing all editions !! rowspan="2" | Launch a book-burning party which has the goal of burning every 4e book<br />
|-<br />
! Think namespaces are the solution to 4e material !! Think categories are the solution to 4e material !! Think changing the identifier is the solution to 4e material !! Think changing the background color/skin is the solution to 4e material !! Think templates are the solution to 4e material !! Think that more than one of the aforementioned solutions is the best solution for 4e material (Please say which ones would work best together)<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
# [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] (w/ New Skin)<br />
# [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] (What in the current wiki would we want to link to with 4e? That is the only reason I see for keeping it together... Besides usernames I suppose.)<br />
| <br />
# [[User:Sol|Sol]] <br />
# [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]]<br />
| <br />
# [[User:Trogdor|Trogdor]]<br />
|<br />
|<br />
|<br />
|<br />
# [[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] (Namespaces (for SRD material), Categories, Changing the identifier (for homebrew material))<br />
# [[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] (Namespaces, Catagories)<br />
# [[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] (All the above)<br />
# [[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
# [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] (Namespaces, Skin)<br />
# [[User:Pirate-Sorcerer|Pirate-Sorcerer]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
# [[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
# [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
|<br />
# [[User:xidoraven|xido]] (lacking respect for corporate global capitalism)<br />
# [[User:Othtim|othtim]] - I *like* ''finger of death''.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
::The option to destroy all D&D4e books in the world is not an option. I am upset about this --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 19:20, 30 November 2007 (MST))<br />
<br />
:::LOL! Of course we can't take that action, even if we want to! It is probably unlawful or something. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:12, 1 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::That option has been added ''';)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:09, 2 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::'''LETS GO N' BURN THINGS!!!''' [loads AK47] '''UPRISING AGAINST THE 4E MENACE!!!''' --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:28, 3 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::So... tempted... to burn.... withholding... vote til I can... stop talking... like... Shatner... -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 14:49, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== New Look ==<br />
<br />
I feel that it is high time that we had a new look for the [[Main Page]], for a number of reasons. One is to make it easier for the average user to understand how D&D Wiki is organized, another is so the [[Main Page]] looks nicer. Below is my proposed idea, which is still in the works. Also, I have a couple of questions about it. One, should we use DPL2C to determine the number of items in an area. For example around <DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items exist in [[Dungeons and Dragons]], should we display that below? Also, should we have bullets in front of the link to [[Dungeons and Dragons]], the [[System Reference Document]], etc? Does it look better or worse with them present? Finally, how is the wording of everything? What could be improved? (P.S. the below idea is not mine, it was stolen from [[User:Sledged|Sledged]]'s hard work making [[Dungeons and Dragons]] look nice&mdash;I do not want to take credit which I do not deserve) --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:23, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Yea, the above does look much nicer than the current Main Page, and I do agree it needs an update. As for showing how many things you have in each, that's not necessary but is interesting to see that we have 2900 Homebrew Items, if anything that might bring people in to see that this is a pretty big site and not just some random long forgotten website. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:33, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I have added the number of items to the new look. Any other ideas? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:28, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::This definitely clarified what information is contained in the sections. I would agree with implementing it. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:34, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Let's absolutely add this. The main page definitely needs more information. I like it! &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:48, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I think that if we have 3.5e and 4e on this site, we should have the main page sperating out 3.5e and 4e, and pages for 3.5e and 4e like the above. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:56, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yes, I agree. But that can be added once 4E comes out... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:30, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I'm going to implement this now because I think it is so much better (and I want it as soon as possible). Please, though, continue to post comments here about any revisions we could do to make it look better! &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:32, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::Yeah, I like it. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:38, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::I removed the "d20M" in that SRD link since it is already under the header of d20M. However, I agree, it looks very good and thanks for implementing it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:48, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="column"<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
; <big>Dungeons and Dragons</big><br />
* [[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
; <big>d20 Modern</big><br />
* [[D20 Modern|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=D20M<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[Modern System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=MSRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
|}<br />
<br />
====Main Page after 4e comes out====<br />
<br />
When 4e does come out, we could chang it to this:<br />
<br />
; <big>Dungeons and Dragons</big><br />
* [[Dungeons and Dragons| 3.5e Homebrew Content]] | [[4e Homebrew| 4e Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[System Reference Document|The 3.5e System Reference Document]] | [[4e System Reference Doccument|The 4e System Reference Document]] | [[UA:Variant Rules|Unearthed Arcana]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD|Unearthed Arcana<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
<br />
; <big>d20 Modern</big><br />
* [[D20 Modern|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=D20M<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[Modern System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=MSRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
<br />
Any thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:23, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Or this...?<br />
:; <big>Dungeons and Dragons</big><br />
:; Revised 3rd Edition<br />
:* [[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew]] <div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
category=3.5e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:* [[System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]] | [[UA:Variant Rules|Unearthed Arcana]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD|Unearthed Arcana<br />
category=3.5e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:; 4th Edition<br />
:* [[4e Homebrew|Homebrew]] <div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
category=4e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:* [[System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD<br />
category=4e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
<br />
:; <big>d20 Modern</big><br />
:* [[D20 Modern|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=D20M<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:* [[Modern System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=MSRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:17, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Yeah, that is better than mine. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:52, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Is everyone okay with that look once 4e comes out? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:12, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I actually prefer Sam's layout although perhaps UA could have it's own line. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 07:36, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I think Green Dragon's looks better. Sorry Sam ''';-)''' --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 08:38, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I don't mind. As I said earlier, I prefer GDs. I've had a thought; I think we could, and probably should, put the link to the 4th edition homebrew (and possibly the SRD, though we can't put it up yet, for obvious reasons) on the main page, because, as people in ENworld have proved, we have enough preveiw material from the PHB Lite (derived from the pregenerated characters and rogue preview) to make some powers, the 1st level for classes, and odd things here-and-there. As ENworld is already doing odd bits of 4e homebrew based on previews, we might as well provide a place for it to go now, rather than later. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:37, 18 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Should we make CAPTCHA's present after an IP edits? ==<br />
<br />
Recently a high level of automated spam has been attacking D&D Wiki in the form of inserting nonsense and gibberish into random pages. An example would be [[DnD Flaws]] as of 04:08, 1 November 2007 (MDT) as edited by [[Special:Contributions/200.226.134.53|200.226.134.53]] (permanent link [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=DnD_Flaws&oldid=159600 here]). I think the easiest way to stop this problem would be to provide [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captcha CAPTCHA's] every time an IP makes an edit. The only reason I am asking this is because I am not sure if it would be more beneficial or more harmful to have CAPTCHA's. Do you guys think that IP's would still correct spelling errors if they had to enter a CAPTCHA or would they deem it to difficult? Would it, even if the amount of edits performed by IP's decreased, be worth it? Any ideas would be appreciated. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:41, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Well, if they were just doing it because they were bored then having to spell the correct word to finalize the edit might prevent some people because they are just waaay to lazy. It would also prevent if anyone wanted to create a bot to spam content. Although, it would be annoying for me to have to do that every time I wanted to say, update my User Page with another new item. If you could disable it for users and not IP's, I think that would be a good try to cut down on the spam. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:31, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::The CAPTCHA's would ''only'' be for IP edits, not for when a user edits something. Anyway, that would be terrible if a user had to enter a CAPTCHA to edit something (the reason they would not have to is because to create an account one has to enter a CAPTCHA...) Also, as you may have noticed, all the recent spam attackes have been automated, so hopefully if this is implemented it should help with the problem... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:44, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::So yea, try it and we'll see if the spam goes down. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:24, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::I agree with this completely. Should I go ahead and put them in, or should we wait for more users to comment? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:33, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Go for it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:41, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yeah. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:52, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Okay, it has been added. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 20:50, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::For some odd reason, i have had a captcha come up after all my edits today, despite the fact the captcha is only supposed to come up when an IP edits something (and I am logged in). Why is this, and can someone sort it please? Thanks. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:03, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::This should not be happening. I would recommend doing the following: log out, clear your browser cache, clear your browser history, clear all cookies relating to D&D Wiki, restart your browser, and then log back in and see if it is still giving you troubles. If it is, then I will definitely look into this problem further. I am sorry for the inconvenience that this is causing you, and will try to get it sorted out as soon as is possible. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 13:50, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::It has not worked. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 15:39, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Maybe you're an IP in disguise... ''':P'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:17, 4 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Err... no. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:55, 5 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Okay... Can I change your password (through the database) and login as you to asses the problem? I would like to see what is happening and hopefully give [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] enough information to fix this very strange problem. Would this be okay with you? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:41, 5 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:Yeah, sure. Can you change my password back afterwards though, please? Thanks. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:11, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Am I the only one getting the problem? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:23, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::No, I also experienced this today with my edits. Although, I'm behind a corporate firewall here, so I don't know if that has anything to do with it. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 09:25, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::No, I've gotten one after every edit I've made, even if it was just adding one letter. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:15, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Oops... I guess the setting was set so sysops were the only ones who did not have to give a CAPTCHA whereas everyone else did. The issue should now be fixed, and sorry about that... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:22, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::Much better. ''':D''' Now I can reformate the equipment section in peace. Which as an update I've finished nearly all the back to footers and have all but the magic weapons and over half the wondrous items updated to the MIC format. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 20:42, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Yeah, sorted. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:59, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Glad to hear it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:44, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Move towards new DPL ==<br />
<br />
Hello all, this site is running on a very outdated version of DPL, which has caused several hacks to have to be thrown together, and is potentially not allowing things to get done. When I upgraded this wiki to v11, I upgraded DPL as well, but most all pages that used DPL immediately stopped working. Is there an interest for me to get a test wiki running, and people can figure out how the DPL should be working, and then implement it? Or should we instead stick with what we have and wait until we really need the next version? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:07, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I honestly have no idea what the DPL is. So could someone tell me what it is and/or what it does? Then I could answer your questions. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:27, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::What are the new features of the new DPL version? For most purposes, the DPLs seem to be working well, but I know we've especially had to hack some DPL2 stuff. Would the new version fix this? [Watsyurname529, DPLs are dynamically assembled lists generally based off of category tags, e.g. [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_Base_Classes&action=edit this code] yields [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/User_Base_Classes this page].] &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 18:21, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I feel that we should implement the new dpl version. The DPL2 (at least according to [[User:Sledged|Sledged]]) would make it so we would not need three main different modifications of the dpl to be running on this site, the dpl, dplc, and the dpl2c (full list [[Special:Version|here]]). I think it would help D&D Wiki greatly to implement the newest version of the dpl, and make things easier for a new user to understand. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:48, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::There's a demo site for DPL with a manual [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page here].<br />
::::Is there a way to get a list of all the pages using dpl*? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 16:29, 8 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::[[MediaWiki:Pages using DPL]] is what True Orphans uses. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 18:17, 8 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::It's only listing the pages in the main/default namespace. What about the SRD pages? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 14:58, 13 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::The extension that page is for specifically excludes all SRD dpl pages, so those have never been added to that dpl list. We will have to compile a list on our own for SRD pages. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:54, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I see. Also, when I said "pages using <tt>dpl*</tt>," I meant also the <tt>dpl2c</tt>, <tt>dplc</tt>, and <tt>dpl2cu</tt> tags. I don't see any of the pages using those tags listed. If those pages can be identified before hand, it'll make an upgrade a bit easier. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:48, 15 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::To answer [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]]'s first question. This wiki is running version 0.7.7 of DPL2. The latest version is 1.5.2, so there is a significant number of changes. For brevity, I'll just list a few of the new features that apply to this wiki:<br />
:::*You can specify your own format for the output. For example you could list each result as a row in a table instead of getting the standard three column output.<br />
:::*In conjunction with the previous feature, DPL2 pull content from the listed pages for displaying as part of the output.<br />
:::*You can get results based on pages names and page content in addition to categories and namespaces. For instance, all the [[DnD Prestige Classes|user PrCs]] are assigned to the category beginning with the first letter of the page title. Those categories can be completely removed because DPL2 lets you return pages whose title's first letter matches one specified in the DPL2 call.<br />
:::*DPL2 can used to compensate for user error. Broken links like the one titled "Anima and Animus Mage" on the [[DnD Prestige Classes|user PrCs page]] can be eliminated.<br />
:::*With the latest version of DPL2 (an one other specific extension) users can create spell/feat/monster/etc filters like the one seen [http://www.penpaperpixel.org/tools/d20spellfilter/ here].<br />
:::*It can be used as a parser function (which I personally prefer over tags).<br />
:::*Pages that are linked to only from DPL calls are not listed as [[Special:Lonelypages|orphaned pages]].<br />
:::—[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 14:58, 13 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Okay, lets do it. What are the changes that need to be made to dpl pages to make this not be broken when implemented? What is the best way of going about this change? Should we change the pages first, then implement it, or implement it then fix all the errors on the dpl pages? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:54, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::There's one more complication to take into consideration; All the pages with the <tt>dpl*</tt> mod tags (<tt>dpl2c</tt>, <tt>dplc</tt>, and <tt>dpl2cu</tt>) have to be changed, not just list pages. So we'll have to go through all the class pages (base, prestige, npc, and racial paragon) and NPC pages. I think Blue's suggestion of a test wiki is the best way to do it. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:48, 15 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::It might not be necessary to set up a test wiki. I [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Issue:No_More_Globals submitted a request] over at the [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page DPL2 site] to transition all the globals to class members. If Gero decides to adopt it, the latest version and the currently installed version can be installed side-by-side without one conflicting with the other. The only caveat is that the line that reads<br />
<br />
::::::<pre>$wgParser->setHook( "DPL", array( __CLASS__, "dplTag" ) );</pre><br />
<br />
::::::in the new version will have to be commented out. This will disable using new version as a tag extension, but it will still be available as a parser function call; <tt>{<nowiki/>{#dpl:}}</tt>. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:23, 21 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::And [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page DPL2] version 1.6.0 (no more globals) has been released. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 09:42, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Okay, I upgraded to the latest version. Let me know if there are any errors. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 12:18, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== A Small Sample ===<br />
<br />
So here's a sample list of the user base classes, which I've limited to the 'A's:<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" style="text-align: left;"<br />
|+ Homebrew Base Classes with Descriptions<br />
|- {{#vardefine:odd|0}}<br />
! Name !! style="text-align: center;" | Balance<sup>[[#1|1]]</sup> (out of 10) !! Type<sup>[[#2|2]]</sup> !! Description<sup>[[#3|3]]</sup><br />
{{#dpl:category=DnD<br />
|titlematch=A%<br />
|category=User<br />
|category=Base Class<br />
|include={Balance}:1,{x0}:type:desc<br />
|mode=userformat<br />
|format=,¦- ²{#vardefine:odd¦²{#ifexpr: ²{#var:odd}²¦0¦1}²}²²{#ifexpr: ²{#var:odd}²¦¦class="even"}²\n¦ [[%PAGE%¦²{#replace:%PAGE%¦(DnD Class)¦}²]]\n,,<br />
|tablerow=¦style="text-align: center;" ¦ ²{#if: %%¦%%¦NR}²,\n¦%%,%%\n<br />
}}|-<br />
| colspan="7" class="foot" |<br />
# <span id="1">Shows how balanced a certain Class is, the number is out of 10. The Balance rating is from the actual Class's page; it is not made on this page. More information [[Balance System|here]].</span><br />
# <span id="2">A general category the Class fits into. e.g. Strong Spellcasting, Combat Focused, etc.</span><br />
# <span id="3"> A concise description of the Class-- should advertise the Class.</span><br />
|}<br />
—[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 13:59, 27 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I like it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:27, 29 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:: The Alchemist... I don't know if i would consider it a spell caster --[[User:Cerin616|Cerin616, Drew]] 15:58, 11 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Better now? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:20, 11 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== 4,000th Item! ==<br />
<br />
Whoo! I just posted the 4,000th homebrew item on this site! Amazing how much stuff we've got on here. Just want to say congrats to everyone who's posted/edited here. Also here is the 4,000th item: [[Fried Frying Pan (DnD Equipment)|Fried Frying Pan]] --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:29, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:If that number is correct.... ''':P'''. I think we may actually have more, they are just not categorized (that number is actually the number of items in [[:Category:DnD]]). Although, I agree. Congratulations all! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:51, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Hey, it says 4000 Items on the main page and that's good enough for me ''':P''' to you too, lol. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 20:56, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Meh... ''':)'''. Also, if you want to make that number more accurate please take a look at the [[Special:TrueOrphans|TrueOrphans]] (which may not be true&mdash;I think [[MediaWiki:Pages_using_DPL]] needs to be updated...). However, feel free to categorize those things and, overall, make things on D&D Wiki be linked to! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:14, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
==Sidebar Change==<br />
Dungeons and Dragons or Homebrew?<br />
<br />
The side bar has an option called "Dungeons and Dragons" that takes you to the Homebrew section. This seems to me to be misleading and should be changed to "Homebrew." This is not that big of a deal, but it would be more consistant. --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 15:09, 18 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Actually, there's more than just homebrew material there (though the vast majority of it is homebrew). It also contains OGC from source books like ''Unearthed Arcana'', ''Relics and Rituals'', ''Creature Collection'', ''Monster Manual II'', and such. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:38, 21 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Currently on the [[Main Page]] we call that entire section "Homebrew Content" even though it has more than just that (as [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] pointed out above). If we want to be nitpicky, that is also a problem. Anyway, the reason it is called "Dungeons and Dragons" on the sidebar is that the sidebar cannot have any real wiki-syntax. The ideal organization for that would be something like:<br />
::D&D<br />
:::[[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew]] (even though it's not all homebrew...)<br />
:::[[System Reference Document|SRD]]<br />
::D20M<br />
:::[[D20 Modern|Homebrew]] (even though it's not all homebrew...)<br />
:::[[Modern System Reference Document|MSRD]]<br />
::However, that is not possible. Since that is not possible we try to do the best we can, and that is the current way. Actually, this post has given me an idea... Maybe another box, labeled "D&D" and one labeled "D20M" could exist, with the links in them... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:43, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I just changed it. What does everyone think? Better? Worse? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:45, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I dont mean to be picky. I also dont mean to make extra work for ya all. I just through out ideas when I have them. I like the change, but I also like the reasons given above for why it was the way it was. That is why I like wiki format. I hardly ever make changes, but I do add my ideas to disscution.--[[User:Mander|Mander]] 22:44, 29 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I hesitate to bring it up, but I think it might be worth mentioning; The D&D section could be split up into "homebrew" and "published OGC" sections. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:07, 30 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::First off you were not a bother at all, [[User:Mander|Mander]]. The sidebar is very easy to change and it's always great to improve things. Anyway, I feel that as soon as we have enough published OGC material (we are reaching it though, if one counts NBoF as "published") then we should definitely spit "DnD" up into published OGC and Homebrew. However, right now I do not think we have enough... Maybe when all the UA material is posted we can give it a shot, but until then I do not think we have enough OGC content. Your thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:48, 4 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::: So many acronyms, so few ranks in knowlege-acronyms...--[[User:Mander|Mander]] 01:30, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Age of the internet. Soon everything we be reduced to acronyms, IMHO. [[Help:FAQ#What are OGL, OGC, SRD, and GNU FPL?|OGC]], [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/welcome DnD], [http://datadeco.com/nbofeats/ NBoF], and [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/881560000 UA] (which I really should finish transcribing). —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 02:31, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Actually, speaking of acronyms, it would be helpful to have a list of all the D&D acronyms in [[DnD Other]] (I am sure a list exists on the internet, it just needs to be copied over). Also, sorry about using all those acronyms above. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:31, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
New question: Shouldn't the [[UA:Variant Rules|UA Transcript]] be linked in the sidebar? -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 17:02, 16 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:It should. What should we call it, Unearthed Arcana, UA, Variant SRD, or what? Ideas? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:48, 16 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Maybe UA: Variants? -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 08:34, 17 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::: Or "UA Variant Rules." Either one works for me. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:00, 17 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I have added it. Does it look okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:45, 18 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Looks great! -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 17:01, 21 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Maps? ==<br />
<br />
:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:Dungeons and Dragons#New Section: Maps?]]<small> It dealt with Homebrew specific material, not everything on the site --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:52, 4 December 2007 (MST)</small><br />
<br />
== Tavern Schedule ==<br />
<br />
Should a small Tavern Schedule be placed on the main page on the right side (floating)? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:40, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I think this is a good idea to increase use of the tavern, but it would be best if days that already had events planned were highlighted, a different text color, the only days with links, etc. They need to stand out; otherwise, I have to click each day to even see if there is anything that day. It almost seems to me that a mini-program/extension is needed to code that to make it more useful... still, the calendar is a great idea. That is the best suggestion I have heard to increase usage of the tavern. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:35, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::The days that have events are blue. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:43, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Much better. I like it. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 20:24, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== New Logo ==<br />
<br />
{| align="right" class="d20"<br />
|-<br />
! Submitted Logos:<br />
|-<br />
| ''Please submit your own logo!''<br/>[[dndmedia:Special:Upload|Upload it!]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:D&D logo-test1.png|frame|From Maria C.]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:D&D logo-test2.png|frame|From [[User:Xidoraven|Xidoraven]]]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:D&D logo-test3.png|frame|Variation 1]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:D&D logo-test4.png|frame|Variation 2]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:Logo.png|frame|Current logo]]<br />
|}<br />
<br />
=== Official Updates ===<br />
<br />
Here is what will happen. A two week submission period will start now, after this time when more logos or variations have been submitted, a one week voting period will take place. So, right now, please upload all the variations of these logos or your own D&D Wiki logo and in two weeks time the D&D Wiki community will decide what the logo will become. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:57, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:The voting for which logo should become D&D Wiki's logo will start February 9th. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:13, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== Voting ===<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" style="text-align: left;"<br />
|+ New Logo &mdash; Voting (Please use "#" and extra lines to separate votes)<br />
! [[Image:D&D logo-test1.png]]<br />
! [[Image:D&D logo-test2.png]]<br />
! [[Image:D&D logo-test3.png]]<br />
! [[Image:D&D logo-test4.png]]<br />
! [[Image:Logo.png]]<br />
|-<br />
! From Maria C.<br />
! From [[User:Xidoraven|Xidoraven]]<br />
! Variation 1<br />
! Variation 2<br />
! Current logo<br />
|-<br />
| <br />
#<br />
| <br />
# [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]]<br />
# [[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]]<br />
# [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]]<br />
# [[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]]<br />
# [[User:Young DM|Young DM]]<br />
# [[User:Arohanui|Arohanui]]<br />
# [[User:Othtim|Othtim]]<br />
# [[User:Mask man|Mask man]]<br />
# [[User:kreik|kreik]]<br />
# [[User:EaTCarbS|EaTCarbS]]<br />
# [[User:Lordsnarf|Lordsnarf]]<br />
| <br />
#[[User:Silver Dragon|Silver Dragon]]<br />
| <br />
#[[User:Hawk|Hawk]]<br />
#[[User:Pirate-Sorcerer|Pirate-Sorcerer]]<br />
#[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]]<br />
#[[Summerscythe]]<br />
#[[User:Wackymynd|Wackymynd]]<br />
#[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]]<br />
#[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]]<br />
| <br />
#<br />
|}<br />
<br />
Everyone agree that we have reached a consensus? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:16, 24 February 2008 (MST)<br />
:Looks like we have to me 11/1/6 Xidoraven has a pretty big lead. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 23:40, 24 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I believe that the vote looks pretty definitive. Please let me know if anyone ever gives you problems from Wizards.com or Hasbro, Inc. I am currently working with them in a professional capacity, so I will be able to speak for my work myself, and in direct communications to them. If they want my business, they will not harass this site for being loyal consumers and fans of a popular product line. Best of wishes to you all.<br />
::GD, if you have any more input on what we talked about before, please let me know by email. I am having a hard time getting back here to check on my pages right now. -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 08:03, 25 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Changed. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:24, 26 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Looks good, everyone. Thanks for the support, and let me know if you need any other design ideas, since you may feel the need in the future to reconsider color usage, etc. Are there any ideas for what would be placed in the background area, if not the current Player's Handbook image? -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 00:39, 11 March 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
=== General Discussion on Submitted Logos ===<br />
<br />
We have had two submissions for a new logo. One of them is from [[User:Xidoraven|Xidoraven]], and the other is from Maria C. Both of them are shown below, and we should decide to either keep the current logo or change to one of these. Please leave feedback. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:04, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I like the second one. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 15:05, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I vote for Xidoraven's. I like colorful. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 15:06, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I wonder what the first would look like with a bit more color. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 15:10, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I really like the dragon on the first logo, however I feel that the wording on that logo may be a little hard to read. So, I think it may look very nice if both the trial logos were merged into one. The "D&D Wiki" would be cut out of the first logo and the "D&D Wiki" text from xido's image would be pasted over it, albeit a little smaller. Does anyone think this idea has some merit? Is it worth exploring further? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:35, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Variation 2 is great! I give that my vote. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 16:23, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
:::::On second thought... I like Variation 1. Arrrg... It is difficult because the logo seems too big with the dragon, yet too small at the same time. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 16:24, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I like variation 2, except the logo should be moved a bit down and right so that the entire graphic is a bit more square (lest the words encroach on the dragon picture)... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 06:06, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Variation 2 OR Xidoravens. Either way, it's really cool! A new logo for a new edition... --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:46, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Variation 2 has me as well. Also, if anyone wants to compile their own variation or make their own logo please do! We need all the options we can get! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:56, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::My wife votes Xidoravens ''':P'''. I'm actually really not sure. I like Variation 1, 2, and Xidoravens... Perhaps we should set up an official vote? --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 18:01, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Is there going to be an "official vote" (whatever that may mean)? Variation 2 is my preferences, and I agree that it would likely look even better with the dragon picked out in red and gold. Also, whichever one is chosen, is it kosher for me to slap the logo up places (such as my blog) linking back to the wiki, as a means of promotion? --[[User:Arohanui|Arohanui]] 01:03, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::I've gotta agree, but with xido's colors, I wouldn't mind seeing the dragon colored as a [[SRD:Half-Dragon|half-gold dragon]] [[SRD:Red Dragon|red dragon]]. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 21:39, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::First off I agree, if the dragon was given some color this entire logo could come out very sharp. Secondly, xido, tell me if I am wrong. You are basically saying that you would be okay to work with the dragon image if Maria C. has the same intentions you have of modifying D&D iconic images for a good cause. Since I cannot speak for Maria C. I will contact her and ask her to join this discussion to help discuss her logo and the final outcome of D&D Wiki's logo. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:19, 25 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::I agree with Blue Dragon. As for my vote for the logos, I like the two combinations, particularly the second one. -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 09:37, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:I also have to say, I really like the dragon in the middle of Xido's logo. I think that using his for the top logo, and then Maria's for a softer logo, potentially on the main page, could be used. However, I feel that a voting period should exist. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:30, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Definitely Version two and It shouldn't be changed a bit the black and white dragon behind the blazing dnd wiki looks awesome but as a second choice id go for Xidoraven's logo by itself<br />
<br />
:::I like Xidoraven's original logo. [[User:Kimmuriel|Kimmuriel]] 18:39, 14 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::: Xidoraven for prez! --[[User:Othtim|Othtim]]<br />
<br />
:::::I would make a terrible president. I would prefer project coordinator, or community shaman, but not something as pop-culture as presidente. ;) -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 07:18, 16 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
Okay, how do i put my name on variation 2, that my fav :D - [[User:Zombiecow|Zombiecow]]<br />
<br />
=== Authors Comments and Discussion ===<br />
<br />
Font size is highly important in a logo concept, especially when they are sized down this much. I designed the font spacing and proportions with that in mind. Also, though I enjoy the integration of the two (trust me, my inner artist is inspired - not jealous), it seems a little busy, and the dragons look dim compared to the heavy vibrancy I put into the original 4e-based concept. I know it sounds haughty and rude, but I choose my own. If Miss Maria would be willing to revise her concept, I think they would more accurately meld. Her design would need the words removed fully, and would require a splash of color (like a layer over it, that appears like watercolor, or an expressive way of 'filling in the lines'). The logo I created has heavier contrast even than that of the original 4e logo design. I had not anticipated it being integrated with another black-and-white (or blank) portion. Had I known, I might have prepared an alternative. -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 21:30, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:As a second thought: Here's my other dilemma.<br />
:I do not know Miss Maria, but I know that her artwork is based on Lockwood's, and that is a blatant copyright infringement of one of the most controversial materials produced by Wizards: Commissioned Artwork. ([http://wizards.com/dnd/images/MM35_gallery/MM35_PG76.jpg])<br />
:I am well aware of the fact I pulled a concept from 4e D&D corporate design, knowing full well that it might bring a lawsuit upon me. I am also communicating with the makers of Scrabulous (Scrabulous.com) currently, because I feel that what is happening right now with their product is an issue in international business ethics. I openly state that my work is a mere pseudo-forgery of Wizards own internally-produced corporate graphics, but I appreciate and respect Mr. Lockwood for being such a professional artist in his field, and cannot openly condone utilizing his work in our own endeavors. If the piece was just a tad different from the Red Dragon's stance or appearance, I could see over-looking it, but this is something that is necessary for an artist to understand up-front. I openly admit to pirating the official 4e logo design from Wizards for a good cause, but I would hope that Miss Maria would be able to do the same in her position.<br />
:That being said, the general concensus on what constitutes 'unique artwork' is at least 15% difference from the original piece. Though she has flipped the image on its vertical axis, and turned detailed painting into rough black outlines, I would think it would need just a ''tad'' more work done to it to be considered anything other than outright plagiarism. If Miss Maria is aware of my own intentions, and has the same goals of her own, then I can look the other way. I would prefer to go down alone if I am to go down as an artist. At least this way, no one can say that you paid me for my services, but that I instead gave them openly as a professional operating in the open-source markets under the GNU license.<br />
:That's my last piece. -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 22:09, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Hello, this is Maria. First of all, I am not Miss Maria as you have taken a fancy of calling me. Second, I created this wood engraving without the knowledge of what's copyrighted and what is not. Green Dragon is family friend and has been nagging me for months to create a logo understanding that I am a graphic design artist. He handed me d&d books and asked me to make a logo. So I choose something cool, changed it, carved it, printed it, modified it on the computer. Green Dragon did not give any advice for this, only that it needed to be done. I wasn't told of anything so I am sorry for the copyright infringement. I also created this logo not for a profit such, but for this 'community' which may be considered a good cause since I get not one thing out of it. And xudo, you need to work on being respectful. You seem jealous that someone else has submitted artwork and that you aren't the only one with fame. 'Artists' are so competitive and always trying to be the best with their noses in the air. -Maria {{Unsigned|Xuthukzaklath|15:16, 25 January 2008 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
:::As a friendly site note to all, I vote that the attacks should stop. This should be a logo design competition in which '''the best''' logo is chosen. There is no need to either of the creators to bicker. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 09:35, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I highly agree, BD.<br />
::::I just wanted to make my comments publicly known. I have absolutely no problem with the mods of this site asking multiple artists for their ideas. I am glad that you have put forward as well. That is how professional art works. Everyone puts forward what they have to give, and then the leaders decide which works best for what they'd like to portray the project. In this case, there were two options, plus the idea of combining. I have not a single problem with any of those ideas, and in fact wish for the mods to make their own decision. As an artist, I may seem biased. In fact, my words (including the word 'blatant') may have had a negative ring or tone to them, but I assure you that my mental inflection did not.<br />
::::I only want to make everyone aware that I have taken multiple considerations into effect in stealing elements of Hasbro's corporate logo in order to promote this open-source site's mission of helping the public. I have a SERIOUS issue with Hasbro & Mattel's current intellectual property campaign at the moment, as well as their business ethics toward third-party producers of copyrighted content. This is because of the legal drama happening with Scrabulous.com. It is for this reason that I am openly providing my professional services to the mods of this site, in order to help them, just as you, Maria, have done. I respect your position and comments. Please just know that I wanted my input to be put out there, in case you were not aware of the legal implications of that particularly recognizable image (the red dragon literally is '''''the most''''' reproduced dragon in D&D as of this year, in terms of rulebook, supplemental, and related material to the D&D brand line. To utilize this image would be a very risky and potentially harmful venture. That is my only point here. If you are okay with that risk, I am okay with it. But please note that the reasons for THAT piracy is not in any way the same as the professional stance I am making by utilizing corporate branding material from Hasbro, as opposed to the very highly recognizable works of Mr. Lockwood, whom I revere admirably as an artist.<br />
::::On a sidenote, I assumed that being a Maria, that you are a female. I could be wrong here. In the state of Louisiana, where I have recently moved to, it is customary for men in particular to respectfully call a woman of any form (whether married, divorced, single, or otherwise) 'Miss Whoever'. I was merely trying to be courteous. I hope I have not offended. That was not my intent.<br />
::::Thanks for understanding, all, and I hope that the Mods can make an adequate decision on the logo design. I would not like to seem biased, so I will leave it all up to you, having said my piece. Best wishes, -- [[User:70.172.234.38|70.172.234.38]] 19:59, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::PS - I don't want to seem pushy, but I have always had a hard time voting on this site. Perhaps making a username profile on Elftown.com, and seeing the way their own polls are set up might give you ideas for future changes. Privacy features, public features, wiki-features, and a pseudo-html are all able to be used there. I have had some really good success with hosting polls on Elftown to get input or for contests of any multiple-choice form. -- [[User:70.172.234.38|70.172.234.38]] 19:59, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== Legality of Images ===<br />
<br />
As to the copyright issues, I believe that the background of our skin is a WoTC copyrighted image. I feel that if we receive a cease and desist letter they will be removed, but beyond that, I feel that it should not be a major issue. Also, I have another interesting idea. I think that Xidoraven's is powerful, and in that sense alone looks quite nice. Would there be any major consideration to have the background of the main page be this dragon, or something similar? A watermark, so to speak? The second combination could also potentially be modified by Xidoraven, seeing that he would know what to do for D&D Wiki's purposes. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 09:40, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Actually, both the skin and the logos would be covered under the free use clause of international copyright law, as it is neither being used to make money nor infringes the copyright holder's ability to sell goods. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:53, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Sam, I just want to say a quick word about free use (I know you like it, so I won't be too harsh). Essentially, the clause is the "wiggle room" in an otherwise extremely strict copyright law and allows for things like academic criticism, etc. However, exactly what constitues "fair use" and what constitutes "unfair use" is loosely defined in the law, and it is important that you know that the United States judicial system has historically ruled very strictly against those parties who (in their eyes) abuse the clause. So, we should tread a bit softly. However, as was said above, if we (Green Dragon, actually) is issued a cease and desist order from any company (such as those owning HALO and LotR, for example, or especially from Hasbro) then we will have to delete the content. Basically, I just want it to be noted that fair use is limited, especially within the widely respected bounds of legal precedent, so don't be too sure that certain images, etc. can be freely used under "fair use." Further, the likelyhood of abuse increases as more information is added. Thus, if I were to quote a line from the PHB as evidence in an argument, that would certainly pass litmus. The more direct and derivative information that is added, though, the more likely it is that infringement will ensue. (Please also note that all material and information derived from a copyrighted source is also [partially] owned by that source, which includes information and rules we might create for use in, for example, the HALO setting). A final note: Wizards of the Coast is renowned for its aggressive pursual in copyright infringement cases after inherited issues involving TSR, Palladium, and certain other companies, a historical precedent that everyone here should be aware of. In any case, please keep in mind that so long as there are no legal actions served we should be okay (this site is not for profit thus far, though if we begin to earn revenue from advertising this will importantly change), but&mdash;if the issue comes to a head&mdash; we will most definitely be on the losing side and will have to remove content or face court action. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 09:22, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I was aware of that. I had to do quite abit of research into it when I did LotR. I do think, however, that as there are Wikias for both LotR and Halo, neither of which have yet been sued, the CSs in question should be fine. Although the dragon thing is a definatly something we should think over carefully. Although, as we are only considering a logo, the risk is small (I think). So, yes, those things are fine for now and we can remove them if we get into trouble. The biggest problem with free use is definatly it's vagueness. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:05, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Protection of Pages ==<br />
<br />
You know this isnt much of a wiki since everything is editblocked.if someone vandalizes a page u REVERT it [[User:Zau|Zau]] 03:12, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:? Of course we revert it! Why should we let our work be spoiled by vandal? All wiki's revert vandallism. The point of a wiki is to work together to improve the whole thing, rather than to reck the whole thing by vandalism. And about those editblocked pages- those are mostly SRD, which is official material that we aren't allowed to whimsically edit. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:49, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I have unlocked this page to IP edits, we will see what happens. Also, the SRD's protection is up in the air right now, if all goes well with the new UA material on D&D Wiki (which, even though it is OGC, is only protected from IP edits) then the SRD may very well become protected only from IP edits as well. If you are referring to specific GNU FLD homebrew pages that are protected, they are only protected because the author of the page is question has asked them to be protected. They will never become un-protected unless the author wishes this to happen. I hope this helps answer your question as to why so many pages on D&D Wiki are protected. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:03, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Index of True Dragons ==<br />
<br />
:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:True Dragon Index#Location?]]<small> as it dealt with that page. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 09:25, 8 February 2008 (MST)</small><br />
<br />
== Published Settings ==<br />
<br />
Hi I was wondering does anyone know whether it would be legal to publish information about old dnd settings on here or homebrew stuff for those settings ie: planescape or spelljammer? also would it be legal to do the same for the still in print settings like forgotten realms and eberron? and would anyone else be interested in stuff like this? [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 22:42, 7 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:New settings = no. Not allowed, as they aren't under the OGL (I think...). Old ones I'm not sure about. -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 22:28, 8 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Probably not. The old stuff isn't under the OGL. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:03, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::If it is licensed under the [[OGL]] please add them, however I do not think any of them are... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:43, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I'm pretty sure It is technically not allowed unless we want to make fun of them in which case it falls under fair use in the copyright acts of the world lol. Does anyone know how we could find out for sure? [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 06:42, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::They cannot be added. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:08, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Semantic MediaWiki ==<br />
<br />
I do not pretend to understand this nor what it would take to implement but would it be possible to use something like [http://ontoworld.org/wiki/Semantic_MediaWiki] to create forms to make adding entries for new users easier. there are a number of entries that need to be formatted if a form formatted the entries for them this problem may be fixed. Although it would only help at page creation its a start. Any thoughts?<br />
<br />
I should point out the form wouldn't replace editing the code directly just allow another option for those who have no idea how to format. Which means those who like to stare down the face of a page of code (myself included) could still do so. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 02:25, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I've briefly grazed over that extension, and I've yet to take it for a test run, but I think you're right that there may be some useful nuggets along with the semantic forms extension (which requires semantic wiki). I'd been meaning to ask [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] or [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] to take it for a spin in development environments and give input on it. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:36, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I think it would be useful only problem is that it needs to be added to dnd wiki then someone has to make the forms, it's a fair amount of work. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 21:29, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_MediaWiki About]. Not sure if this is really what we are looking for... It, as far as I can tell, would just help with dynamic categories and act a little like the dpl2c feature we currently use. I think an external script for adding things (as [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] is working on) may be a better option. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:10, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::My apologies I was unclear on what I meant I'm lucky Sledged knew what I meant. Its not the semantic wiki itself that I am interested in but the [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Semantic_Forms Semantic forms extension]. As far as I understand it it allows you to 'simply' create a form to fill out and will take care of the wiki coding for you. If you scroll down to the Special Pages heading and look at the examples it will give you a better idea of what this is. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 23:24, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree with you, that is a very interesting extension, and I could see it being very useful here on D&D Wiki. The only problem I see is that, although impressive, it requires a Semantic Wiki as a prerequisite. I am not sure I would want D&D Wiki to become a Semantic Wiki, although the decision is not mine it is the communities. Maybe someone could change the code so a Semantic Wiki is not needed and it can work within the normal MediaWiki environment? That would make it quite a bit more appealing ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:59, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I have not read all the material and probably wouldn't understand most of it anyway I believe it would be beyond my ken, my knowledge of wikis and php is limited. What would be involved in implementing this do you think? What would 'becoming a semantic wiki' do? You seem to have reservations I'm just wondering if there are draw backs you foresee? [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 06:25, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::I gave a look at Semantic Wiki and I think it is a great idea. In my experience as a technical writer, duplication of information is one of the Prime Evils. Namely, here was the criteria that led me to really want to add dpl to races and now feats:<br />
:::::::*All information about a particular topic should be in the same location.<br />
:::::::*Updating information should update other pages that use that information.<br />
:::::::Where I work, we use a form of documentation source files called DocBook. DocBook is much like this wiki where information must be repeated because there is no inclusion mechanism. There is another form of documentation source, which we are considering switching to after the next release of our software. This format is called Dita. Dita allows you to segment information into sections which can be included directly by other pages. This concept is partially similar to Semantic Wiki, but I would argue, less powerful. Semantic Wiki allows you to tag information as a particular type of information. It might be a little more work to create a page, but all of the sudden we have so much more power to categorize our information.<br />
:::::::On a race page, for example, we can have a "quick synopsis" type of data which users would use for a sentence that describes the race. The page could also have an "ability score adjustment" type of data and a "level adjustment" type of data. All of the x0 templates I put on the top of race pages would be unnecessary at this point. The advantage being: if a user updates the source of the race (ie: changes the Ability score adjustments from +2 str to +2 con), it will automatically change the race table without requiring the x0 template at the top of the page to be changed. This means that the information displayed in the tables will always be true to the source.<br />
:::::::The big problem with Semantic Wiki is that it would be a LOT of work from the startup. Probably a few months of work if we want to fully integrate it. So no matter how great I think the idea is, it is probably not a feasible or worthwhile one to integrate.<br />
:::::::Now [[User:Hawk|Hawk]], you seem to be interested in the same thing that I am (and in fact something I have been working on). You want some sort of form based generator that will automatically format the pages after you supply some information. I have almost finished an NPC Generator, which should be promising. I just need to add in spellcasting, epic spellcasting, and special abilities. Forms can always be done directly in php and linked to. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 07:14, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::This forms extension allows you to not only create a page but edit it using the forms as far as I can tell. I do not know if your PHP pages can do that but if they do it creates a slight issue on the off chance that someone is editing the page on the wiki and on the form the wiki edit would be wiped over when you save the form as it is working directly with the database (I assume). Where as using this forms extension your still working within the wiki and it will prompt you like normal that there is a conflict (yet again I assume) and the situation can be remedied. I do not know exactly what semantic wiki does but the benefits of the forms extension as I understand them are:<br />
::::::::* Creation and editing of pages through forms<br />
::::::::* Users can create their own forms 'easily'<br />
::::::::* Those new to wiki's can use these forms and the page will be automatically wikified which means very little formating will be required afterwards.<br />
::::::::* The fact your filling in a form rather than code means that it's less daunting for the new user and they are more likly to contribute.<br />
::::::::* Organization of Dnd Wiki can easily be improved as categories can be added automatically to entries by use of the forms.<br />
::::::::[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 08:01, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::What I have been working is only for initial creation, though at some point I would like to have an "import feature". If we had it all form based, however, people would not learn wiki syntax, which is a powerful syntax in its own right. Is that a bad thing? I'm really not sure. Templates can also automatically add categories though.<br />
:::::::::I still don't understand exactly how a wiki works on the back end, and I am actually going to toy with Media Wiki and Semantic Wiki (with the forms extension) tonight. I will see if I can integrate an application with the wiki directly, while still preserving the wiki ways (as an edit not an overwrite). I will also see how easy it is to create a semantic wiki form. Not that my input is even close to the be-all and end-all of this discussion, but I would like to share what I learn with the community. I hope that Semantic Wiki is very easy to use and the forms feature is as well. Good call making note of it! --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 10:28, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Personally I love coding I'm a nerd I admit it lol, but what it keeps coming down to for me is not everyone does and allowing those people to add and edit their creations on here would be awesome. And the forms extension seems to be the quickest, easiest and most effective way of doing that. Let me know how you go with the testing it will be interesting to see if it performs as well as I am hoping. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 10:36, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Did you end up trying this out Aarnott? [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 21:09, 21 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Short answer: yes. Long answer: I think I messed up on the install because I'm getting some strange errors thrown during runtime (like when I access the localhost server). I'm going to uninstall everything today and retry it (no work or school today -- yay!). Third time is a charm ''':)'''. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 08:37, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::So it ended up being an easy thing to install and I was just being dumb ''':P'''. I have got a few form examples working and I think it is a really sweet extension, but there is a major problem that really limits the Semantic Form usage. The form must be used to fill a template (at least from my knowledge using their built-in form generator). This poses a problem if we wanted to have users fill in a race page for example. They could only fill out the author template and x0 template (or Race template if we replace that), but the point stands that there are limitations. Semantic Wiki on its own though looks like a really great extension and the forms extension would be good to use at least for some pages. All the work I have done with races, for example, can be made a lot better by tagging particular parts of an article. If we can get the form extension working in the ideal way, then new users will never create a poorly formatted page. I say go for the installs. They definitely don't hurt and in fact I will start a project to tag all the races so we can get rid of templates to store information. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 11:30, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:Okay, we can give it a go. I will have [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] install it when he answers me back. Also, I am a little confused as to what you are saying above. Can we or can we not get rid of the [[Template:x0]] on the races' pages with this extension? I thought this made it so one can "tag" certain parts of an article and have those "tags" show up on a different page as well (like a split [[Template:x0]] (just like [[DnD Deities|Deities]] is currently organized)). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:38, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::We can get rid of any templates we use that duplicate information already in the article (such as x0). What happens is we create properties which are used to identify information. So in the case of a Race, we would have a property called "Ability Score Adjustments" or something like that and tag the section directly in the article that refers to the ability score adjustments. Instead of using dpl to grab template information, we use semantic wiki to grab the "Ability Score Adjustment" directly from the page. The main advantage in my opinion is that when you update a page, you only have to change information once and then the tables update. It will be some work though (thus why it would become a project for me), but Semantic Wiki does not change existing wiki functionality, which is a very good thing. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 11:45, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I installed WAMP (appache server + php + mysql latest stable versions) on my vista ultimate machine last night and then installed media wiki semantic and the forms extension I had no trouble it installed perfectly (apart from me stupidly trying to instal semantic forms with a mysql user that didn't have permission to create tables). I have been fiddling around a little havnt had much time though. Here's what i've figured out:<br />
:::# You create properties like string, page or date first<br />
:::# Then create templates (using the template making tool that comes with the forms) I made a author template and a very quick deity template.<br />
:::# then you make a form. You pick Author click add. then you click deity and click add (you can create forms which use more than one template!)<br />
:::# name the form then save<br />
:::# when you go to the form it will ask for a page name type one in like "MyDeity (DnD Deity)" hit enter<br />
:::# you are then taken to the form you fill it out it makes the page as per the templates it works as described !!! :O<br />
:::# you can even edit the page again using the form !!!<br />
::: [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 19:11, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
::::There is one thing though semantic wiki adds a box at the bottom of the page "Facts about..." if it can be removed i'd be happier. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 19:16, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
:::::I just realized it would be relatively easy to turn our current preloads into templates add a few bits of code you have a compatible template to make a form for and if you edit the template EVERY SINGLE CREATURE, DEITY OR CLASS (that uses that template) IS EDITED AS WELL!!! meaning we decide we want the classes to look like (insert format here) we can instantly change them all at once!!! [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 19:36, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::The problem lies in the fact that we will have to change every single homebrew page. I'm up for the challenge (as long as it takes), but help will be nice if you are willing ''':)'''. It does seem pretty nifty though. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 20:20, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::I do not want this extension if the "Facts about" (or whatever it is called) is present. Is there a way to remove it? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:07, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I am more than happy to help. What we need is to create the forms and templates so that all new entries use them. then start changing things over slowly, On the plus side if it takes awhile to convert the old stuff its not so bad as they will look exactly as they do now until we get to them. Perhaps we should consider moving this discussion onto it's own page before this page gets so large it destroys the Internet. I would also suggest holding off on installing it until we've fiddled some more to see what effect it has on the wiki like the damn facts about table. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 22:10, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::I should point out the facts about table is only present on pages that use semantic data so if we did instal it it wouldnt effect anything until we started to make pages with semantic data on them. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 22:14, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::This is an image of an author table I created useing a form [http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/6099/66402195ri6.jpg]<br />
::::::::::Notice it looks exactly the same as our current author table. Below is the form:<br />
::::::::::[http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/5454/36613376en2.jpg] [http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/766/83147904gr7.jpg] <br />
::::::::::Notice on the form the date field it is contextual so all dates on author pages will have the same format so yet more consistency [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 23:03, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::First off, what is that operating system your using... please don't say Vista ''';)'''; Ubuntu überalles. Anyway, again, is there anyway to remove the "facts about" box? If that can be removed this will be installed right away. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:47, 24 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::I'm afraid so I use (and like) Windows Vista Ultimate Version 6.0.6000 Build 6000. Ok I have figured out how to get rid of the factbox (that's its official name) you need to edit "SMW_Settings.php" in the folder "[wiki folder]\extensions\SemanticMediaWiki\includes". this line "$smwgShowFactbox = SMW_FACTBOX_NONEMPTY;" needs to be changed to "$smwgShowFactbox = SMW_FACTBOX_HIDDEN;" and this line "$smwgShowFactboxEdit = SMW_FACTBOX_NONEMPTY;" needs to be changed to "$smwgShowFactboxEdit = SMW_FACTBOX_HIDDEN;". Pages that were created with semantic data on them before you change these lines seem to keep the factbox for some reason on my machine so those settings should be changed as soon as the extension is installed. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 23:35, 24 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::I've put my project of wikifying entries on hold until we figure all this out because if we decide to edit the old entries so they use the forms templates I'll be doubling up on work. If we make semantic templates out of the preloads the articles made with forms will look like our current entries but if we want the old entries to get layout updates automatically like the new entries will be able to we will have to change all the old entries. As [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] says it will be a mammoth task but in the end I think the benefits are worth it. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 23:45, 26 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:Is there an ETA for Blue Dragon to put this on the server? I'm eager to work on using the Semantic features! --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 12:36, 27 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::It should be done now! ''':)''' &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 22:45, 28 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I say lets start with [[LA 8 Races]]. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:22, 28 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Okay, so [[Form:DnD Equipment]] was created, however the category issue and the identifier issue still needs to be solved. Any ideas on how to fix these problems? Also, I feel this would be a lot easier if two edit boxes worked on a form, however it seems they do not. Any ideas on how to circumvent this, or can two of them work on a form somehow? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:16, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::: Sorry GD but I don't have a clue what your asking. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 05:39, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::[[Form:DnD Equipment]] now includes categories, I do not know all the categories for subtype ie: outfits armor etc and the way i've written it you can only have one type category and one subtype category if someone wants to find a way around that be my guest and could someone who knows all the categories add a list to [[Property:Item Subtype]] for me the list should be written like [[Property:Item Type]]. I made some properties for the author template so we could use the new semantic search functionality to search for say all pages with me as the author but the template wasn't working properly after I added them so I reverted the edit I'll try to get it to work later but if someone else wants to try be my guest. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 07:04, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::P.S. Sorry about littering the recent changes pages with all those edits its hard to tell what an edit will do when your working on a template and form at the same time and changes to a form cant be seen through the preview button (because you only see the page title input box). also feel free to delete the page entitled test. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 07:09, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::P.P.S. I have added code to Category:Equipment so that any page using that category will have a tab at the top "Edit with form" which will send you to the equipment form. This will allow novices to edit their page without having to edit code and will allow us to edit the old pages so they use the form now. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 07:34, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::I have deleted the "Edit with Form" option &mdash; I want people to learn wiki syntax. Blue Dragon also implemented this, however I am not a fan. Deleted. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:55, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Are you sure you want to enforce that? The whole purpose of wiki-markup is so that users don't have to know HTML to created and edit pages. Semantic Forms takes it one step further by narrowing the amount of wiki-markup a user has to use. It seems a bit counter-intuitive to actively require users to learn the wiki syntax. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:23, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::This "edit with form" thing might help improve the formatting of pages made by new or non-users. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:55, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:Damn you [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ''';)''', you're very right. Okay, I guess we can have them... It's just that I do not want a generation of users not learning wiki syntax; that could be detrimental to D&D Wiki. However, what is the goal of D&D Wiki? It's to provide a place where users can submit homebrew content so it can be played in other D&D campaigns. Editing with forms will just help make the goal of posting things and fixing things on D&D Wiki easier. I guess we should have it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:29, 29 February 2008 (MST) <br />
<br />
::For me it's more about letting people add and edit content easily without having to learn the entire wiki syntax in one hit. If they want their creations to look good they still have to learn syntax for stuff like equipment as there is no standard format for the item description etc so at current we just have an input box, but if they don't bother with syntax as a lot of creation i've wikified didn't then the form has done most of the wikifying for us. Does that mean I can put the edit with form tab back up? --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 19:04, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I say go for it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:26, 2 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== SMW and DPL ===<br />
<br />
There's been a request for [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page DPL] to be able to access SMW properties. I'm keeping an eye out for when this gets implemented. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:19, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Once the semantic data is implemented it would be possible to replace the dpl generated tables with inline queries, if anyone is interested in doing that we would not need the DPL to be able to access SMW. I'm not sure how the DPL works exactly but SMW inline queries are done each time someone looks at a page so if the DPL doesn't do this using SMW inline queries may put more strin on the server for more information goto the SMW [http://semantic-mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Inline_queries manual] --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 18:59, 29 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I'll have to play around with it and see the level of flexibility compared to DPL. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 04:35, 1 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Had trouble using the queries on my test wiki but I suspect that may be because i'm not as smart as I like to think. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 06:10, 1 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I made a query at [[LA 8 Races]], but I am getting SRD Matches for some reason. I think it is using an implicit OR rather than an implicit AND for the category matches, even though the documentation claims it uses AND by default. I do know a way to fix the table, but it is not elegant because it will stop working if we add semantic syntax to the SRD. I'll keep looking for an answer... --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 07:30, 1 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Featured Articles ==<br />
<br />
Hi everyone time for major change to the wiki idea number two (number one being semantic forms). I guess it's not a major change so much as a new 'thing'. I was wondering what would everyone think about having a article featured on the main page say every month. We nominate articles for featuring, people would support or oppose the articles then first day of the month one could be chosen to be on the main page until the next month. The articles would be finished work, well formated etc etc. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 06:23, 3 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:We could also go that step further and have a Process closer to wikipedias where you nominate an article it becomes 'featured' but does not necessarily get added to the main page. each month or week or whatever someone decides which one gets put up / you can request a featured article be considered for the main page. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 06:40, 3 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Er... I know why you brought this up; it really is a standard across most wiki's. Therefore it makes me lean towards implementing it... Anyway, if this is to get implemented I do not want an obtrusive template, like the one on Uncyclopedia. Any thoughts for a good template? P.S. I like the second implementation more. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:37, 3 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::{| style="text-align: right; width: 100%; border: none;" <br />
| This is a [[Featured Articles|Featured Article]]! [[Image:Cscr-featured.png|30px]]<br />
|}<br />
:::Thoughts?<br />
:::--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:33, 3 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::How do you handle projects? Does LotR count as one or a few hundred? Does the ''title page'' of LotR count? --[[User:Pwsnafu|Pwsnafu]] 17:38, 3 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::The main reason I was thinking about it is it puts some of our best work on the front page which draws in visitors instead of going through all those links to find something cool it's right there you can read it then people are more likely to go searching for more. It's also a recognition of your hard work having it on the main page. I like your little Featured article template is it for the talk page or the actual page if it's for the actual page perhaps it could be centered that way it blends in more being between the table of contents and the author template. We'd need some guidelines or criteria for making a page featured, and some one to arbitrate the process (and make final decisions) we can call him/her the Article Master or AM (like DM lol). we need to get some ideas rolling then maybe take a vote? --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 19:06, 3 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::Pwsnafu: I'd say for something like that it would be best to feature the main page of a project, not all subpages would need to be as good but there would still be a standard of quality for the entire project. Conversely a particularly good subpage which can stand on it's own could also be featured. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 19:10, 3 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::I've just been stareing at the main page for awhile and so far I haven't thought of much in the way of how we could format it. About the only thing I can think of would be move the tavern schedule down next to the news and then use that blank space next to the menu for the featured articles. EDIT: personally I'd be for moving the tavern schedule to its own page. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 19:29, 3 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::[[Featured Articles]] --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 01:42, 4 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::I'm all for it, if it means that even wanton visitors can get a more inside view of the site at first glance. It might persuade some of them to stick around and lord knows dandwiki can use more contributors :O. --[[User:Sulacu|Sulacu]] 10:01, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Yes! --[[User:Penske|Penske]] 15:27, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Now we just need some featured articles :P. Hard to judge the true value of a system if it isn't used. --[[User:Sulacu|Sulacu]] 18:29, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Gygax Gone at 69 ==<br />
<br />
[[:Category:Gary Gygax|Gary Gygax]], co-creator of D&D with [[:Category:Dave Arneson|Dave Arneson]], passed away Tuesday, March 4th, 2008, at the age of 69. Read coverage on it at [http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2008/03/report-gary-gyg.html Wired], [http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2008/03/farewell_gary_gygax_the_dungeo.html BBC News], [http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080304/ap_en_ot/obit_gygax Yahoo! News], [http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?no_d2=1&sid=08/03/04/1750206 /.], and many other news sites. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 09:18, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:[[Discussion:The Passing of a Giant - RIP Gary Gygax]] --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 09:21, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Submitted for Your Approval ==<br />
<br />
I present the new [[Form:DnD Spell|form for submitting (non-epic) spells]], Courtesy of Semantic MediaWiki and Semantic Forms. [[Special:EditData/Form:DnD_Spell/User:Sledged/Atonement|Here]]'s what it looks like with the fields populated. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 15:30, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Hm... I wish you could make it work more like [[Form:Rating]] where it uses a template which, once saved, goes to the normal wiki formatting. Can this be done with spells as well? It's just that I do not really want the formatting of all the spells changed to this new "standard". --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:18, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::If that is what is wanted all you have to do is add <tt><nowiki>subst:</nowiki></tt> in the form code next to any templates you want to be substituted onto the page. --[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 20:33, 5 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Just be aware that if <tt>subst:</tt> is added, you'll lose the option of using the form to edit the page once it's been created. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:21, 6 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::It is a price I would be willing to pay. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:44, 6 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Okay, there's a problem with <tt>subst:</tt>. Part of the way to form works is that it looks at the template to see what properties it has and which parameters are associated with each property. When you use <tt>subst:</tt>, it's looking for the page <tt>Template:subst:template name</tt> instead of <tt>Template:template name</tt> and it makes the form useless as a result. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 14:37, 6 March 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Wiki Criticism ==<br />
<br />
This is the most useless Wiki I have ever found on D&D. I'm sick of homebrew rubbish. I'm trying to find info on Mask and Olidamarra (spelling?) and I can't find anything good) {{unsigned| 68.193.215.240}}<br />
<br />
:Admittedly, this probably isn't the best wiki to go to for official WotC material, but that doesn't make it useless. What's wrong with homebrew? WotC seems to encourage it, and the only real difference between good homebrew and published material is that the former is sold in books. --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 05:40, 14 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::We are not allowed to have information about Gods and Goddesses on D&D Wiki. They are reserved as product identity. Sorry about that. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:27, 14 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== WotC Website Material ==<br />
<br />
It occurred to me as I was answering a question about what material we have on the site...would we be able to host material from the wizards site? [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/arch/psi The Mind's Eye], for instance, has some interesting things, and I would love to see things like it on the wiki. --[[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] 19:16, 18 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Hm... Can we http://ww2.wizards.com/Company/Default.aspx?doc=SiteLegalNotice? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:19, 19 April 2008 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::According to section 2, "You are granted a limited, non-sublicenseable license to ''access'' and use the Site and ''electronically copy'' (except where specified as prohibited) and ''print to hard copy portions'' of Site Content for your ''personal'', noncommercial use only; provided, that you preserve any copyright, trademark or other similar notices contained in or associated with such Site Content. Such license is subject to these TOU and does not include: [...] (ii) the collection and use of any product or service listings, pictures or descriptions; '''(iii) the distribution (electronic or otherwise), public performance, or public display of any Site Content;''' [...] downloading (other than the page caching) of any portion of the Site, any Site Content or any information contained therein, except as expressly permitted on the Site; [...]"<br />
::In other words, I think not. Hosting anything more than links here violates the spirit of the first, italicized part (my emphasis) and also several of the explicit prohibitions (especially the bolded one, also my emphasis added). So... probably not. And WotC has a history of taking a very hard line against IP infringement, copyright suits, etc. &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 14:33, 19 April 2008 (MDT)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=232649Talk:Main Page2008-02-25T19:40:14Z<p>EldritchNumen: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Archives<br />
|label1=Discussions 1&ndash;30<br />
|label2=Discussions 31&ndash;44<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== 4th edition ==<br />
<br />
I don't really want to recreate the rumours and excitement concerning the upcoming 4th edition, but it looks like we need to think about a way to handle it here. It's pretty sure that there will be two editions in parallel use, at least for a while, so we need a way to separate editions. Tagging articles [[:Category:3.5]] and [[:Category:4.0]] wouldn't be too hard, what I'm concerned about is article lemmata for articles that exists in different versions for different editions. <br />
<br />
Also, it's not clear yet whether there will be a 4th edition SRD. I hope there will be one. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 08:50, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Might be a good idea to put SRD 3.5 articles with a template underneath (this is only a suggestion, not an attempt to have a million templates per page):<br />
<br />
:{| style="text-align: center; font-size:0.9em;" width="100%"<br />
| [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|40px]]<br/>This material is published under the [[V3.5 rules]].<br/><small>[[Main Page|&rarr;More]]</small><br />
|}<br />
<br />
:Although, there might be too many templates if we do this. perhaps we could replace the SRD template to this for 3.5 articles:<br />
<br />
:{| class="messagebox protected" style="border:2px solid #99B; padding:0px; font-size:0.9em;"<br />
|-<br />
| valign="top" | [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|45px]]<br />
| This material is published under the '''[[Open Game License v1.0a]]'''. The [[GNU Free Documentation License]] does not apply to this page. This material is for the D&D [[V 3.5 rules]].<br />
|}<br />
<br />
:We don't really need to mark homebrew stuff- it should work for 4.0 rules anyway. Whatre can I find news on the 4th edition, anyway? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:10, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Have you been at the WotC Homepage lately? Did you notice something? --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 09:48, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::If 4e is really coming out we can most likely just slap on a small template on all 4e things or all 3.5e things. Also, the categories you said above will work. I do not see it as too much of a problem... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:55, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::According to my reasearch, it ios not out until 2011 (rather silly really; why advertise it four and a bit years before its release), so we really do not have to bother with it yet, anyway. {{Unsigned|Sam Kay|10:04, 16 August 2007 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
::::::Boo! Hsssss! I had a browser tab open for the last ten minutes of the countdown of the [http://www.wizards.com/dnd D&D] page. Once it finished, I got "Service Unavailable". About as disappointing as 3.0 psionics. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 16:35, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Lol ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:38, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::4th edition is definitely coming. We really need to sit down, argue, butt heads, and work out the namespacing issues now. Thankfully, 3E has a namespace already. We have lots to sort out. Wikiworld will instantly be 4th compatible, as I haven't bothered with stats for most of the writeup. The new MIC style items should also be compatible. There are interesting times ahead. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 18:39, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::It has been stated that the PHB will be out May '08 MM June '08 and DMG July '08 {{Unsigned|Quill|19:11, 16 August 2007 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
::::::::::Yes, we have a year to prepare but it makes it easier later if we start thinking about it now. Btw., I'm still waiting for the WotC Homepage to survive sudden massive attention so I can see the official WotC Press release... --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 03:22, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Just do what I suggested and replace the OGC tgemplate with:<br />
:::::::::::{| class="messagebox protected" style="border:2px solid #99B; padding:0px; font-size:0.9em;"<br />
|-<br />
| valign="top" | [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|45px]]<br />
| This material is published under the '''[[Open Game License v1.0a]]'''. The [[GNU Free Documentation License]] does not apply to this page. This material is for the D&D [[V 3.5 rules]].<br />
|}<br />
<br />
:::::::::::It is alot easier to mark 3.5 in this way. You could also add an image to the template to mark it, I suppose. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:30, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::I vote to leave the V3.5 on the wiki pemanently (unless the wiki runs out of memory), as some people will still use V3.5. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:39, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Btw, [http://rustmonster.net/2007/08/16/dd-4th-edition-announced-gen-con/ here] it says that Wizards announced to continue the OGL. Good decision. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 09:45, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:Can we get a 4E Info/Rumor link up on the landing page? (Though we may as well link it to ENWorld. They will have the best coverage.) [http://www.enworld.org/index.php?page=4e ENWorld 4E Page] It hasn't been updated yet, but it will be. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 14:19, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Great! it will be nice to have 4.0e on the wiki.--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:27, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::A few things. First off we need to figure out if the homebrew material will be compatible with 4e, if it is we are well off. If it is not we need to figure out how we are going to categorize the 3.5e and the 4e homebrew information separately. Oh, and yes, D&D Wiki has enough space to keep the 3.5e material - nothing need ever be deleted to save space on D&D Wiki. Secondly, if we want a link to 4e information from ENWorld then, I feel, that we should add it as a news item. Dmilewski can take care of this if this is the communities decision. Thirdly we need to figure out when the 4e SRD is coming out to see how much time we have to prepare for it. About the SRD (3.5e and 4e); we need to decide if we want a different namespace for the two SRD editions or if we want to organize them by their identifiers. Anyway, if the homebrew information is compatible we are looking at not too much work (and a much more useful and successful D&D Wiki). Let us hope... ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:10, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::I think ther homebrew stuff will mostlky ber compatable with 4e, but if not we will have to work to update the best stuff... --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:22, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Either the homebrew material is almost 100% good-to-go or it is not. We cannot have a medium on D&D Wiki. The reason we can not have a medium is because many many people will not switch over to 4e for a long time (or ever!) and we do want want these people to lose D&D Wiki as a recourse. If the two editions are not compatible we will have to have two separate pages like [[Dungeons and Dragons]] and we will have to have 3.5e classes, races, etc and 4e classes, races, etc. Again, we need to really know if they will be compatible or not (and if someone has any information please cite the source). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:32, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yeah, I know, I was meaning as they are now... I have had a look at the articles on WotC website, and I seem to remember that the playtest report mentioned that a player was playing a psyon (because it was 3.5e) to see if it was compatible.--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:42, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I volenteer to help updating homberew stuff to 4e should the need arise (hopefully it won't). --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:54, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::I think that conversion of each section should be considered on a case-by-case basis. For example, magic items may only need a level assigned to them. That's an easy conversion worth doing. Classes and prestige classes will need to be entirely rewritten as trees, maneuvers, or such, if they are worth translating at all. <br />
<br />
::::::::My current belief is that we will need to split the content. That hoses the entire redirect initiative. (That was a reservation of mine with the redirect initiative. All the pages that I did for the SRD were hard-referenced. I used no redirects.) <br />
<br />
::::::::Campaign environments will be easiest to convert. Many simply implement the existing system, then list some house rules. For example, LotR and Wikiworld are both concept heavy, rules light. Wikiworld has always been rules light, as I wanted Wikiworld to work with any game system. I suggest that Sam keep LotR rules light, so as to keep it universal.<br />
<br />
:::::::::I was at GenCon when they made the announcement of 4e. According to Wizards of the Coast, the 3.5e material will be compatible with a minimum of modification. There were no details given at the time, however, so what that means, I'm not sure. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 14:04, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Many classes and (both base and prestige) might be obsolete under the new rules- if the same effect can be made just by using talents on one of the other classes. I think we'll have to make a big review of everything and check it for 4e compatibility, maybe putting a 4e Compatible template and a 4e Incompatible template (and nothing on pages that haven't nbeen checked yet, obviously). [[User:MorkaisChosen|MorkaisChosen]] 08:25, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Or we could just keep 3.5e material 3.5e material, since not everyone is going to switch right away... Maybe keep it for a couple years than change it to 4e. Thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:16, 4 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
I read on the Wizards page that one thing they're thinking of implementing with all the online stuff they're using in 4th ed is a wiki to allow home brew stuff. If that's true, it may be best to just keep this site in 3.x to avoid competition with the "official" wiki. I'm still uncertain about all that though. Any thoughts? --[[User:Banyan|Banyan]] 23:07, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I don't think a little competition will hurt. If Wizards opens their own wiki, that's an excellent idea, but it doesn't mean we should give up this project here. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 00:57, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I wouldn't bother with the "official wiki" anyway. This one is better. Anyway, why would we be scared of competition? It is not like we are trying to make money, or anything. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:00, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Would someone like to contact them and ask them if this is true? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:35, 26 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
==New Edition Issues==<br />
<br />
The following questions are both technical and procedural. There is no correct answer. These questions are here to collect upcoming issues with the wiki and decisions that should be considered. Please add to the list.<br />
<br />
===General architecture===<br />
<br />
How best to manage a wiki filled with multiple editions and systems (3E, 4E, Modern, Etc.)<br />
<br />
:I am very open to discussion, but I feel that the best way to manage different systems is to make the different edition pages very obvious. For example, we could have all namespace v4 pages come with a slightly darker page background, or something similar. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:22, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I agree. The Wizards message boards use a different skin for each game. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 10:57, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::I am against the changing of the skin, however I think namespaces are the way to go. We could label the namespaces as SRD3.5e, SRD4e, 4e, 3.5e, D20M, etc. What do you guys think about this idea? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:11, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::People will be far too confused if they want to know whether the article is 3.5 or 4.0, and they constantly have to be checking namespaces. It will be much easier if the page background is slightly darker for 4.0, or something similar. I am not talking about a different feel, just a difference. There is a difference :) &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 18:00, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Why not have two menu pages, one for each edition, and label all pages with 3.5 and 4.0? --[[User: Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:02, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Sam Kay, do you mean namespaces? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:04, 26 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Yeah... I did. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:23, 1 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
===Namespaces===<br />
Should we move current SRD pages to a 3E namespace?<br />
<br />
:I assume you mean 3.5E namespace, and I feel that we need to wait a bit until the structure is clear and known to all, but I feel that it definitely needs to happen before 4E comes out. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:23, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
How do we want the namespaces to interact?<br />
<br />
:Why not have two D&D menus: 3.5, and 4.0. That way, you would know whether you where in 3.5 or 4.0. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:33, 3 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
What should we do with articles that are invariant between 3E and 4E (assuming there are any)?<br />
<br />
:This brings up another question: It would be great if there was a way to allow edits on a 3.5E to be reflected, or maybe a reflection would be requested, onto a 4E page. This way the races or whatnot would remain the same. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:25, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I've been wrestling with related questions on [[WikiRPS]]. It's easy to have small (or even large) pieces of shared text, using a template. But what if the bulk of the text is shared, but just the numbers scattered throughout the text are different (for instance)? As far as I know, the only way to do it is to modularize the text into templates as much as possible. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 11:02, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
Redirects point to 3E SRD. Is there a way to have namespace relative redirects, where <nowiki>[[foo]]</nowiki> inside the <nowiki>[[SRD]]</nowiki> context points to <nowiki>[[SRD:Foo]]</nowiki> while <nowiki>[[foo]]</nowiki> in the 4E context points to <nowiki>[[SRD4:Foo]]</nowiki>. <br />
<br />
:I don't think it's possible, but I'm willing to be proven wrong. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 09:55, 21 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::It would be possible with a few minor hacks. However, this will lead to a very confusing website. I am against the idea. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:18, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
===Templates===<br />
<br />
What templates should be used to tag 3E and 4E pages?<br />
<br />
===Homebrew===<br />
<br />
Should homebrew rules be tagged by edition?<br />
<br />
:I strongly feel so. Everything is specific to a version if it falls back on D&D. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:26, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::That depends on whether it is edition specific or not: WotC declaired that 3.5e would be compatable with 4.0e --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:19, 1 September 2007 (MDT)--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:19, 1 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Im new here just signed up today but was reading through this and had something to say. According to the Dnd podcast 4ed is not fully compatible with 3.5, They imply that if you want to use a lot of stuff it will have to be updated. In fact they go so far as to say that you may even have to recreate things from the ground up. So separating old material and new material will be nessacary. I'd suggest tagging everything now 3.5. then creating a menu with two separate sections 3.5 and 4 and go through a process of reviewing and or editing the old material and copy it over to the new namespace.[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 07:16, 5 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Not nessassaraly- look as CSs- they are mostly background stuff, therefore, they have no <br />
need of a tag for either 3.5 or 4. Deities might not, depending on rule changes. Enviroments will not, as it is mostly descriptive stuff. And they said that it would a be a case-by-case thing. Plus, changing the DnD category to 3.5e would take forever. there are about 4000 articles (I think) here. Better to leave them as DnD, and add 4e. Which has been done. And anyway, I said "compatable" not "fully compatable". They mean slightly different things: one means that some suff may need minor changes, others would need alot, the other means that you could just drop it into a game. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:36, 5 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
Should campaigns get their own namespace, or belong to their intended edition?<br />
<br />
:I feel that campaigns should not get their own namespaces because it would remove the items in the campaign from D&D Wiki linking schemes, etc. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:26, 22 August 2007 (MDT)''<br />
<br />
===Site conversion===<br />
<br />
How best to automate changes?<br />
<br />
Should 3E redirect be systematically replace with hard page references?<br />
<br />
:I'm not sure I understand the question. Can you give an example? &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 09:55, 21 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I think it means that rather than mentions of "darkvision" being linked to the darkvision page it says what page information about darkvision can be found at in the core rule books. If so, I am against the idea. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:09, 6 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Another 4e Option ==<br />
<br />
I can't help but feel that the cleanest solution would to be just host a completely separate wiki specifically for 4E, and just circumvent all the aforementioned issues. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:30, 21 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I agree&mdash;having a separate wiki would be very clean, but it may not be as useful, since one would have to switch between the wiki for different versions of D&D. However, I am starting to like the idea... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:24, 21 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Well, I think the ease of having a separate wiki would probably be more valuable than the "convenience" of having them together. Also, my understanding is that 4E is not nearly so compatible with 3.5E. So, perhaps the "clean slate" concept would be much better. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 10:02, 22 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::From what I'm reading it seems like it'll about as compatible as 2e is to 3e.<br />
:::Also, let's not forget that the above issues are merely the ones of which we can conceive. With projects this size, more issues always arise after implementation.<br />
:::4ed20wiki.com anyone? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 19:36, 27 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Wizards did say 4e would be compatible with 3e with a minor amount of modification. Why not have two sub-main pages within this wiki? On the main page you have links to 3rd edition D20 and 4th edition D20. Then each edition could have it's own sub-main page just like our current main page... That would be ''like'' two wikis but without the flicking from wiki to wiki, having two accounts, and the possibility of reduced number of edits on each wiki. Personally, I think it would be better to have one wiki with separate sections. We already have modern and D&D with separate sections on one wiki, so why not do it with 3e and 4e? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:16, 28 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree w/ Sam, we should just include a sub-set for D&D 4E like we did for d20 Modern. That way people can have just one account and since 3.5 will be compatible w/ 4E people can still look at all of our 3.5 Stuff and port it over to 4E. Just Create a Dungeons and Dragons 4E Page and a 4ESRD and everything's fine. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 11:21, 28 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::I know that the "official" announcement was that 4E would be compatible with 3E, however, I've listened to the Podcasts, read much of the forum boards, and tried to pay attention to what is out there and I don't think it will be that compatible. In fact, Dave Noonan said on the D&D Podcast that there won't be a simple process to take a 3E character and just equate it to 4E. The level progression is different, the spread of powers associated with each level will change for each of the classes, and many of the class abilities (especially spell casting) are being changed greatly. Also, monsters are being reworked extensively, and many of the mechanics are being revised, rewritten, or scrapped entirely. I have a feeling that the compatibility will be simply that you can take a story line from a 3E adventure and use it, but the mechanics, though familiar, are not the same. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 09:55, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I still think one wiki would be best. Plus, I have also been reading the announcements, and I think a lot of the things can already be achieved with variants: the saves working like ACs, for example, add 10 to each save, take 10 from the DC, and roll a D20 and add the DC, compare to save. Easy. Critical spells? I have already done a variant for that before they announced it in Design and development. It is on this site under the title [[Spellcasting (DnD Variant Rule)|Spellcasting]]. So 3E-4E conversion could be a case of slight modification using variant rules. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:31, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::I'm not sure I see exactly how variants address the issue of hosting materials for two different versions of the d20 System. Are you suggesting that for every 4E rule component that's different from the corresponding 3.5 rule, it be put under the [[DnD Rules]] or a SRD Variant section? And if so, would this be in addition to or instead of hosting 4E SRD in it's own space?<br />
::::::::And since the d20 Modern section was brought up, I never really cared for it being hosted next to the d20 stuff. Admittedly, it hasn't been a problem, but that could be due to the fact that there's far fewer users using that section than the d20 section (if the amount of user-submitted material is any indication). Whether or not 4E material has it's own wiki, I'm definitely against the 4E d20 Modern and d20 Future being hosted on the same wiki.<br />
::::::::With the issue of multiple accounts, there's a way to have only one account apply to both wikis. I created an account on a [http://www.wikia.com Wikia] site a while ago, and it works with all wikis there. [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue]] would know how complicated such a thing would be to accomplish, and if it'd be worth while. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:20, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::The answer to your question is no, I was merely stating that I think 3E will be compatible with 4E with a minimal of rule conversion. If we can have one account on two seperate wikis, would it be possible to have a single user page (and talk page) for '''BOTH''' wikis? I knows you have seperate pages on wikia... and have links between wikis work as an "inside" link rather than an "external link"? If so, then having two wikis '''Would''' be more... better. Erm... More... practical. Although if we could have a united main page for both that lead to each seperate wiki, that would be good too. About 4E modern and D20 future, starwars ect, ect, yadda yadda yadda, I am not really bothered about them. So long as we have 3E and 4E D&D (and 3E modern would be good, although we could '''completely''' replace it with 4E modern), then I am happy. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 15:25, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::I have strengthened and decided my view, I am against two wikis for a number of reasons. One is that people would have two user pages, two talk pages, and two recent changes lists would exist. It would become a lot to handle. Another reason is that it would divide visitors between two sites, making it look like dandwiki.com is actually not doing as well as it would be, therefore making it not as popular on google, etc. Another reason I am against it is that people will choose one wiki they like and stick with it, disabling half of our growing user base. It would stop prompting people to join random discussions as much, and stop prompting them to help out as much. Another reason is that structure changes would have to be done twice, the same template made two times, one for each wiki. It seems, to me, like a lot more problems would arise than good would come out of it. I am against making two wikis.<br />
::::::::::A solution I see to this problem is namespaces. We could have namespaces such as 3.5e, 4e, 3.5eSRD, and 4eSRD to eliminate confusion as to which version something is. I think namespaces would be the best solution to this problem, not separate wikis. Maybe we should vote? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:00, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Sure. Why not? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 21:25, 31 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Done. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:19, 31 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::If anyone can see a way to make the voting table below clearer please do. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:32, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:I voted for everything. That's because I believe that we will need our whole toolbox to sort this out.<br />
:First, we need to identify the two idea complicating this discussion and table them. I believe that D20 Modern will be best served with it's own sister wiki. Simply by separating it, we greatly simplify our discussion. It then becomes its own discussion (which it deserves). Campaigns also deserves their own discussion. <br />
:This greatly simplifies our problem. <br />
:We already know that we will need new templates for 4.0. (Fact: see the new creature layout block.) We will also need new page preloads. Layout differences will help us tell one page from another. The new class pages will look different than the old class pages simply by being laid out differently. That does the same job as a skin. We also have footer and header templates that can go into a preload and existing pages.<br />
:Namespaces are powerful tools to help us sort out what is what, even at a glance. They provide an absoluteness that chains through everything. The new SRD will most definitely be in a new namespace. For contributor content, I don't see a powerful enough need for a separate namespace when layouts and templates are already providing us good service. Page titles also convey information. '''Page Title (DnD Page)''' is different from '''Page Title (4E Page)'''. <br />
:Categories will be directly impacted by namespaces, but the purpose of categories is not in separating pages, but in collecting like pages. If we try to separate pages too much using Categories, all we do is create a complicated set of categories. We have page titles and namespaces to help a user identify what page goes with which system. These should be sufficient.<br />
:Finally, there is ignorance. If we make the wiki too complex for contributors, we will lose contributors. Any schema that we invent must be apparent to our average contributor.<br />
:That's alot, isn't it?<br />
:My belief is that we should make a new namespace for the new SRD, and let the body of the wiki sort itself out with layouts, footers, and linking. Most sections are clearly one edition or the other. The trouble sections (D20 Modern and Campaigns) need their own discussions to sort out. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 07:52, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::If I didn't know better, I'd swear you were putting together an argument for separate wikis. I think this statement sums it up:<br />
<br />
:::''If we make the wiki too complex for contributors, we will lose contributors.''<br />
<br />
::There's going to be plenty to worry about with just dealing with one edition without having to worry about how keep the editions separate, and too many of the solutions depend on the users maintaining the separation. Right now we have users assigning incorrect categories or neglecting categories, putting non-SRD material in the SRD namespace, not using the preloads, not putting the " (DnD xxxx)" identifier (or putting the wrong identifier) when they create a page, and so on and so on. Trying to maintain a separation between editions is going to add to the problem. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:45, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Nothing on this earth will stop the symptoms above. Ignorance will always exist. I believe the above are symptoms of too-few editors. We have needed editors patrolling their own areas for a while. We must also admit to ourselves that editing is not very interesting to most of our contributors. I really don't know how to address that issue.<br />
:::One reason that I don't want separate wikis is that our Campaign section is always among the most popular sections. How do I maintain Wikiworld across two wikis? If our solutions won't work well for campaigns, we will hurt ourselves.--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 15:09, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Also, on the incorrect editing, most random people who post here don't know all the catagories or how to properly code a wiki. I still don't know all the catagories but I usually go find a page that does and copy and paste. So the incorrect editing will always be a problem. I also firmly stand behind the idea of just one wiki, everything in one place. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:28, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree with Dmilewski. Why was the last sysop elected more than half a year ago? It's because we have a large issue with people not wanting to edit the infrastructure of this site. The last editor that really edited the infrastructure was [[User:Mkill|Mkill]] (albeit with some very controversial edits), who since that time has left D&D Wiki. The infrastructure is not perfect here, many many things need to be improved or are currently wrong, but why is no one stepping up and fixing them? Is D&D Wiki to complex for people to handle? Should we dumb it down? And how do the questions I just asked pertain to 4e material?<br />
:::::Actually, I think the questions I just asked are the core of this issue. A new 4e wiki will eliminate all the issues with people not wanting to edit the infrastructure, and that is why it seems so appealing. It will make a new slate, without D&D Wiki's insane hierarchy (which, by the way, only exists because average users do not edit the infrastructure or help other people's creations on D&D Wiki), and without all of the work that needs to be done on D&D Wiki that is not getting done (publications, dplc's for races, modernizing classes layouts, linking orphaned pages, etc, etc). D&D Wiki has issues, and a new 4e wiki will remove them all... but I don't like to run from my problems.<br />
:::::Yes, D&D Wiki needs some major changes to become what I envision it to be; to become what everyone envisions it to be, but I feel we can accomplish these changes within this current wiki, and just this current wiki. Problems will arise from adding a new edition, but we can solve these problems, we will need to solve these problems... and, of course, the best way to solve these problems is to solve the problem with the average user not editing the infrastructure, because that is where I feel it all stems from. If the average editor feels that D&D Wiki does not just need more content, but rather needs infrastructure help, organizational help, help with making things look good, and help with making everything balanced, then with everyones hard work all the problems on D&D Wiki will soon disappear, creating an environment where adding a new edition will be as smooth as adding a new race. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:29, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Well not everyone wants to just go on a site and edit the way it works just for fun. They might add something but I wouldn't expect them to edit it. Maybe you should try on the equipment page to when you add a new item show some of the various templetes you can use such as the author one and the various catagories you can use. This might help because then you can just copy and paste what you need. I do agree that if we had more people editing and making things right the first or second time then this place would run much smoother. Now I would like to step up and help edit and my area would be the equipment section as I spend most my time there and I am most familar with it. You still might have to make more minor edits to what I have done but I garentee you that there will be less of them. Also, all I would be doing is standardizing and making minor edits as I do not know how to code much more than that; I could learn but that will take time. If you would like me to try to do that I will, it's just anywhere else and I'm not going to be nearly as useful. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 21:18, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I really didn't for my post to be a ''"plea for help"'' (even though it may have come off like that... ''':P'''), but if you want to do something which requires little or no wiki-syntax knowledge thats helps out [[DnD Equipment]] please drop a note on my user-talk page and I will help you find something that needs to get done on [[DnD Equipment]]. Anyway... back to the subject on hand..... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:57, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::When does the vote end? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:38, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Does the 5th of December sound okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:45, 2 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Yeah. I think everybody who wants a vote has voted or will have done by then. We can always send a MOI to people who havent voted. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:26, 3 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Okay, the vote is over. Thanks to everyone that voted, and it appears that we will not be making a separate wiki for 4e material (or holding a book burning convention) but rather organize the different edition by way of categories, namespaces, and possibly changing the identifier. Agiain, thanks to everyone that voted ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:05, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::So, when are we going to start setting it up for 4e? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:40, 15 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Feel free to start whenever you have time... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:04, 15 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:I'd love to, but what do we call the new pages... "4E Dungeons and Dragons", "4E D20 Modern", "4E DnD Base Classes"? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:03, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Or "Dungeons and Dragons (4E)?" There's still a few more details that need to be decided. In what namespace will user content be? Main or "4E"? How do we deal with items independent of rules versions (i.e. maps, campaigns and the like)?<br />
::Personally, I think we can mirror the 3.5 section by replacing all the instances of "DnD" in all the identifiers with "4E" instead (e.g. "4E Character Options," "4E Feats," "4E Creatures," etc...), and the landing page can just be "Fourth Edition." (I always though "Dungeons and Dragons" and "DnD" were bit of misnomers in this context.) —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:37, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Ok. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:33, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I'll start setting it up under 4E Homebrew, 4E Feats, etc. We can move them if need be. If we have stuff under 4E as you suggested, I think DnD should be replaced with 3E or 3.5E for the 3.5 stuff... Thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 02:18, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Started to set it up- see [[4E Homebrew|this page]]. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:17, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== The 4e Movement ===<br />
<br />
I looked over the page and I feel there are a couple kinks to be worked out. First off do we want the pages being labeled as "4E" or "4e"? Secondly, which pages do we want to work with both editions? Should these pages keep the "DnD" while all the other pages would adopt a 3.5e or 4e, respectively, identifier? Thirdly, should we change the descriptions of the sub-pages to say which edition they cover or would that be redundant? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:35, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I think 4e, Maps, campaign settings, possibly deities (depending on changes), Environments, Possibly Quests and Disscussion could be shared, yes, they keep DnD, rest become 3.5e or 4e, yes the rest need to say edition sub-pages cover. Any thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:34, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Yes. How can we make the newly implemented dpl on [[Dungeons and Dragons]] (thank you so much, Sledged) work with non-specific edition pages in all the main categories (for DM's, for Players, or General)? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:27, 24 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Give pages that work for both two categories? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:08, 27 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::[[DnD Campaign Settings|Campaign Settings]], [[DnD Links|Links]], [[DnD Guidelines|Guidelines]], etc. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:37, 27 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Ok, I have done everything except the spells section and the SRD. I have made a 4e version of the pages that I was not sure of (quests and deities), and linked to both (we delete the 4e one if not required or remove the category if the 4e one is required). What do you think? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:27, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::One thing is that everything could be piped so it does not say "4e" all the time. I feel that if one is already on the 4e landing page then having 4e before everything would just come off as repetitive. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:19, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::What do you mean? Like 4e Homebrew/Classes/Base Classes? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:51, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Not exactly. I was refering to things like [[4e Deities]] being piped to [[4e Deities|Deities]]. It just seems repetitive to be on the 4e page and have everything say 4e before it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:43, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Ok. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:18, 25 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::[in a robotic voice] TASK COMPLETE. Are there any more tasks to be done on the 4e Homebrew section? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:24, 27 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Other than the spells section I really do not see anything else. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:20, 28 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Good. Shall we set up the 4e SRD section in the same way so we can just get on with transcribing it when 4e comes out? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:58, 3 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::I read somewhere that WotC will not be releasing a 4e SRD. I think we need verify or disprove this and then decide what to do from that point. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 09:47, 4 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:[http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4news/20080108a 4E SRD and OGL]. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:46, 4 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::"All of the material included in the OGL Designer’s Kit will be available for free starting on June 6, 2008. Parties who find the cost prohibitive can begin developing their products at that time." I guess that means we're able to have the SRD for 4e! --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 07:20, 5 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
===Vote===<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" style="text-align: left;"<br />
|+ 4e Solution &mdash; Voting (Please use "#" and extra lines to separate)<br />
! rowspan="2" | For making a new wiki to encompass 4e material !! colspan="6" | For keeping D&D Wiki as a whole, encompassing all editions !! rowspan="2" | Launch a book-burning party which has the goal of burning every 4e book<br />
|-<br />
! Think namespaces are the solution to 4e material !! Think categories are the solution to 4e material !! Think changing the identifier is the solution to 4e material !! Think changing the background color/skin is the solution to 4e material !! Think templates are the solution to 4e material !! Think that more than one of the aforementioned solutions is the best solution for 4e material (Please say which ones would work best together)<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
# [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] (w/ New Skin)<br />
# [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] (What in the current wiki would we want to link to with 4e? That is the only reason I see for keeping it together... Besides usernames I suppose.)<br />
| <br />
# [[User:Sol|Sol]] <br />
# [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]]<br />
| <br />
# [[User:Trogdor|Trogdor]]<br />
|<br />
|<br />
|<br />
|<br />
# [[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] (Namespaces (for SRD material), Categories, Changing the identifier (for homebrew material))<br />
# [[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] (Namespaces, Catagories)<br />
# [[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] (All the above)<br />
# [[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
# [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] (Namespaces, Skin)<br />
# [[User:Pirate-Sorcerer|Pirate-Sorcerer]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
# [[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
# [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
|<br />
# [[User:xidoraven|xido]] (lacking respect for corporate global capitalism)<br />
# [[User:Othtim|othtim]] - I *like* ''finger of death''.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
::The option to destroy all D&D4e books in the world is not an option. I am upset about this --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 19:20, 30 November 2007 (MST))<br />
<br />
:::LOL! Of course we can't take that action, even if we want to! It is probably unlawful or something. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:12, 1 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::That option has been added ''';)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:09, 2 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::'''LETS GO N' BURN THINGS!!!''' [loads AK47] '''UPRISING AGAINST THE 4E MENACE!!!''' --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:28, 3 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::So... tempted... to burn.... withholding... vote til I can... stop talking... like... Shatner... -- [[User:Eiji|Eiji]] 14:49, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== New Look ==<br />
<br />
I feel that it is high time that we had a new look for the [[Main Page]], for a number of reasons. One is to make it easier for the average user to understand how D&D Wiki is organized, another is so the [[Main Page]] looks nicer. Below is my proposed idea, which is still in the works. Also, I have a couple of questions about it. One, should we use DPL2C to determine the number of items in an area. For example around <DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items exist in [[Dungeons and Dragons]], should we display that below? Also, should we have bullets in front of the link to [[Dungeons and Dragons]], the [[System Reference Document]], etc? Does it look better or worse with them present? Finally, how is the wording of everything? What could be improved? (P.S. the below idea is not mine, it was stolen from [[User:Sledged|Sledged]]'s hard work making [[Dungeons and Dragons]] look nice&mdash;I do not want to take credit which I do not deserve) --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:23, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Yea, the above does look much nicer than the current Main Page, and I do agree it needs an update. As for showing how many things you have in each, that's not necessary but is interesting to see that we have 2900 Homebrew Items, if anything that might bring people in to see that this is a pretty big site and not just some random long forgotten website. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:33, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I have added the number of items to the new look. Any other ideas? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:28, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::This definitely clarified what information is contained in the sections. I would agree with implementing it. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:34, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Let's absolutely add this. The main page definitely needs more information. I like it! &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:48, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I think that if we have 3.5e and 4e on this site, we should have the main page sperating out 3.5e and 4e, and pages for 3.5e and 4e like the above. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:56, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yes, I agree. But that can be added once 4E comes out... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:30, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I'm going to implement this now because I think it is so much better (and I want it as soon as possible). Please, though, continue to post comments here about any revisions we could do to make it look better! &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:32, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::Yeah, I like it. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:38, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::I removed the "d20M" in that SRD link since it is already under the header of d20M. However, I agree, it looks very good and thanks for implementing it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:48, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="column"<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
; <big>Dungeons and Dragons</big><br />
* [[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
; <big>d20 Modern</big><br />
* [[D20 Modern|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=D20M<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[Modern System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=MSRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
|}<br />
<br />
====Main Page after 4e comes out====<br />
<br />
When 4e does come out, we could chang it to this:<br />
<br />
; <big>Dungeons and Dragons</big><br />
* [[Dungeons and Dragons| 3.5e Homebrew Content]] | [[4e Homebrew| 4e Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[System Reference Document|The 3.5e System Reference Document]] | [[4e System Reference Doccument|The 4e System Reference Document]] | [[UA:Variant Rules|Unearthed Arcana]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD|Unearthed Arcana<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
<br />
; <big>d20 Modern</big><br />
* [[D20 Modern|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=D20M<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[Modern System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=MSRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
<br />
Any thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:23, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Or this...?<br />
:; <big>Dungeons and Dragons</big><br />
:; Revised 3rd Edition<br />
:* [[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew]] <div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
category=3.5e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:* [[System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]] | [[UA:Variant Rules|Unearthed Arcana]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD|Unearthed Arcana<br />
category=3.5e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:; 4th Edition<br />
:* [[4e Homebrew|Homebrew]] <div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
category=4e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:* [[System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD<br />
category=4e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
<br />
:; <big>d20 Modern</big><br />
:* [[D20 Modern|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=D20M<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:* [[Modern System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=MSRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:17, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Year, that is better than mine. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:52, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Is everyone okay with that look once 4e comes out? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:12, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Should we make CAPTCHA's present after an IP edits? ==<br />
<br />
Recently a high level of automated spam has been attacking D&D Wiki in the form of inserting nonsense and gibberish into random pages. An example would be [[DnD Flaws]] as of 04:08, 1 November 2007 (MDT) as edited by [[Special:Contributions/200.226.134.53|200.226.134.53]] (permanent link [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=DnD_Flaws&oldid=159600 here]). I think the easiest way to stop this problem would be to provide [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captcha CAPTCHA's] every time an IP makes an edit. The only reason I am asking this is because I am not sure if it would be more beneficial or more harmful to have CAPTCHA's. Do you guys think that IP's would still correct spelling errors if they had to enter a CAPTCHA or would they deem it to difficult? Would it, even if the amount of edits performed by IP's decreased, be worth it? Any ideas would be appreciated. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:41, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Well, if they were just doing it because they were bored then having to spell the correct word to finalize the edit might prevent some people because they are just waaay to lazy. It would also prevent if anyone wanted to create a bot to spam content. Although, it would be annoying for me to have to do that every time I wanted to say, update my User Page with another new item. If you could disable it for users and not IP's, I think that would be a good try to cut down on the spam. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:31, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::The CAPTCHA's would ''only'' be for IP edits, not for when a user edits something. Anyway, that would be terrible if a user had to enter a CAPTCHA to edit something (the reason they would not have to is because to create an account one has to enter a CAPTCHA...) Also, as you may have noticed, all the recent spam attackes have been automated, so hopefully if this is implemented it should help with the problem... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:44, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::So yea, try it and we'll see if the spam goes down. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:24, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::I agree with this completely. Should I go ahead and put them in, or should we wait for more users to comment? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:33, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Go for it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:41, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yeah. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:52, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Okay, it has been added. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 20:50, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::For some odd reason, i have had a captcha come up after all my edits today, despite the fact the captcha is only supposed to come up when an IP edits something (and I am logged in). Why is this, and can someone sort it please? Thanks. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:03, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::This should not be happening. I would recommend doing the following: log out, clear your browser cache, clear your browser history, clear all cookies relating to D&D Wiki, restart your browser, and then log back in and see if it is still giving you troubles. If it is, then I will definitely look into this problem further. I am sorry for the inconvenience that this is causing you, and will try to get it sorted out as soon as is possible. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 13:50, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::It has not worked. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 15:39, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Maybe you're an IP in disguise... ''':P'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:17, 4 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Err... no. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:55, 5 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Okay... Can I change your password (through the database) and login as you to asses the problem? I would like to see what is happening and hopefully give [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] enough information to fix this very strange problem. Would this be okay with you? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:41, 5 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:Yeah, sure. Can you change my password back afterwards though, please? Thanks. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:11, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Am I the only one getting the problem? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:23, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::No, I also experienced this today with my edits. Although, I'm behind a corporate firewall here, so I don't know if that has anything to do with it. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 09:25, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::No, I've gotten one after every edit I've made, even if it was just adding one letter. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:15, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Oops... I guess the setting was set so sysops were the only ones who did not have to give a CAPTCHA whereas everyone else did. The issue should now be fixed, and sorry about that... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:22, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::Much better. ''':D''' Now I can reformate the equipment section in peace. Which as an update I've finished nearly all the back to footers and have all but the magic weapons and over half the wondrous items updated to the MIC format. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 20:42, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Yeah, sorted. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:59, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Glad to hear it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:44, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Move towards new DPL ==<br />
<br />
Hello all, this site is running on a very outdated version of DPL, which has caused several hacks to have to be thrown together, and is potentially not allowing things to get done. When I upgraded this wiki to v11, I upgraded DPL as well, but most all pages that used DPL immediately stopped working. Is there an interest for me to get a test wiki running, and people can figure out how the DPL should be working, and then implement it? Or should we instead stick with what we have and wait until we really need the next version? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:07, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I honestly have no idea what the DPL is. So could someone tell me what it is and/or what it does? Then I could answer your questions. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:27, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::What are the new features of the new DPL version? For most purposes, the DPLs seem to be working well, but I know we've especially had to hack some DPL2 stuff. Would the new version fix this? [Watsyurname529, DPLs are dynamically assembled lists generally based off of category tags, e.g. [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_Base_Classes&action=edit this code] yields [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/User_Base_Classes this page].] &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 18:21, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I feel that we should implement the new dpl version. The DPL2 (at least according to [[User:Sledged|Sledged]]) would make it so we would not need three main different modifications of the dpl to be running on this site, the dpl, dplc, and the dpl2c (full list [[Special:Version|here]]). I think it would help D&D Wiki greatly to implement the newest version of the dpl, and make things easier for a new user to understand. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:48, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::There's a demo site for DPL with a manual [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page here].<br />
::::Is there a way to get a list of all the pages using dpl*? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 16:29, 8 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::[[MediaWiki:Pages using DPL]] is what True Orphans uses. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 18:17, 8 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::It's only listing the pages in the main/default namespace. What about the SRD pages? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 14:58, 13 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::The extension that page is for specifically excludes all SRD dpl pages, so those have never been added to that dpl list. We will have to compile a list on our own for SRD pages. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:54, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I see. Also, when I said "pages using <tt>dpl*</tt>," I meant also the <tt>dpl2c</tt>, <tt>dplc</tt>, and <tt>dpl2cu</tt> tags. I don't see any of the pages using those tags listed. If those pages can be identified before hand, it'll make an upgrade a bit easier. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:48, 15 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::To answer [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]]'s first question. This wiki is running version 0.7.7 of DPL2. The latest version is 1.5.2, so there is a significant number of changes. For brevity, I'll just list a few of the new features that apply to this wiki:<br />
:::*You can specify your own format for the output. For example you could list each result as a row in a table instead of getting the standard three column output.<br />
:::*In conjunction with the previous feature, DPL2 pull content from the listed pages for displaying as part of the output.<br />
:::*You can get results based on pages names and page content in addition to categories and namespaces. For instance, all the [[User Prestige Classes with Descriptions|user PrCs]] are assigned to the category beginning with the first letter of the page title. Those categories can be completely removed because DPL2 lets you return pages whose title's first letter matches one specified in the DPL2 call.<br />
:::*DPL2 can used to compensate for user error. Broken links like the one titled "Anima and Animus Mage" on the [[User Prestige Classes with Descriptions|user PrCs page]] can be eliminated.<br />
:::*With the latest version of DPL2 (an one other specific extension) users can create spell/feat/monster/etc filters like the one seen [http://www.penpaperpixel.org/tools/d20spellfilter/ here].<br />
:::*It can be used as a parser function (which I personally prefer over tags).<br />
:::*Pages that are linked to only from DPL calls are not listed as [[Special:Lonelypages|orphaned pages]].<br />
:::—[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 14:58, 13 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Okay, lets do it. What are the changes that need to be made to dpl pages to make this not be broken when implemented? What is the best way of going about this change? Should we change the pages first, then implement it, or implement it then fix all the errors on the dpl pages? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:54, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::There's one more complication to take into consideration; All the pages with the <tt>dpl*</tt> mod tags (<tt>dpl2c</tt>, <tt>dplc</tt>, and <tt>dpl2cu</tt>) have to be changed, not just list pages. So we'll have to go through all the class pages (base, prestige, npc, and racial paragon) and NPC pages. I think Blue's suggestion of a test wiki is the best way to do it. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:48, 15 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::It might not be necessary to set up a test wiki. I [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Issue:No_More_Globals submitted a request] over at the [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page DPL2 site] to transition all the globals to class members. If Gero decides to adopt it, the latest version and the currently installed version can be installed side-by-side without one conflicting with the other. The only caveat is that the line that reads<br />
<br />
::::::<pre>$wgParser->setHook( "DPL", array( __CLASS__, "dplTag" ) );</pre><br />
<br />
::::::in the new version will have to be commented out. This will disable using new version as a tag extension, but it will still be available as a parser function call; <tt>{<nowiki/>{#dpl:}}</tt>. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:23, 21 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::And [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page DPL2] version 1.6.0 (no more globals) has been released. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 09:42, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Okay, I upgraded to the latest version. Let me know if there are any errors. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 12:18, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== A Small Sample ===<br />
<br />
So here's a sample list of the user base classes, which I've limited to the 'A's:<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" style="text-align: left;"<br />
|+ Homebrew Base Classes with Descriptions<br />
|- {{#vardefine:odd|0}}<br />
! Name !! style="text-align: center;" | Balance<sup>[[#1|1]]</sup> (out of 10) !! Type<sup>[[#2|2]]</sup> !! Description<sup>[[#3|3]]</sup><br />
{{#dpl:category=DnD<br />
|titlematch=A%<br />
|category=User<br />
|category=Base Class<br />
|include={Balance}:1,{x0}:type:desc<br />
|mode=userformat<br />
|format=,¦- ²{#vardefine:odd¦²{#ifexpr: ²{#var:odd}²¦0¦1}²}²²{#ifexpr: ²{#var:odd}²¦¦class="even"}²\n¦ [[%PAGE%¦²{#replace:%PAGE%¦(DnD Class)¦}²]]\n,,<br />
|tablerow=¦style="text-align: center;" ¦ ²{#if: %%¦%%¦NR}²,\n¦%%,%%\n<br />
}}|-<br />
| colspan="7" class="foot" |<br />
# <span id="1">Shows how balanced a certain Class is, the number is out of 10. The Balance rating is from the actual Class's page; it is not made on this page. More information [[Balance System|here]].</span><br />
# <span id="2">A general category the Class fits into. e.g. Strong Spellcasting, Combat Focused, etc.</span><br />
# <span id="3"> A concise description of the Class-- should advertise the Class.</span><br />
|}<br />
—[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 13:59, 27 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I like it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:27, 29 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:: The Alchemist... I don't know if i would consider it a spell caster --[[User:Cerin616|Cerin616, Drew]] 15:58, 11 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Better now? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:20, 11 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== 4,000th Item! ==<br />
<br />
Whoo! I just posted the 4,000th homebrew item on this site! Amazing how much stuff we've got on here. Just want to say congrats to everyone who's posted/edited here. Also here is the 4,000th item: [[Fried Frying Pan (DnD Equipment)|Fried Frying Pan]] --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:29, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:If that number is correct.... ''':P'''. I think we may actually have more, they are just not categorized (that number is actually the number of items in [[:Category:DnD]]). Although, I agree. Congratulations all! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:51, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Hey, it says 4000 Items on the main page and that's good enough for me ''':P''' to you too, lol. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 20:56, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Meh... ''':)'''. Also, if you want to make that number more accurate please take a look at the [[Special:TrueOrphans|TrueOrphans]] (which may not be true&mdash;I think [[MediaWiki:Pages_using_DPL]] needs to be updated...). However, feel free to categorize those things and, overall, make things on D&D Wiki be linked to! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:14, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
==Sidebar Change==<br />
Dungeons and Dragons or Homebrew?<br />
<br />
The side bar has an option called "Dungeons and Dragons" that takes you to the Homebrew section. This seems to me to be misleading and should be changed to "Homebrew." This is not that big of a deal, but it would be more consistant. --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 15:09, 18 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Actually, there's more than just homebrew material there (though the vast majority of it is homebrew). It also contains OGC from source books like ''Unearthed Arcana'', ''Relics and Rituals'', ''Creature Collection'', ''Monster Manual II'', and such. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:38, 21 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Currently on the [[Main Page]] we call that entire section "Homebrew Content" even though it has more than just that (as [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] pointed out above). If we want to be nitpicky, that is also a problem. Anyway, the reason it is called "Dungeons and Dragons" on the sidebar is that the sidebar cannot have any real wiki-syntax. The ideal organization for that would be something like:<br />
::D&D<br />
:::[[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew]] (even though it's not all homebrew...)<br />
:::[[System Reference Document|SRD]]<br />
::D20M<br />
:::[[D20 Modern|Homebrew]] (even though it's not all homebrew...)<br />
:::[[Modern System Reference Document|MSRD]]<br />
::However, that is not possible. Since that is not possible we try to do the best we can, and that is the current way. Actually, this post has given me an idea... Maybe another box, labeled "D&D" and one labeled "D20M" could exist, with the links in them... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:43, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I just changed it. What does everyone think? Better? Worse? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:45, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I dont mean to be picky. I also dont mean to make extra work for ya all. I just through out ideas when I have them. I like the change, but I also like the reasons given above for why it was the way it was. That is why I like wiki format. I hardly ever make changes, but I do add my ideas to disscution.--[[User:Mander|Mander]] 22:44, 29 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I hesitate to bring it up, but I think it might be worth mentioning; The D&D section could be split up into "homebrew" and "published OGC" sections. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:07, 30 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::First off you were not a bother at all, [[User:Mander|Mander]]. The sidebar is very easy to change and it's always great to improve things. Anyway, I feel that as soon as we have enough published OGC material (we are reaching it though, if one counts NBoF as "published") then we should definitely spit "DnD" up into published OGC and Homebrew. However, right now I do not think we have enough... Maybe when all the UA material is posted we can give it a shot, but until then I do not think we have enough OGC content. Your thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:48, 4 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::: So many acronyms, so few ranks in knowlege-acronyms...--[[User:Mander|Mander]] 01:30, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Age of the internet. Soon everything we be reduced to acronyms, IMHO. [[Help:FAQ#What are OGL, OGC, SRD, and GNU FPL?|OGC]], [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/welcome DnD], [http://datadeco.com/nbofeats/ NBoF], and [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/881560000 UA] (which I really should finish transcribing). —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 02:31, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Actually, speaking of acronyms, it would be helpful to have a list of all the D&D acronyms in [[DnD Other]] (I am sure a list exists on the internet, it just needs to be copied over). Also, sorry about using all those acronyms above. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:31, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
New question: Shouldn't the [[UA:Variant Rules|UA Transcript]] be linked in the sidebar? -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 17:02, 16 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:It should. What should we call it, Unearthed Arcana, UA, Variant SRD, or what? Ideas? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:48, 16 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Maybe UA: Variants? -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 08:34, 17 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::: Or "UA Variant Rules." Either one works for me. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:00, 17 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I have added it. Does it look okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:45, 18 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Looks great! -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 17:01, 21 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Maps? ==<br />
<br />
:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:Dungeons and Dragons#New Section: Maps?]]<small> It dealt with Homebrew specific material, not everything on the site --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:52, 4 December 2007 (MST)</small><br />
<br />
== Tavern Schedule ==<br />
<br />
Should a small Tavern Schedule be placed on the main page on the right side (floating)? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:40, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I think this is a good idea to increase use of the tavern, but it would be best if days that already had events planned were highlighted, a different text color, the only days with links, etc. They need to stand out; otherwise, I have to click each day to even see if there is anything that day. It almost seems to me that a mini-program/extension is needed to code that to make it more useful... still, the calendar is a great idea. That is the best suggestion I have heard to increase usage of the tavern. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:35, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::The days that have events are blue. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:43, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Much better. I like it. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 20:24, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== New Logo ==<br />
<br />
{| align="right" class="d20"<br />
|-<br />
! Submitted Logos:<br />
|-<br />
| ''Please submit your own logo!''<br/>[[dndmedia:Special:Upload|Upload it!]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:D&D logo-test1.png|frame|From Maria C.]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:D&D logo-test2.png|frame|From [[User:Xidoraven|Xidoraven]]]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:D&D logo-test3.png|frame|Variation 1]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:D&D logo-test4.png|frame|Variation 2]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:Logo.png|frame|Current logo]]<br />
|}<br />
<br />
=== Official Updates ===<br />
<br />
Here is what will happen. A two week submission period will start now, after this time when more logos or variations have been submitted, a one week voting period will take place. So, right now, please upload all the variations of these logos or your own D&D Wiki logo and in two weeks time the D&D Wiki community will decide what the logo will become. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:57, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:The voting for which logo should become D&D Wiki's logo will start February 9th. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:13, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== Voting ===<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" style="text-align: left;"<br />
|+ New Logo &mdash; Voting (Please use "#" and extra lines to separate votes)<br />
! [[Image:D&D logo-test1.png]]<br />
! [[Image:D&D logo-test2.png]]<br />
! [[Image:D&D logo-test3.png]]<br />
! [[Image:D&D logo-test4.png]]<br />
! [[Image:Logo.png]]<br />
|-<br />
! From Maria C.<br />
! From [[User:Xidoraven|Xidoraven]]<br />
! Variation 1<br />
! Variation 2<br />
! Current logo<br />
|-<br />
| <br />
#<br />
| <br />
# [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]]<br />
# [[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]]<br />
# [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]]<br />
# [[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]]<br />
# [[User:Young DM|Young DM]]<br />
# [[User:Arohanui|Arohanui]]<br />
# [[User:Othtim|Othtim]]<br />
# [[User:Mask man|Mask man]]<br />
# [[User:kreik|kreik]]<br />
# [[User:EaTCarbS|EaTCarbS]]<br />
# [[User:Lordsnarf|Lordsnarf]]<br />
| <br />
#[[User:Silver Dragon|Silver Dragon]]<br />
| <br />
#[[User:Hawk|Hawk]]<br />
#[[User:Pirate-Sorcerer|Pirate-Sorcerer]]<br />
#[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]]<br />
#[[Summerscythe]]<br />
#[[User:Wackymynd|Wackymynd]]<br />
#[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]]<br />
#[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]]<br />
| <br />
#<br />
|}<br />
<br />
Everyone agree that we have reached a consensus? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:16, 24 February 2008 (MST)<br />
:Looks like we have to me 11/1/6 Xidoraven has a pretty big lead. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 23:40, 24 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I believe that the vote looks pretty definitive. Please let me know if anyone ever gives you problems from Wizards.com or Hasbro, Inc. I am currently working with them in a professional capacity, so I will be able to speak for my work myself, and in direct communications to them. If they want my business, they will not harass this site for being loyal consumers and fans of a popular product line. Best of wishes to you all.<br />
<br />
::GD, if you have any more input on what we talked about before, please let me know by email. I am having a hard time getting back here to check on my pages right now. -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 08:03, 25 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== General Discussion on Submitted Logos ===<br />
<br />
We have had two submissions for a new logo. One of them is from [[User:Xidoraven|Xidoraven]], and the other is from Maria C. Both of them are shown below, and we should decide to either keep the current logo or change to one of these. Please leave feedback. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:04, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I like the second one. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 15:05, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I vote for Xidoraven's. I like colorful. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 15:06, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I wonder what the first would look like with a bit more color. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 15:10, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I really like the dragon on the first logo, however I feel that the wording on that logo may be a little hard to read. So, I think it may look very nice if both the trial logos were merged into one. The "D&D Wiki" would be cut out of the first logo and the "D&D Wiki" text from xido's image would be pasted over it, albeit a little smaller. Does anyone think this idea has some merit? Is it worth exploring further? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:35, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Variation 2 is great! I give that my vote. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 16:23, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
:::::On second thought... I like Variation 1. Arrrg... It is difficult because the logo seems too big with the dragon, yet too small at the same time. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 16:24, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I like variation 2, except the logo should be moved a bit down and right so that the entire graphic is a bit more square (lest the words encroach on the dragon picture)... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 06:06, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Variation 2 OR Xidoravens. Either way, it's really cool! A new logo for a new edition... --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:46, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Variation 2 has me as well. Also, if anyone wants to compile their own variation or make their own logo please do! We need all the options we can get! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:56, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::My wife votes Xidoravens ''':P'''. I'm actually really not sure. I like Variation 1, 2, and Xidoravens... Perhaps we should set up an official vote? --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 18:01, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Is there going to be an "official vote" (whatever that may mean)? Variation 2 is my preferences, and I agree that it would likely look even better with the dragon picked out in red and gold. Also, whichever one is chosen, is it kosher for me to slap the logo up places (such as my blog) linking back to the wiki, as a means of promotion? --[[User:Arohanui|Arohanui]] 01:03, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::I've gotta agree, but with xido's colors, I wouldn't mind seeing the dragon colored as a [[SRD:Half-Dragon|half-gold dragon]] [[SRD:Red Dragon|red dragon]]. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 21:39, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::First off I agree, if the dragon was given some color this entire logo could come out very sharp. Secondly, xido, tell me if I am wrong. You are basically saying that you would be okay to work with the dragon image if Maria C. has the same intentions you have of modifying D&D iconic images for a good cause. Since I cannot speak for Maria C. I will contact her and ask her to join this discussion to help discuss her logo and the final outcome of D&D Wiki's logo. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:19, 25 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::I agree with Blue Dragon. As for my vote for the logos, I like the two combinations, particularly the second one. -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 09:37, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:I also have to say, I really like the dragon in the middle of Xido's logo. I think that using his for the top logo, and then Maria's for a softer logo, potentially on the main page, could be used. However, I feel that a voting period should exist. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:30, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Definitely Version two and It shouldn't be changed a bit the black and white dragon behind the blazing dnd wiki looks awesome but as a second choice id go for Xidoraven's logo by itself<br />
<br />
:::I like Xidoraven's original logo. [[User:Kimmuriel|Kimmuriel]] 18:39, 14 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::: Xidoraven for prez! --[[User:Othtim|Othtim]]<br />
<br />
:::::I would make a terrible president. I would prefer project coordinator, or community shaman, but not something as pop-culture as presidente. ;) -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 07:18, 16 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
Okay, how do i put my name on variation 2, that my fav :D - [[User:Zombiecow|Zombiecow]]<br />
<br />
=== Authors Comments and Discussion ===<br />
<br />
Font size is highly important in a logo concept, especially when they are sized down this much. I designed the font spacing and proportions with that in mind. Also, though I enjoy the integration of the two (trust me, my inner artist is inspired - not jealous), it seems a little busy, and the dragons look dim compared to the heavy vibrancy I put into the original 4e-based concept. I know it sounds haughty and rude, but I choose my own. If Miss Maria would be willing to revise her concept, I think they would more accurately meld. Her design would need the words removed fully, and would require a splash of color (like a layer over it, that appears like watercolor, or an expressive way of 'filling in the lines'). The logo I created has heavier contrast even than that of the original 4e logo design. I had not anticipated it being integrated with another black-and-white (or blank) portion. Had I known, I might have prepared an alternative. -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 21:30, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:As a second thought: Here's my other dilemma.<br />
:I do not know Miss Maria, but I know that her artwork is based on Lockwood's, and that is a blatant copyright infringement of one of the most controversial materials produced by Wizards: Commissioned Artwork. ([http://wizards.com/dnd/images/MM35_gallery/MM35_PG76.jpg])<br />
:I am well aware of the fact I pulled a concept from 4e D&D corporate design, knowing full well that it might bring a lawsuit upon me. I am also communicating with the makers of Scrabulous (Scrabulous.com) currently, because I feel that what is happening right now with their product is an issue in international business ethics. I openly state that my work is a mere pseudo-forgery of Wizards own internally-produced corporate graphics, but I appreciate and respect Mr. Lockwood for being such a professional artist in his field, and cannot openly condone utilizing his work in our own endeavors. If the piece was just a tad different from the Red Dragon's stance or appearance, I could see over-looking it, but this is something that is necessary for an artist to understand up-front. I openly admit to pirating the official 4e logo design from Wizards for a good cause, but I would hope that Miss Maria would be able to do the same in her position.<br />
:That being said, the general concensus on what constitutes 'unique artwork' is at least 15% difference from the original piece. Though she has flipped the image on its vertical axis, and turned detailed painting into rough black outlines, I would think it would need just a ''tad'' more work done to it to be considered anything other than outright plagiarism. If Miss Maria is aware of my own intentions, and has the same goals of her own, then I can look the other way. I would prefer to go down alone if I am to go down as an artist. At least this way, no one can say that you paid me for my services, but that I instead gave them openly as a professional operating in the open-source markets under the GNU license.<br />
:That's my last piece. -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 22:09, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Hello, this is Maria. First of all, I am not Miss Maria as you have taken a fancy of calling me. Second, I created this wood engraving without the knowledge of what's copyrighted and what is not. Green Dragon is family friend and has been nagging me for months to create a logo understanding that I am a graphic design artist. He handed me d&d books and asked me to make a logo. So I choose something cool, changed it, carved it, printed it, modified it on the computer. Green Dragon did not give any advice for this, only that it needed to be done. I wasn't told of anything so I am sorry for the copyright infringement. I also created this logo not for a profit such, but for this 'community' which may be considered a good cause since I get not one thing out of it. And xudo, you need to work on being respectful. You seem jealous that someone else has submitted artwork and that you aren't the only one with fame. 'Artists' are so competitive and always trying to be the best with their noses in the air. -Maria {{Unsigned|Xuthukzaklath|15:16, 25 January 2008 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
:::As a friendly site note to all, I vote that the attacks should stop. This should be a logo design competition in which '''the best''' logo is chosen. There is no need to either of the creators to bicker. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 09:35, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I highly agree, BD.<br />
::::I just wanted to make my comments publicly known. I have absolutely no problem with the mods of this site asking multiple artists for their ideas. I am glad that you have put forward as well. That is how professional art works. Everyone puts forward what they have to give, and then the leaders decide which works best for what they'd like to portray the project. In this case, there were two options, plus the idea of combining. I have not a single problem with any of those ideas, and in fact wish for the mods to make their own decision. As an artist, I may seem biased. In fact, my words (including the word 'blatant') may have had a negative ring or tone to them, but I assure you that my mental inflection did not.<br />
::::I only want to make everyone aware that I have taken multiple considerations into effect in stealing elements of Hasbro's corporate logo in order to promote this open-source site's mission of helping the public. I have a SERIOUS issue with Hasbro & Mattel's current intellectual property campaign at the moment, as well as their business ethics toward third-party producers of copyrighted content. This is because of the legal drama happening with Scrabulous.com. It is for this reason that I am openly providing my professional services to the mods of this site, in order to help them, just as you, Maria, have done. I respect your position and comments. Please just know that I wanted my input to be put out there, in case you were not aware of the legal implications of that particularly recognizable image (the red dragon literally is '''''the most''''' reproduced dragon in D&D as of this year, in terms of rulebook, supplemental, and related material to the D&D brand line. To utilize this image would be a very risky and potentially harmful venture. That is my only point here. If you are okay with that risk, I am okay with it. But please note that the reasons for THAT piracy is not in any way the same as the professional stance I am making by utilizing corporate branding material from Hasbro, as opposed to the very highly recognizable works of Mr. Lockwood, whom I revere admirably as an artist.<br />
::::On a sidenote, I assumed that being a Maria, that you are a female. I could be wrong here. In the state of Louisiana, where I have recently moved to, it is customary for men in particular to respectfully call a woman of any form (whether married, divorced, single, or otherwise) 'Miss Whoever'. I was merely trying to be courteous. I hope I have not offended. That was not my intent.<br />
::::Thanks for understanding, all, and I hope that the Mods can make an adequate decision on the logo design. I would not like to seem biased, so I will leave it all up to you, having said my piece. Best wishes, -- [[User:70.172.234.38|70.172.234.38]] 19:59, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::PS - I don't want to seem pushy, but I have always had a hard time voting on this site. Perhaps making a username profile on Elftown.com, and seeing the way their own polls are set up might give you ideas for future changes. Privacy features, public features, wiki-features, and a pseudo-html are all able to be used there. I have had some really good success with hosting polls on Elftown to get input or for contests of any multiple-choice form. -- [[User:70.172.234.38|70.172.234.38]] 19:59, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== Legality of Images ===<br />
<br />
As to the copyright issues, I believe that the background of our skin is a WoTC copyrighted image. I feel that if we receive a cease and desist letter they will be removed, but beyond that, I feel that it should not be a major issue. Also, I have another interesting idea. I think that Xidoraven's is powerful, and in that sense alone looks quite nice. Would there be any major consideration to have the background of the main page be this dragon, or something similar? A watermark, so to speak? The second combination could also potentially be modified by Xidoraven, seeing that he would know what to do for D&D Wiki's purposes. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 09:40, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Actually, both the skin and the logos would be covered under the free use clause of international copyright law, as it is neither being used to make money nor infringes the copyright holder's ability to sell goods. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:53, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Sam, I just want to say a quick word about free use (I know you like it, so I won't be too harsh). Essentially, the clause is the "wiggle room" in an otherwise extremely strict copyright law and allows for things like academic criticism, etc. However, exactly what constitues "fair use" and what constitutes "unfair use" is loosely defined in the law, and it is important that you know that the United States judicial system has historically ruled very strictly against those parties who (in their eyes) abuse the clause. So, we should tread a bit softly. However, as was said above, if we (Green Dragon, actually) is issued a cease and desist order from any company (such as those owning HALO and LotR, for example, or especially from Hasbro) then we will have to delete the content. Basically, I just want it to be noted that fair use is limited, especially within the widely respected bounds of legal precedent, so don't be too sure that certain images, etc. can be freely used under "fair use." Further, the likelyhood of abuse increases as more information is added. Thus, if I were to quote a line from the PHB as evidence in an argument, that would certainly pass litmus. The more direct and derivative information that is added, though, the more likely it is that infringement will ensue. (Please also note that all material and information derived from a copyrighted source is also [partially] owned by that source, which includes information and rules we might create for use in, for example, the HALO setting). A final note: Wizards of the Coast is renowned for its aggressive pursual in copyright infringement cases after inherited issues involving TSR, Palladium, and certain other companies, a historical precedent that everyone here should be aware of. In any case, please keep in mind that so long as there are no legal actions served we should be okay (this site is not for profit thus far, though if we begin to earn revenue from advertising this will importantly change), but&mdash;if the issue comes to a head&mdash; we will most definitely be on the losing side and will have to remove content or face court action. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 09:22, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I was aware of that. I had to do quite abit of research into it when I did LotR. I do think, however, that as there are Wikias for both LotR and Halo, neither of which have yet been sued, the CSs in question should be fine. Although the dragon thing is a definatly something we should think over carefully. Although, as we are only considering a logo, the risk is small (I think). So, yes, those things are fine for now and we can remove them if we get into trouble. The biggest problem with free use is definatly it's vagueness. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:05, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Protection of Pages ==<br />
<br />
You know this isnt much of a wiki since everything is editblocked.if someone vandalizes a page u REVERT it [[User:Zau|Zau]] 03:12, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:? Of course we revert it! Why should we let our work be spoiled by vandal? All wiki's revert vandallism. The point of a wiki is to work together to improve the whole thing, rather than to reck the whole thing by vandalism. And about those editblocked pages- those are mostly SRD, which is official material that we aren't allowed to whimsically edit. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:49, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I have unlocked this page to IP edits, we will see what happens. Also, the SRD's protection is up in the air right now, if all goes well with the new UA material on D&D Wiki (which, even though it is OGC, is only protected from IP edits) then the SRD may very well become protected only from IP edits as well. If you are referring to specific GNU FLD homebrew pages that are protected, they are only protected because the author of the page is question has asked them to be protected. They will never become un-protected unless the author wishes this to happen. I hope this helps answer your question as to why so many pages on D&D Wiki are protected. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:03, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Index of True Dragons ==<br />
<br />
:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:True Dragon Index#Location?]]<small> as it dealt with that page. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 09:25, 8 February 2008 (MST)</small><br />
<br />
== Published Settings ==<br />
<br />
Hi I was wondering does anyone know whether it would be legal to publish information about old dnd settings on here or homebrew stuff for those settings ie: planescape or spelljammer? also would it be legal to do the same for the still in print settings like forgotten realms and eberron? and would anyone else be interested in stuff like this? [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 22:42, 7 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:New settings = no. Not allowed, as they aren't under the OGL (I think...). Old ones I'm not sure about. -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 22:28, 8 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Probably not. The old stuff isn't under the OGL. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:03, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::If it is licensed under the [[OGL]] please add them, however I do not think any of them are... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:43, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I'm pretty sure It is technically not allowed unless we want to make fun of them in which case it falls under fair use in the copyright acts of the world lol. Does anyone know how we could find out for sure? [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 06:42, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::They cannot be added. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:08, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Semantic MediaWiki ==<br />
<br />
I do not pretend to understand this nor what it would take to implement but would it be possible to use something like [http://ontoworld.org/wiki/Semantic_MediaWiki] to create forms to make adding entries for new users easier. there are a number of entries that need to be formatted if a form formatted the entries for them this problem may be fixed. Although it would only help at page creation its a start. Any thoughts?<br />
<br />
I should point out the form wouldn't replace editing the code directly just allow another option for those who have no idea how to format. Which means those who like to stare down the face of a page of code (myself included) could still do so. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 02:25, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I've briefly grazed over that extension, and I've yet to take it for a test run, but I think you're right that there may be some useful nuggets along with the semantic forms extension (which requires semantic wiki). I'd been meaning to ask [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] or [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] to take it for a spin in development environments and give input on it. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:36, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I think it would be useful only problem is that it needs to be added to dnd wiki then someone has to make the forms, it's a fair amount of work. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 21:29, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_MediaWiki About]. Not sure if this is really what we are looking for... It, as far as I can tell, would just help with dynamic categories and act a little like the dpl2c feature we currently use. I think an external script for adding things (as [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] is working on) may be a better option. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:10, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::My apologies I was unclear on what I meant I'm lucky Sledged knew what I meant. Its not the semantic wiki itself that I am interested in but the [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Semantic_Forms Semantic forms extension]. As far as I understand it it allows you to 'simply' create a form to fill out and will take care of the wiki coding for you. If you scroll down to the Special Pages heading and look at the examples it will give you a better idea of what this is. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 23:24, 10 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree with you, that is a very interesting extension, and I could see it being very useful here on D&D Wiki. The only problem I see is that, although impressive, it requires a Semantic Wiki as a prerequisite. I am not sure I would want D&D Wiki to become a Semantic Wiki, although the decision is not mine it is the communities. Maybe someone could change the code so a Semantic Wiki is not needed and it can work within the normal MediaWiki environment? That would make it quite a bit more appealing ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:59, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I have not read all the material and probably wouldn't understand most of it anyway I believe it would be beyond my ken, my knowledge of wikis and php is limited. What would be involved in implementing this do you think? What would 'becoming a semantic wiki' do? You seem to have reservations I'm just wondering if there are draw backs you foresee? [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 06:25, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::I gave a look at Semantic Wiki and I think it is a great idea. In my experience as a technical writer, duplication of information is one of the Prime Evils. Namely, here was the criteria that led me to really want to add dpl to races and now feats:<br />
:::::::*All information about a particular topic should be in the same location.<br />
:::::::*Updating information should update other pages that use that information.<br />
:::::::Where I work, we use a form of documentation source files called DocBook. DocBook is much like this wiki where information must be repeated because there is no inclusion mechanism. There is another form of documentation source, which we are considering switching to after the next release of our software. This format is called Dita. Dita allows you to segment information into sections which can be included directly by other pages. This concept is partially similar to Semantic Wiki, but I would argue, less powerful. Semantic Wiki allows you to tag information as a particular type of information. It might be a little more work to create a page, but all of the sudden we have so much more power to categorize our information.<br />
:::::::On a race page, for example, we can have a "quick synopsis" type of data which users would use for a sentence that describes the race. The page could also have an "ability score adjustment" type of data and a "level adjustment" type of data. All of the x0 templates I put on the top of race pages would be unnecessary at this point. The advantage being: if a user updates the source of the race (ie: changes the Ability score adjustments from +2 str to +2 con), it will automatically change the race table without requiring the x0 template at the top of the page to be changed. This means that the information displayed in the tables will always be true to the source.<br />
:::::::The big problem with Semantic Wiki is that it would be a LOT of work from the startup. Probably a few months of work if we want to fully integrate it. So no matter how great I think the idea is, it is probably not a feasible or worthwhile one to integrate.<br />
:::::::Now [[User:Hawk|Hawk]], you seem to be interested in the same thing that I am (and in fact something I have been working on). You want some sort of form based generator that will automatically format the pages after you supply some information. I have almost finished an NPC Generator, which should be promising. I just need to add in spellcasting, epic spellcasting, and special abilities. Forms can always be done directly in php and linked to. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 07:14, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::This forms extension allows you to not only create a page but edit it using the forms as far as I can tell. I do not know if your PHP pages can do that but if they do it creates a slight issue on the off chance that someone is editing the page on the wiki and on the form the wiki edit would be wiped over when you save the form as it is working directly with the database (I assume). Where as using this forms extension your still working within the wiki and it will prompt you like normal that there is a conflict (yet again I assume) and the situation can be remedied. I do not know exactly what semantic wiki does but the benefits of the forms extension as I understand them are:<br />
::::::::* Creation and editing of pages through forms<br />
::::::::* Users can create their own forms 'easily'<br />
::::::::* Those new to wiki's can use these forms and the page will be automatically wikified which means very little formating will be required afterwards.<br />
::::::::* The fact your filling in a form rather than code means that it's less daunting for the new user and they are more likly to contribute.<br />
::::::::* Organization of Dnd Wiki can easily be improved as categories can be added automatically to entries by use of the forms.<br />
::::::::[[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 08:01, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::What I have been working is only for initial creation, though at some point I would like to have an "import feature". If we had it all form based, however, people would not learn wiki syntax, which is a powerful syntax in its own right. Is that a bad thing? I'm really not sure. Templates can also automatically add categories though.<br />
:::::::::I still don't understand exactly how a wiki works on the back end, and I am actually going to toy with Media Wiki and Semantic Wiki (with the forms extension) tonight. I will see if I can integrate an application with the wiki directly, while still preserving the wiki ways (as an edit not an overwrite). I will also see how easy it is to create a semantic wiki form. Not that my input is even close to the be-all and end-all of this discussion, but I would like to share what I learn with the community. I hope that Semantic Wiki is very easy to use and the forms feature is as well. Good call making note of it! --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 10:28, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Personally I love coding I'm a nerd I admit it lol, but what it keeps coming down to for me is not everyone does and allowing those people to add and edit their creations on here would be awesome. And the forms extension seems to be the quickest, easiest and most effective way of doing that. Let me know how you go with the testing it will be interesting to see if it performs as well as I am hoping. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 10:36, 11 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Did you end up trying this out Aarnott? [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 21:09, 21 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Short answer: yes. Long answer: I think I messed up on the install because I'm getting some strange errors thrown during runtime (like when I access the localhost server). I'm going to uninstall everything today and retry it (no work or school today -- yay!). Third time is a charm ''':)'''. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 08:37, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::So it ended up being an easy thing to install and I was just being dumb ''':P'''. I have got a few form examples working and I think it is a really sweet extension, but there is a major problem that really limits the Semantic Form usage. The form must be used to fill a template (at least from my knowledge using their built-in form generator). This poses a problem if we wanted to have users fill in a race page for example. They could only fill out the author template and x0 template (or Race template if we replace that), but the point stands that there are limitations. Semantic Wiki on its own though looks like a really great extension and the forms extension would be good to use at least for some pages. All the work I have done with races, for example, can be made a lot better by tagging particular parts of an article. If we can get the form extension working in the ideal way, then new users will never create a poorly formatted page. I say go for the installs. They definitely don't hurt and in fact I will start a project to tag all the races so we can get rid of templates to store information. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 11:30, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:Okay, we can give it a go. I will have [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] install it when he answers me back. Also, I am a little confused as to what you are saying above. Can we or can we not get rid of the [[Template:x0]] on the races' pages with this extension? I thought this made it so one can "tag" certain parts of an article and have those "tags" show up on a different page as well (like a split [[Template:x0]] (just like [[DnD Deities|Deities]] is currently organized)). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:38, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::We can get rid of any templates we use that duplicate information already in the article (such as x0). What happens is we create properties which are used to identify information. So in the case of a Race, we would have a property called "Ability Score Adjustments" or something like that and tag the section directly in the article that refers to the ability score adjustments. Instead of using dpl to grab template information, we use semantic wiki to grab the "Ability Score Adjustment" directly from the page. The main advantage in my opinion is that when you update a page, you only have to change information once and then the tables update. It will be some work though (thus why it would become a project for me), but Semantic Wiki does not change existing wiki functionality, which is a very good thing. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 11:45, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I installed WAMP (appache server + php + mysql latest stable versions) on my vista ultimate machine last night and then installed media wiki semantic and the forms extension I had no trouble it installed perfectly (apart from me stupidly trying to instal semantic forms with a mysql user that didn't have permission to create tables). I have been fiddling around a little havnt had much time though. Here's what i've figured out:<br />
:::# You create properties like string, page or date first<br />
:::# Then create templates (using the template making tool that comes with the forms) I made a author template and a very quick deity template.<br />
:::# then you make a form. You pick Author click add. then you click deity and click add (you can create forms which use more than one template!)<br />
:::# name the form then save<br />
:::# when you go to the form it will ask for a page name type one in like "MyDeity (DnD Deity)" hit enter<br />
:::# you are then taken to the form you fill it out it makes the page as per the templates it works as described !!! :O<br />
:::# you can even edit the page again using the form !!!<br />
::: [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 19:11, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
::::There is one thing though semantic wiki adds a box at the bottom of the page "Facts about..." if it can be removed i'd be happier. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 19:16, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
:::::I just realized it would be relatively easy to turn our current preloads into templates add a few bits of code you have a compatible template to make a form for and if you edit the template EVERY SINGLE CREATURE, DEITY OR CLASS (that uses that template) IS EDITED AS WELL!!! meaning we decide we want the classes to look like (insert format here) we can instantly change them all at once!!! [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 19:36, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::The problem lies in the fact that we will have to change every single homebrew page. I'm up for the challenge (as long as it takes), but help will be nice if you are willing ''':)'''. It does seem pretty nifty though. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 20:20, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::I do not want this extension if the "Facts about" (or whatever it is called) is present. Is there a way to remove it? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:07, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I am more than happy to help. What we need is to create the forms and templates so that all new entries use them. then start changing things over slowly, On the plus side if it takes awhile to convert the old stuff its not so bad as they will look exactly as they do now until we get to them. Perhaps we should consider moving this discussion onto it's own page before this page gets so large it destroys the Internet. I would also suggest holding off on installing it until we've fiddled some more to see what effect it has on the wiki like the damn facts about table. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 22:10, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::I should point out the facts about table is only present on pages that use semantic data so if we did instal it it wouldnt effect anything until we started to make pages with semantic data on them. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 22:14, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::This is an image of an author table I created useing a form [http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/6099/66402195ri6.jpg]<br />
::::::::::Notice it looks exactly the same as our current author table. Below is the form:<br />
::::::::::[http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/5454/36613376en2.jpg] [http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/766/83147904gr7.jpg] <br />
::::::::::Notice on the form the date field it is contextual so all dates on author pages will have the same format so yet more consistency [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 23:03, 22 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::First off, what is that operating system your using... please don't say Vista ''';)'''; Ubuntu überalles. Anyway, again, is there anyway to remove the "facts about" box? If that can be removed this will be installed right away. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:47, 24 February 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::I'm afraid so I use (and like) Windows Vista Ultimate Version 6.0.6000 Build 6000. Ok I have figured out how to get rid of the factbox (that's its official name) you need to edit "SMW_Settings.php" in the folder "[wiki folder]\extensions\SemanticMediaWiki\includes". this line "$smwgShowFactbox = SMW_FACTBOX_NONEMPTY;" needs to be changed to "$smwgShowFactbox = SMW_FACTBOX_HIDDEN;" and this line "$smwgShowFactboxEdit = SMW_FACTBOX_NONEMPTY;" needs to be changed to "$smwgShowFactboxEdit = SMW_FACTBOX_HIDDEN;". Pages that were created with semantic data on them before you change these lines seem to keep the factbox for some reason on my machine so those settings should be changed as soon as the extension is installed. [[User:Hawk|Hawk]] 23:35, 24 February 2008 (MST)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Continental_Maps&diff=220995Continental Maps2008-02-04T14:40:53Z<p>EldritchNumen: added two new maps</p>
<hr />
<div>{| style="width: 100%;" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"<br />
|- style="text-align: left; font-size: larger;"<br />
|- style="vertical-align: top;"<br />
| style="width: 35%; padding: 0.077em 0.385em;" |<br />
Back to [[Main Page]] &rarr; [[Dungeons and Dragons]] &rarr; [[DnD Maps]]<br />
| style="width: 65%; padding: 0.077em 0.385em;" |<br />
'''[[dndmedia:Special:Upload|Add your own map]]''' to D&D Wiki by clicking the link and following the instructions.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<br />
{| class=d20<br />
==User Continental Maps==<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:Lydia.jpg|thumbnail|The Lydian Islands]]<br />
| [[Image:Sapparizan.png|thumbnail|Sapparizan]]<br />
| [[Image:Ardamap.jpg|thumbnail|Arda]]<br />
| [[Image:Carallion.jpg|thumbnail|Carallion]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:Geburah.jpg|thumbnail|Geburah]]<br />
| [[Image:Map of Thyllors.JPG|thumbnail|Thyllors]]<br />
| [[Image:Moertus North.JPG|thumbnail|Moertus North]]<br />
| [[Image:Moertus South.JPG|thumbnail|Moertus South]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:Valgora World Map.JPG|thumbnail|Valgora]]<br />
| [[Image:White_angel_map_4.png|thumbnail|White Angel]]<br />
| [[Image:TwelveSwords.jpg|thumbnail|Twelve Swords Geographical]]<br />
| [[Image:TwelveSwordsNations.jpg|thumbnail|Twelve Swords Political]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:TSbase.gif|thumbnail|Twelve Swords Partial - Base]]<br />
| [[Image:TSGeo.gif|thumbnail|Twelve Swords Partial - Geographical]]<br />
| [[Image:TSPolitical.gif|thumbnail|Twelve Swords Partial - Political]]<br />
| [[Image:Medrael.jpg|thumbnail|Medrael]]<br />
|-<br />
| [[Image:Karnelön 24'X36'.jpg|thumbnail|Karnelön]]<br />
| <!-- NEXT IMAGE HERE, FORMATTED AS ABOVE --><br />
| <!-- NEXT IMAGE HERE, FORMATTED AS ABOVE --><br />
|}<br />
<br />
<br />
[[Category:DnD]]<br />
[[Category:Maps]]</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=218236Talk:Main Page2008-01-29T16:22:41Z<p>EldritchNumen: some words about fair use...</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Archives<br />
|label1=Discussions 1&ndash;30<br />
|label2=Discussions 31&ndash;44<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== 4th edition ==<br />
<br />
I don't really want to recreate the rumours and excitement concerning the upcoming 4th edition, but it looks like we need to think about a way to handle it here. It's pretty sure that there will be two editions in parallel use, at least for a while, so we need a way to separate editions. Tagging articles [[:Category:3.5]] and [[:Category:4.0]] wouldn't be too hard, what I'm concerned about is article lemmata for articles that exists in different versions for different editions. <br />
<br />
Also, it's not clear yet whether there will be a 4th edition SRD. I hope there will be one. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 08:50, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Might be a good idea to put SRD 3.5 articles with a template underneath (this is only a suggestion, not an attempt to have a million templates per page):<br />
<br />
:{| style="text-align: center; font-size:0.9em;" width="100%"<br />
| [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|40px]]<br/>This material is published under the [[V3.5 rules]].<br/><small>[[Main Page|&rarr;More]]</small><br />
|}<br />
<br />
:Although, there might be too many templates if we do this. perhaps we could replace the SRD template to this for 3.5 articles:<br />
<br />
:{| class="messagebox protected" style="border:2px solid #99B; padding:0px; font-size:0.9em;"<br />
|-<br />
| valign="top" | [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|45px]]<br />
| This material is published under the '''[[Open Game License v1.0a]]'''. The [[GNU Free Documentation License]] does not apply to this page. This material is for the D&D [[V 3.5 rules]].<br />
|}<br />
<br />
:We don't really need to mark homebrew stuff- it should work for 4.0 rules anyway. Whatre can I find news on the 4th edition, anyway? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:10, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Have you been at the WotC Homepage lately? Did you notice something? --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 09:48, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::If 4e is really coming out we can most likely just slap on a small template on all 4e things or all 3.5e things. Also, the categories you said above will work. I do not see it as too much of a problem... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:55, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::According to my reasearch, it ios not out until 2011 (rather silly really; why advertise it four and a bit years before its release), so we really do not have to bother with it yet, anyway. {{Unsigned|Sam Kay|10:04, 16 August 2007 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
::::::Boo! Hsssss! I had a browser tab open for the last ten minutes of the countdown of the [http://www.wizards.com/dnd D&D] page. Once it finished, I got "Service Unavailable". About as disappointing as 3.0 psionics. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 16:35, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Lol ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:38, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::4th edition is definitely coming. We really need to sit down, argue, butt heads, and work out the namespacing issues now. Thankfully, 3E has a namespace already. We have lots to sort out. Wikiworld will instantly be 4th compatible, as I haven't bothered with stats for most of the writeup. The new MIC style items should also be compatible. There are interesting times ahead. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 18:39, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::It has been stated that the PHB will be out May '08 MM June '08 and DMG July '08 {{Unsigned|Quill|19:11, 16 August 2007 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
::::::::::Yes, we have a year to prepare but it makes it easier later if we start thinking about it now. Btw., I'm still waiting for the WotC Homepage to survive sudden massive attention so I can see the official WotC Press release... --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 03:22, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Just do what I suggested and replace the OGC tgemplate with:<br />
:::::::::::{| class="messagebox protected" style="border:2px solid #99B; padding:0px; font-size:0.9em;"<br />
|-<br />
| valign="top" | [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|45px]]<br />
| This material is published under the '''[[Open Game License v1.0a]]'''. The [[GNU Free Documentation License]] does not apply to this page. This material is for the D&D [[V 3.5 rules]].<br />
|}<br />
<br />
:::::::::::It is alot easier to mark 3.5 in this way. You could also add an image to the template to mark it, I suppose. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:30, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::I vote to leave the V3.5 on the wiki pemanently (unless the wiki runs out of memory), as some people will still use V3.5. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:39, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Btw, [http://rustmonster.net/2007/08/16/dd-4th-edition-announced-gen-con/ here] it says that Wizards announced to continue the OGL. Good decision. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 09:45, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:Can we get a 4E Info/Rumor link up on the landing page? (Though we may as well link it to ENWorld. They will have the best coverage.) [http://www.enworld.org/index.php?page=4e ENWorld 4E Page] It hasn't been updated yet, but it will be. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 14:19, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Great! it will be nice to have 4.0e on the wiki.--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:27, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::A few things. First off we need to figure out if the homebrew material will be compatible with 4e, if it is we are well off. If it is not we need to figure out how we are going to categorize the 3.5e and the 4e homebrew information separately. Oh, and yes, D&D Wiki has enough space to keep the 3.5e material - nothing need ever be deleted to save space on D&D Wiki. Secondly, if we want a link to 4e information from ENWorld then, I feel, that we should add it as a news item. Dmilewski can take care of this if this is the communities decision. Thirdly we need to figure out when the 4e SRD is coming out to see how much time we have to prepare for it. About the SRD (3.5e and 4e); we need to decide if we want a different namespace for the two SRD editions or if we want to organize them by their identifiers. Anyway, if the homebrew information is compatible we are looking at not too much work (and a much more useful and successful D&D Wiki). Let us hope... ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:10, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::I think ther homebrew stuff will mostlky ber compatable with 4e, but if not we will have to work to update the best stuff... --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:22, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Either the homebrew material is almost 100% good-to-go or it is not. We cannot have a medium on D&D Wiki. The reason we can not have a medium is because many many people will not switch over to 4e for a long time (or ever!) and we do want want these people to lose D&D Wiki as a recourse. If the two editions are not compatible we will have to have two separate pages like [[Dungeons and Dragons]] and we will have to have 3.5e classes, races, etc and 4e classes, races, etc. Again, we need to really know if they will be compatible or not (and if someone has any information please cite the source). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:32, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yeah, I know, I was meaning as they are now... I have had a look at the articles on WotC website, and I seem to remember that the playtest report mentioned that a player was playing a psyon (because it was 3.5e) to see if it was compatible.--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:42, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I volenteer to help updating homberew stuff to 4e should the need arise (hopefully it won't). --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:54, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::I think that conversion of each section should be considered on a case-by-case basis. For example, magic items may only need a level assigned to them. That's an easy conversion worth doing. Classes and prestige classes will need to be entirely rewritten as trees, maneuvers, or such, if they are worth translating at all. <br />
<br />
::::::::My current belief is that we will need to split the content. That hoses the entire redirect initiative. (That was a reservation of mine with the redirect initiative. All the pages that I did for the SRD were hard-referenced. I used no redirects.) <br />
<br />
::::::::Campaign environments will be easiest to convert. Many simply implement the existing system, then list some house rules. For example, LotR and Wikiworld are both concept heavy, rules light. Wikiworld has always been rules light, as I wanted Wikiworld to work with any game system. I suggest that Sam keep LotR rules light, so as to keep it universal.<br />
<br />
:::::::::I was at GenCon when they made the announcement of 4e. According to Wizards of the Coast, the 3.5e material will be compatible with a minimum of modification. There were no details given at the time, however, so what that means, I'm not sure. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 14:04, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Many classes and (both base and prestige) might be obsolete under the new rules- if the same effect can be made just by using talents on one of the other classes. I think we'll have to make a big review of everything and check it for 4e compatibility, maybe putting a 4e Compatible template and a 4e Incompatible template (and nothing on pages that haven't nbeen checked yet, obviously). [[User:MorkaisChosen|MorkaisChosen]] 08:25, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Or we could just keep 3.5e material 3.5e material, since not everyone is going to switch right away... Maybe keep it for a couple years than change it to 4e. Thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:16, 4 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
I read on the Wizards page that one thing they're thinking of implementing with all the online stuff they're using in 4th ed is a wiki to allow home brew stuff. If that's true, it may be best to just keep this site in 3.x to avoid competition with the "official" wiki. I'm still uncertain about all that though. Any thoughts? --[[User:Banyan|Banyan]] 23:07, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I don't think a little competition will hurt. If Wizards opens their own wiki, that's an excellent idea, but it doesn't mean we should give up this project here. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 00:57, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I wouldn't bother with the "official wiki" anyway. This one is better. Anyway, why would we be scared of competition? It is not like we are trying to make money, or anything. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:00, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Would someone like to contact them and ask them if this is true? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:35, 26 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
==New Edition Issues==<br />
<br />
The following questions are both technical and procedural. There is no correct answer. These questions are here to collect upcoming issues with the wiki and decisions that should be considered. Please add to the list.<br />
<br />
===General architecture===<br />
<br />
How best to manage a wiki filled with multiple editions and systems (3E, 4E, Modern, Etc.)<br />
<br />
:I am very open to discussion, but I feel that the best way to manage different systems is to make the different edition pages very obvious. For example, we could have all namespace v4 pages come with a slightly darker page background, or something similar. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:22, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I agree. The Wizards message boards use a different skin for each game. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 10:57, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::I am against the changing of the skin, however I think namespaces are the way to go. We could label the namespaces as SRD3.5e, SRD4e, 4e, 3.5e, D20M, etc. What do you guys think about this idea? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:11, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::People will be far too confused if they want to know whether the article is 3.5 or 4.0, and they constantly have to be checking namespaces. It will be much easier if the page background is slightly darker for 4.0, or something similar. I am not talking about a different feel, just a difference. There is a difference :) &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 18:00, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Why not have two menu pages, one for each edition, and label all pages with 3.5 and 4.0? --[[User: Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:02, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Sam Kay, do you mean namespaces? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:04, 26 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Yeah... I did. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:23, 1 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
===Namespaces===<br />
Should we move current SRD pages to a 3E namespace?<br />
<br />
:I assume you mean 3.5E namespace, and I feel that we need to wait a bit until the structure is clear and known to all, but I feel that it definitely needs to happen before 4E comes out. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:23, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
How do we want the namespaces to interact?<br />
<br />
:Why not have two D&D menus: 3.5, and 4.0. That way, you would know whether you where in 3.5 or 4.0. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:33, 3 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
What should we do with articles that are invariant between 3E and 4E (assuming there are any)?<br />
<br />
:This brings up another question: It would be great if there was a way to allow edits on a 3.5E to be reflected, or maybe a reflection would be requested, onto a 4E page. This way the races or whatnot would remain the same. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:25, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I've been wrestling with related questions on [[WikiRPS]]. It's easy to have small (or even large) pieces of shared text, using a template. But what if the bulk of the text is shared, but just the numbers scattered throughout the text are different (for instance)? As far as I know, the only way to do it is to modularize the text into templates as much as possible. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 11:02, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
Redirects point to 3E SRD. Is there a way to have namespace relative redirects, where <nowiki>[[foo]]</nowiki> inside the <nowiki>[[SRD]]</nowiki> context points to <nowiki>[[SRD:Foo]]</nowiki> while <nowiki>[[foo]]</nowiki> in the 4E context points to <nowiki>[[SRD4:Foo]]</nowiki>. <br />
<br />
:I don't think it's possible, but I'm willing to be proven wrong. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 09:55, 21 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::It would be possible with a few minor hacks. However, this will lead to a very confusing website. I am against the idea. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:18, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
===Templates===<br />
<br />
What templates should be used to tag 3E and 4E pages?<br />
<br />
===Homebrew===<br />
<br />
Should homebrew rules be tagged by edition?<br />
<br />
:I strongly feel so. Everything is specific to a version if it falls back on D&D. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:26, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::That depends on whether it is edition specific or not: WotC declaired that 3.5e would be compatable with 4.0e --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:19, 1 September 2007 (MDT)--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:19, 1 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
Should campaigns get their own namespace, or belong to their intended edition?<br />
<br />
:I feel that campaigns should not get their own namespaces because it would remove the items in the campaign from D&D Wiki linking schemes, etc. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:26, 22 August 2007 (MDT)''<br />
<br />
===Site conversion===<br />
<br />
How best to automate changes?<br />
<br />
Should 3E redirect be systematically replace with hard page references?<br />
<br />
:I'm not sure I understand the question. Can you give an example? &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 09:55, 21 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I think it means that rather than mentions of "darkvision" being linked to the darkvision page it says what page information about darkvision can be found at in the core rule books. If so, I am against the idea. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:09, 6 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Another 4e Option ==<br />
<br />
I can't help but feel that the cleanest solution would to be just host a completely separate wiki specifically for 4E, and just circumvent all the aforementioned issues. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:30, 21 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I agree&mdash;having a separate wiki would be very clean, but it may not be as useful, since one would have to switch between the wiki for different versions of D&D. However, I am starting to like the idea... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:24, 21 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Well, I think the ease of having a separate wiki would probably be more valuable than the "convenience" of having them together. Also, my understanding is that 4E is not nearly so compatible with 3.5E. So, perhaps the "clean slate" concept would be much better. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 10:02, 22 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::From what I'm reading it seems like it'll about as compatible as 2e is to 3e.<br />
:::Also, let's not forget that the above issues are merely the ones of which we can conceive. With projects this size, more issues always arise after implementation.<br />
:::4ed20wiki.com anyone? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 19:36, 27 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Wizards did say 4e would be compatible with 3e with a minor amount of modification. Why not have two sub-main pages within this wiki? On the main page you have links to 3rd edition D20 and 4th edition D20. Then each edition could have it's own sub-main page just like our current main page... That would be ''like'' two wikis but without the flicking from wiki to wiki, having two accounts, and the possibility of reduced number of edits on each wiki. Personally, I think it would be better to have one wiki with separate sections. We already have modern and D&D with separate sections on one wiki, so why not do it with 3e and 4e? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:16, 28 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree w/ Sam, we should just include a sub-set for D&D 4E like we did for d20 Modern. That way people can have just one account and since 3.5 will be compatible w/ 4E people can still look at all of our 3.5 Stuff and port it over to 4E. Just Create a Dungeons and Dragons 4E Page and a 4ESRD and everything's fine. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 11:21, 28 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::I know that the "official" announcement was that 4E would be compatible with 3E, however, I've listened to the Podcasts, read much of the forum boards, and tried to pay attention to what is out there and I don't think it will be that compatible. In fact, Dave Noonan said on the D&D Podcast that there won't be a simple process to take a 3E character and just equate it to 4E. The level progression is different, the spread of powers associated with each level will change for each of the classes, and many of the class abilities (especially spell casting) are being changed greatly. Also, monsters are being reworked extensively, and many of the mechanics are being revised, rewritten, or scrapped entirely. I have a feeling that the compatibility will be simply that you can take a story line from a 3E adventure and use it, but the mechanics, though familiar, are not the same. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 09:55, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I still think one wiki would be best. Plus, I have also been reading the announcements, and I think a lot of the things can already be achieved with variants: the saves working like ACs, for example, add 10 to each save, take 10 from the DC, and roll a D20 and add the DC, compare to save. Easy. Critical spells? I have already done a variant for that before they announced it in Design and development. It is on this site under the title [[Spellcasting (DnD Variant Rule)|Spellcasting]]. So 3E-4E conversion could be a case of slight modification using variant rules. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:31, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::I'm not sure I see exactly how variants address the issue of hosting materials for two different versions of the d20 System. Are you suggesting that for every 4E rule component that's different from the corresponding 3.5 rule, it be put under the [[DnD Rules]] or a SRD Variant section? And if so, would this be in addition to or instead of hosting 4E SRD in it's own space?<br />
::::::::And since the d20 Modern section was brought up, I never really cared for it being hosted next to the d20 stuff. Admittedly, it hasn't been a problem, but that could be due to the fact that there's far fewer users using that section than the d20 section (if the amount of user-submitted material is any indication). Whether or not 4E material has it's own wiki, I'm definitely against the 4E d20 Modern and d20 Future being hosted on the same wiki.<br />
::::::::With the issue of multiple accounts, there's a way to have only one account apply to both wikis. I created an account on a [http://www.wikia.com Wikia] site a while ago, and it works with all wikis there. [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue]] would know how complicated such a thing would be to accomplish, and if it'd be worth while. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:20, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::The answer to your question is no, I was merely stating that I think 3E will be compatible with 4E with a minimal of rule conversion. If we can have one account on two seperate wikis, would it be possible to have a single user page (and talk page) for '''BOTH''' wikis? I knows you have seperate pages on wikia... and have links between wikis work as an "inside" link rather than an "external link"? If so, then having two wikis '''Would''' be more... better. Erm... More... practical. Although if we could have a united main page for both that lead to each seperate wiki, that would be good too. About 4E modern and D20 future, starwars ect, ect, yadda yadda yadda, I am not really bothered about them. So long as we have 3E and 4E D&D (and 3E modern would be good, although we could '''completely''' replace it with 4E modern), then I am happy. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 15:25, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::I have strengthened and decided my view, I am against two wikis for a number of reasons. One is that people would have two user pages, two talk pages, and two recent changes lists would exist. It would become a lot to handle. Another reason is that it would divide visitors between two sites, making it look like dandwiki.com is actually not doing as well as it would be, therefore making it not as popular on google, etc. Another reason I am against it is that people will choose one wiki they like and stick with it, disabling half of our growing user base. It would stop prompting people to join random discussions as much, and stop prompting them to help out as much. Another reason is that structure changes would have to be done twice, the same template made two times, one for each wiki. It seems, to me, like a lot more problems would arise than good would come out of it. I am against making two wikis.<br />
::::::::::A solution I see to this problem is namespaces. We could have namespaces such as 3.5e, 4e, 3.5eSRD, and 4eSRD to eliminate confusion as to which version something is. I think namespaces would be the best solution to this problem, not separate wikis. Maybe we should vote? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:00, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Sure. Why not? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 21:25, 31 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Done. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:19, 31 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::If anyone can see a way to make the voting table below clearer please do. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:32, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:I voted for everything. That's because I believe that we will need our whole toolbox to sort this out.<br />
:First, we need to identify the two idea complicating this discussion and table them. I believe that D20 Modern will be best served with it's own sister wiki. Simply by separating it, we greatly simplify our discussion. It then becomes its own discussion (which it deserves). Campaigns also deserves their own discussion. <br />
:This greatly simplifies our problem. <br />
:We already know that we will need new templates for 4.0. (Fact: see the new creature layout block.) We will also need new page preloads. Layout differences will help us tell one page from another. The new class pages will look different than the old class pages simply by being laid out differently. That does the same job as a skin. We also have footer and header templates that can go into a preload and existing pages.<br />
:Namespaces are powerful tools to help us sort out what is what, even at a glance. They provide an absoluteness that chains through everything. The new SRD will most definitely be in a new namespace. For contributor content, I don't see a powerful enough need for a separate namespace when layouts and templates are already providing us good service. Page titles also convey information. '''Page Title (DnD Page)''' is different from '''Page Title (4E Page)'''. <br />
:Categories will be directly impacted by namespaces, but the purpose of categories is not in separating pages, but in collecting like pages. If we try to separate pages too much using Categories, all we do is create a complicated set of categories. We have page titles and namespaces to help a user identify what page goes with which system. These should be sufficient.<br />
:Finally, there is ignorance. If we make the wiki too complex for contributors, we will lose contributors. Any schema that we invent must be apparent to our average contributor.<br />
:That's alot, isn't it?<br />
:My belief is that we should make a new namespace for the new SRD, and let the body of the wiki sort itself out with layouts, footers, and linking. Most sections are clearly one edition or the other. The trouble sections (D20 Modern and Campaigns) need their own discussions to sort out. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 07:52, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::If I didn't know better, I'd swear you were putting together an argument for separate wikis. I think this statement sums it up:<br />
<br />
:::''If we make the wiki too complex for contributors, we will lose contributors.''<br />
<br />
::There's going to be plenty to worry about with just dealing with one edition without having to worry about how keep the editions separate, and too many of the solutions depend on the users maintaining the separation. Right now we have users assigning incorrect categories or neglecting categories, putting non-SRD material in the SRD namespace, not using the preloads, not putting the " (DnD xxxx)" identifier (or putting the wrong identifier) when they create a page, and so on and so on. Trying to maintain a separation between editions is going to add to the problem. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:45, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Nothing on this earth will stop the symptoms above. Ignorance will always exist. I believe the above are symptoms of too-few editors. We have needed editors patrolling their own areas for a while. We must also admit to ourselves that editing is not very interesting to most of our contributors. I really don't know how to address that issue.<br />
:::One reason that I don't want separate wikis is that our Campaign section is always among the most popular sections. How do I maintain Wikiworld across two wikis? If our solutions won't work well for campaigns, we will hurt ourselves.--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 15:09, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Also, on the incorrect editing, most random people who post here don't know all the catagories or how to properly code a wiki. I still don't know all the catagories but I usually go find a page that does and copy and paste. So the incorrect editing will always be a problem. I also firmly stand behind the idea of just one wiki, everything in one place. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:28, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree with Dmilewski. Why was the last sysop elected more than half a year ago? It's because we have a large issue with people not wanting to edit the infrastructure of this site. The last editor that really edited the infrastructure was [[User:Mkill|Mkill]] (albeit with some very controversial edits), who since that time has left D&D Wiki. The infrastructure is not perfect here, many many things need to be improved or are currently wrong, but why is no one stepping up and fixing them? Is D&D Wiki to complex for people to handle? Should we dumb it down? And how do the questions I just asked pertain to 4e material?<br />
:::::Actually, I think the questions I just asked are the core of this issue. A new 4e wiki will eliminate all the issues with people not wanting to edit the infrastructure, and that is why it seems so appealing. It will make a new slate, without D&D Wiki's insane hierarchy (which, by the way, only exists because average users do not edit the infrastructure or help other people's creations on D&D Wiki), and without all of the work that needs to be done on D&D Wiki that is not getting done (publications, dplc's for races, modernizing classes layouts, linking orphaned pages, etc, etc). D&D Wiki has issues, and a new 4e wiki will remove them all... but I don't like to run from my problems.<br />
:::::Yes, D&D Wiki needs some major changes to become what I envision it to be; to become what everyone envisions it to be, but I feel we can accomplish these changes within this current wiki, and just this current wiki. Problems will arise from adding a new edition, but we can solve these problems, we will need to solve these problems... and, of course, the best way to solve these problems is to solve the problem with the average user not editing the infrastructure, because that is where I feel it all stems from. If the average editor feels that D&D Wiki does not just need more content, but rather needs infrastructure help, organizational help, help with making things look good, and help with making everything balanced, then with everyones hard work all the problems on D&D Wiki will soon disappear, creating an environment where adding a new edition will be as smooth as adding a new race. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:29, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Well not everyone wants to just go on a site and edit the way it works just for fun. They might add something but I wouldn't expect them to edit it. Maybe you should try on the equipment page to when you add a new item show some of the various templetes you can use such as the author one and the various catagories you can use. This might help because then you can just copy and paste what you need. I do agree that if we had more people editing and making things right the first or second time then this place would run much smoother. Now I would like to step up and help edit and my area would be the equipment section as I spend most my time there and I am most familar with it. You still might have to make more minor edits to what I have done but I garentee you that there will be less of them. Also, all I would be doing is standardizing and making minor edits as I do not know how to code much more than that; I could learn but that will take time. If you would like me to try to do that I will, it's just anywhere else and I'm not going to be nearly as useful. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 21:18, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I really didn't for my post to be a ''"plea for help"'' (even though it may have come off like that... ''':P'''), but if you want to do something which requires little or no wiki-syntax knowledge thats helps out [[DnD Equipment]] please drop a note on my user-talk page and I will help you find something that needs to get done on [[DnD Equipment]]. Anyway... back to the subject on hand..... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:57, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::When does the vote end? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:38, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Does the 5th of December sound okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:45, 2 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Yeah. I think everybody who wants a vote has voted or will have done by then. We can always send a MOI to people who havent voted. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:26, 3 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Okay, the vote is over. Thanks to everyone that voted, and it appears that we will not be making a separate wiki for 4e material (or holding a book burning convention) but rather organize the different edition by way of categories, namespaces, and possibly changing the identifier. Agiain, thanks to everyone that voted ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:05, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::So, when are we going to start setting it up for 4e? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:40, 15 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Feel free to start whenever you have time... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:04, 15 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:I'd love to, but what do we call the new pages... "4E Dungeons and Dragons", "4E D20 Modern", "4E DnD Base Classes"? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:03, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Or "Dungeons and Dragons (4E)?" There's still a few more details that need to be decided. In what namespace will user content be? Main or "4E"? How do we deal with items independent of rules versions (i.e. maps, campaigns and the like)?<br />
::Personally, I think we can mirror the 3.5 section by replacing all the instances of "DnD" in all the identifiers with "4E" instead (e.g. "4E Character Options," "4E Feats," "4E Creatures," etc...), and the landing page can just be "Fourth Edition." (I always though "Dungeons and Dragons" and "DnD" were bit of misnomers in this context.) —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:37, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Ok. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:33, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I'll start setting it up under 4E Homebrew, 4E Feats, etc. We can move them if need be. If we have stuff under 4E as you suggested, I think DnD should be replaced with 3E or 3.5E for the 3.5 stuff... Thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 02:18, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Started to set it up- see [[4E Homebrew|this page]]. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:17, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== The 4e Movement ===<br />
<br />
I looked over the page and I feel there are a couple kinks to be worked out. First off do we want the pages being labeled as "4E" or "4e"? Secondly, which pages do we want to work with both editions? Should these pages keep the "DnD" while all the other pages would adopt a 3.5e or 4e, respectively, identifier? Thirdly, should we change the descriptions of the sub-pages to say which edition they cover or would that be redundant? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:35, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I think 4e, Maps, campaign settings, possibly deities (depending on changes), Environments, Possibly Quests and Disscussion could be shared, yes, they keep DnD, rest become 3.5e or 4e, yes the rest need to say edition sub-pages cover. Any thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:34, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Yes. How can we make the newly implemented dpl on [[Dungeons and Dragons]] (thank you so much, Sledged) work with non-specific edition pages in all the main categories (for DM's, for Players, or General)? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:27, 24 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Give pages that work for both two categories? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:08, 27 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::[[DnD Campaign Settings|Campaign Settings]], [[DnD Links|Links]], [[DnD Guidelines|Guidelines]], etc. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:37, 27 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Ok, I have done everything except the spells section and the SRD. I have made a 4e version of the pages that I was not sure of (quests and deities), and linked to both (we delete the 4e one if not required or remove the category if the 4e one is required). What do you think? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:27, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::One thing is that everything could be piped so it does not say "4e" all the time. I feel that if one is already on the 4e landing page then having 4e before everything would just come off as repetitive. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:19, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::What do you mean? Like 4e Homebrew/Classes/Base Classes? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:51, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Not exactly. I was refering to things like [[4e Deities]] being piped to [[4e Deities|Deities]]. It just seems repetitive to be on the 4e page and have everything say 4e before it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:43, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Ok. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:18, 25 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::[in a robotic voice] TASK COMPLETE. Are there any more tasks to be done on the 4e Homebrew section? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:24, 27 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Other than the spells section I really do not see anything else. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:20, 28 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
===Vote===<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" style="text-align: left;"<br />
|+ 4e Solution &mdash; Voting (Please use "#" and extra lines to separate)<br />
! rowspan="2" | For making a new wiki to encompass 4e material !! colspan="6" | For keeping D&D Wiki as a whole, encompassing all editions !! rowspan="2" | Launch a book-burning party which has the goal of burning every 4e book<br />
|-<br />
! Think namespaces are the solution to 4e material !! Think categories are the solution to 4e material !! Think changing the identifier is the solution to 4e material !! Think changing the background color/skin is the solution to 4e material !! Think templates are the solution to 4e material !! Think that more than one of the aforementioned solutions is the best solution for 4e material (Please say which ones would work best together)<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
# [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] (w/ New Skin)<br />
| <br />
# [[User:Sol|Sol]] <br />
# [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]]<br />
| <br />
# [[User:Trogdor|Trogdor]]<br />
|<br />
|<br />
|<br />
|<br />
# [[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] (Namespaces (for SRD material), Categories, Changing the identifier (for homebrew material))<br />
# [[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] (Namespaces, Catagories)<br />
# [[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] (All the above)<br />
# [[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
# [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] (Namespaces, Skin)<br />
# [[User:Pirate-Sorcerer|Pirate-Sorcerer]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
# [[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
|<br />
# [[User:xidoraven|xido]] (lacking respect for corporate global capitalism)<br />
|}<br />
<br />
::The option to destroy all D&D4e books in the world is not an option. I am upset about this --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 19:20, 30 November 2007 (MST))<br />
<br />
:::LOL! Of course we can't take that action, even if we want to! It is probably unlawful or something. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:12, 1 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::That option has been added ''';)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:09, 2 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::'''LETS GO N' BURN THINGS!!!''' [loads AK47] '''UPRISING AGAINST THE 4E MENACE!!!''' --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:28, 3 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== New Look ==<br />
<br />
I feel that it is high time that we had a new look for the [[Main Page]], for a number of reasons. One is to make it easier for the average user to understand how D&D Wiki is organized, another is so the [[Main Page]] looks nicer. Below is my proposed idea, which is still in the works. Also, I have a couple of questions about it. One, should we use DPL2C to determine the number of items in an area. For example around <DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items exist in [[Dungeons and Dragons]], should we display that below? Also, should we have bullets in front of the link to [[Dungeons and Dragons]], the [[System Reference Document]], etc? Does it look better or worse with them present? Finally, how is the wording of everything? What could be improved? (P.S. the below idea is not mine, it was stolen from [[User:Sledged|Sledged]]'s hard work making [[Dungeons and Dragons]] look nice&mdash;I do not want to take credit which I do not deserve) --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:23, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Yea, the above does look much nicer than the current Main Page, and I do agree it needs an update. As for showing how many things you have in each, that's not necessary but is interesting to see that we have 2900 Homebrew Items, if anything that might bring people in to see that this is a pretty big site and not just some random long forgotten website. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:33, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I have added the number of items to the new look. Any other ideas? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:28, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::This definitely clarified what information is contained in the sections. I would agree with implementing it. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:34, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Let's absolutely add this. The main page definitely needs more information. I like it! &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:48, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I think that if we have 3.5e and 4e on this site, we should have the main page sperating out 3.5e and 4e, and pages for 3.5e and 4e like the above. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:56, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yes, I agree. But that can be added once 4E comes out... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:30, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I'm going to implement this now because I think it is so much better (and I want it as soon as possible). Please, though, continue to post comments here about any revisions we could do to make it look better! &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:32, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::Yeah, I like it. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:38, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::I removed the "d20M" in that SRD link since it is already under the header of d20M. However, I agree, it looks very good and thanks for implementing it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:48, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="column"<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
; <big>Dungeons and Dragons</big><br />
* [[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
; <big>d20 Modern</big><br />
* [[D20 Modern|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=D20M<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[Modern System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=MSRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
|}<br />
<br />
====Main Page after 4e comes out====<br />
<br />
When 4e does come out, we could chang it to this:<br />
<br />
; <big>Dungeons and Dragons</big><br />
* [[Dungeons and Dragons| 3.5e Homebrew Content]] | [[4e Homebrew| 4e Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[System Reference Document|The 3.5e System Reference Document]] | [[4e System Reference Doccument|The 4e System Reference Document]] | [[UA:Variant Rules|Unearthed Arcana]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD|Unearthed Arcana<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
<br />
; <big>d20 Modern</big><br />
* [[D20 Modern|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=D20M<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[Modern System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=MSRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
<br />
Any thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:23, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Or this...?<br />
:; <big>Dungeons and Dragons</big><br />
:; Revised 3rd Edition<br />
:* [[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew]] <div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
category=3.5e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:* [[System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]] | [[UA:Variant Rules|Unearthed Arcana]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD|Unearthed Arcana<br />
category=3.5e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:; 4th Edition<br />
:* [[4e Homebrew|Homebrew]] <div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
category=4e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:* [[System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD<br />
category=4e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
<br />
:; <big>d20 Modern</big><br />
:* [[D20 Modern|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=D20M<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:* [[Modern System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=MSRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:17, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Year, that is better than mine. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:52, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Is everyone okay with that look once 4e comes out? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:12, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Should we make CAPTCHA's present after an IP edits? ==<br />
<br />
Recently a high level of automated spam has been attacking D&D Wiki in the form of inserting nonsense and gibberish into random pages. An example would be [[DnD Flaws]] as of 04:08, 1 November 2007 (MDT) as edited by [[Special:Contributions/200.226.134.53|200.226.134.53]] (permanent link [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=DnD_Flaws&oldid=159600 here]). I think the easiest way to stop this problem would be to provide [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captcha CAPTCHA's] every time an IP makes an edit. The only reason I am asking this is because I am not sure if it would be more beneficial or more harmful to have CAPTCHA's. Do you guys think that IP's would still correct spelling errors if they had to enter a CAPTCHA or would they deem it to difficult? Would it, even if the amount of edits performed by IP's decreased, be worth it? Any ideas would be appreciated. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:41, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Well, if they were just doing it because they were bored then having to spell the correct word to finalize the edit might prevent some people because they are just waaay to lazy. It would also prevent if anyone wanted to create a bot to spam content. Although, it would be annoying for me to have to do that every time I wanted to say, update my User Page with another new item. If you could disable it for users and not IP's, I think that would be a good try to cut down on the spam. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:31, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::The CAPTCHA's would ''only'' be for IP edits, not for when a user edits something. Anyway, that would be terrible if a user had to enter a CAPTCHA to edit something (the reason they would not have to is because to create an account one has to enter a CAPTCHA...) Also, as you may have noticed, all the recent spam attackes have been automated, so hopefully if this is implemented it should help with the problem... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:44, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::So yea, try it and we'll see if the spam goes down. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:24, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::I agree with this completely. Should I go ahead and put them in, or should we wait for more users to comment? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:33, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Go for it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:41, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yeah. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:52, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Okay, it has been added. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 20:50, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::For some odd reason, i have had a captcha come up after all my edits today, despite the fact the captcha is only supposed to come up when an IP edits something (and I am logged in). Why is this, and can someone sort it please? Thanks. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:03, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::This should not be happening. I would recommend doing the following: log out, clear your browser cache, clear your browser history, clear all cookies relating to D&D Wiki, restart your browser, and then log back in and see if it is still giving you troubles. If it is, then I will definitely look into this problem further. I am sorry for the inconvenience that this is causing you, and will try to get it sorted out as soon as is possible. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 13:50, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::It has not worked. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 15:39, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Maybe you're an IP in disguise... ''':P'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:17, 4 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Err... no. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:55, 5 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Okay... Can I change your password (through the database) and login as you to asses the problem? I would like to see what is happening and hopefully give [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] enough information to fix this very strange problem. Would this be okay with you? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:41, 5 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
{{Discussion Indentation Revert}}<br />
<br />
:Yeah, sure. Can you change my password back afterwards though, please? Thanks. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:11, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Am I the only one getting the problem? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:23, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::No, I also experienced this today with my edits. Although, I'm behind a corporate firewall here, so I don't know if that has anything to do with it. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 09:25, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::No, I've gotten one after every edit I've made, even if it was just adding one letter. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:15, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Oops... I guess the setting was set so sysops were the only ones who did not have to give a CAPTCHA whereas everyone else did. The issue should now be fixed, and sorry about that... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:22, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::Much better. ''':D''' Now I can reformate the equipment section in peace. Which as an update I've finished nearly all the back to footers and have all but the magic weapons and over half the wondrous items updated to the MIC format. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 20:42, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Yeah, sorted. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:59, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Glad to hear it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:44, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Move towards new DPL ==<br />
<br />
Hello all, this site is running on a very outdated version of DPL, which has caused several hacks to have to be thrown together, and is potentially not allowing things to get done. When I upgraded this wiki to v11, I upgraded DPL as well, but most all pages that used DPL immediately stopped working. Is there an interest for me to get a test wiki running, and people can figure out how the DPL should be working, and then implement it? Or should we instead stick with what we have and wait until we really need the next version? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:07, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I honestly have no idea what the DPL is. So could someone tell me what it is and/or what it does? Then I could answer your questions. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:27, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::What are the new features of the new DPL version? For most purposes, the DPLs seem to be working well, but I know we've especially had to hack some DPL2 stuff. Would the new version fix this? [Watsyurname529, DPLs are dynamically assembled lists generally based off of category tags, e.g. [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_Base_Classes&action=edit this code] yields [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/User_Base_Classes this page].] &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 18:21, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I feel that we should implement the new dpl version. The DPL2 (at least according to [[User:Sledged|Sledged]]) would make it so we would not need three main different modifications of the dpl to be running on this site, the dpl, dplc, and the dpl2c (full list [[Special:Version|here]]). I think it would help D&D Wiki greatly to implement the newest version of the dpl, and make things easier for a new user to understand. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:48, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::There's a demo site for DPL with a manual [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page here].<br />
::::Is there a way to get a list of all the pages using dpl*? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 16:29, 8 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::[[MediaWiki:Pages using DPL]] is what True Orphans uses. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 18:17, 8 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::It's only listing the pages in the main/default namespace. What about the SRD pages? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 14:58, 13 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::The extension that page is for specifically excludes all SRD dpl pages, so those have never been added to that dpl list. We will have to compile a list on our own for SRD pages. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:54, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I see. Also, when I said "pages using <tt>dpl*</tt>," I meant also the <tt>dpl2c</tt>, <tt>dplc</tt>, and <tt>dpl2cu</tt> tags. I don't see any of the pages using those tags listed. If those pages can be identified before hand, it'll make an upgrade a bit easier. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:48, 15 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::To answer [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]]'s first question. This wiki is running version 0.7.7 of DPL2. The latest version is 1.5.2, so there is a significant number of changes. For brevity, I'll just list a few of the new features that apply to this wiki:<br />
:::*You can specify your own format for the output. For example you could list each result as a row in a table instead of getting the standard three column output.<br />
:::*In conjunction with the previous feature, DPL2 pull content from the listed pages for displaying as part of the output.<br />
:::*You can get results based on pages names and page content in addition to categories and namespaces. For instance, all the [[User Prestige Classes with Descriptions|user PrCs]] are assigned to the category beginning with the first letter of the page title. Those categories can be completely removed because DPL2 lets you return pages whose title's first letter matches one specified in the DPL2 call.<br />
:::*DPL2 can used to compensate for user error. Broken links like the one titled "Anima and Animus Mage" on the [[User Prestige Classes with Descriptions|user PrCs page]] can be eliminated.<br />
:::*With the latest version of DPL2 (an one other specific extension) users can create spell/feat/monster/etc filters like the one seen [http://www.penpaperpixel.org/tools/d20spellfilter/ here].<br />
:::*It can be used as a parser function (which I personally prefer over tags).<br />
:::*Pages that are linked to only from DPL calls are not listed as [[Special:Lonelypages|orphaned pages]].<br />
:::—[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 14:58, 13 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Okay, lets do it. What are the changes that need to be made to dpl pages to make this not be broken when implemented? What is the best way of going about this change? Should we change the pages first, then implement it, or implement it then fix all the errors on the dpl pages? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:54, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::There's one more complication to take into consideration; All the pages with the <tt>dpl*</tt> mod tags (<tt>dpl2c</tt>, <tt>dplc</tt>, and <tt>dpl2cu</tt>) have to be changed, not just list pages. So we'll have to go through all the class pages (base, prestige, npc, and racial paragon) and NPC pages. I think Blue's suggestion of a test wiki is the best way to do it. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:48, 15 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::It might not be necessary to set up a test wiki. I [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Issue:No_More_Globals submitted a request] over at the [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page DPL2 site] to transition all the globals to class members. If Gero decides to adopt it, the latest version and the currently installed version can be installed side-by-side without one conflicting with the other. The only caveat is that the line that reads<br />
<br />
::::::<pre>$wgParser->setHook( "DPL", array( __CLASS__, "dplTag" ) );</pre><br />
<br />
::::::in the new version will have to be commented out. This will disable using new version as a tag extension, but it will still be available as a parser function call; <tt>{<nowiki/>{#dpl:}}</tt>. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:23, 21 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::And [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page DPL2] version 1.6.0 (no more globals) has been released. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 09:42, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Okay, I upgraded to the latest version. Let me know if there are any errors. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 12:18, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== A Small Sample ===<br />
<br />
So here's a sample list of the user base classes, which I've limited to the 'A's:<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" style="text-align: left;"<br />
|+ Homebrew Base Classes with Descriptions<br />
|- {{#vardefine:odd|0}}<br />
! Name !! style="text-align: center;" | Balance<sup>[[#1|1]]</sup> (out of 10) !! Type<sup>[[#2|2]]</sup> !! Description<sup>[[#3|3]]</sup><br />
{{#dpl:category=DnD<br />
|titlematch=A%<br />
|category=User<br />
|category=Base Class<br />
|include={Balance}:1,{x0}:type:desc<br />
|mode=userformat<br />
|format=,¦- ²{#vardefine:odd¦²{#ifexpr: ²{#var:odd}²¦0¦1}²}²²{#ifexpr: ²{#var:odd}²¦¦class="even"}²\n¦ [[%PAGE%¦²{#replace:%PAGE%¦(DnD Class)¦}²]]\n,,<br />
|tablerow=¦style="text-align: center;" ¦ ²{#if: %%¦%%¦NR}²,\n¦%%,%%\n<br />
}}|-<br />
| colspan="7" class="foot" |<br />
# <span id="1">Shows how balanced a certain Class is, the number is out of 10. The Balance rating is from the actual Class's page; it is not made on this page. More information [[Balance System|here]].</span><br />
# <span id="2">A general category the Class fits into. e.g. Strong Spellcasting, Combat Focused, etc.</span><br />
# <span id="3"> A concise description of the Class-- should advertise the Class.</span><br />
|}<br />
—[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 13:59, 27 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I like it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:27, 29 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:: The Alchemist... I don't know if i would consider it a spell caster --[[User:Cerin616|Cerin616, Drew]] 15:58, 11 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Better now? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:20, 11 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== 4,000th Item! ==<br />
<br />
Whoo! I just posted the 4,000th homebrew item on this site! Amazing how much stuff we've got on here. Just want to say congrats to everyone who's posted/edited here. Also here is the 4,000th item: [[Fried Frying Pan (DnD Equipment)|Fried Frying Pan]] --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:29, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:If that number is correct.... ''':P'''. I think we may actually have more, they are just not categorized (that number is actually the number of items in [[:Category:DnD]]). Although, I agree. Congratulations all! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:51, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Hey, it says 4000 Items on the main page and that's good enough for me ''':P''' to you too, lol. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 20:56, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Meh... ''':)'''. Also, if you want to make that number more accurate please take a look at the [[Special:TrueOrphans|TrueOrphans]] (which may not be true&mdash;I think [[MediaWiki:Pages_using_DPL]] needs to be updated...). However, feel free to categorize those things and, overall, make things on D&D Wiki be linked to! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:14, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
==Sidebar Change==<br />
Dungeons and Dragons or Homebrew?<br />
<br />
The side bar has an option called "Dungeons and Dragons" that takes you to the Homebrew section. This seems to me to be misleading and should be changed to "Homebrew." This is not that big of a deal, but it would be more consistant. --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 15:09, 18 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Actually, there's more than just homebrew material there (though the vast majority of it is homebrew). It also contains OGC from source books like ''Unearthed Arcana'', ''Relics and Rituals'', ''Creature Collection'', ''Monster Manual II'', and such. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:38, 21 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Currently on the [[Main Page]] we call that entire section "Homebrew Content" even though it has more than just that (as [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] pointed out above). If we want to be nitpicky, that is also a problem. Anyway, the reason it is called "Dungeons and Dragons" on the sidebar is that the sidebar cannot have any real wiki-syntax. The ideal organization for that would be something like:<br />
::D&D<br />
:::[[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew]] (even though it's not all homebrew...)<br />
:::[[System Reference Document|SRD]]<br />
::D20M<br />
:::[[D20 Modern|Homebrew]] (even though it's not all homebrew...)<br />
:::[[Modern System Reference Document|MSRD]]<br />
::However, that is not possible. Since that is not possible we try to do the best we can, and that is the current way. Actually, this post has given me an idea... Maybe another box, labeled "D&D" and one labeled "D20M" could exist, with the links in them... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:43, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I just changed it. What does everyone think? Better? Worse? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:45, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I dont mean to be picky. I also dont mean to make extra work for ya all. I just through out ideas when I have them. I like the change, but I also like the reasons given above for why it was the way it was. That is why I like wiki format. I hardly ever make changes, but I do add my ideas to disscution.--[[User:Mander|Mander]] 22:44, 29 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I hesitate to bring it up, but I think it might be worth mentioning; The D&D section could be split up into "homebrew" and "published OGC" sections. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:07, 30 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::First off you were not a bother at all, [[User:Mander|Mander]]. The sidebar is very easy to change and it's always great to improve things. Anyway, I feel that as soon as we have enough published OGC material (we are reaching it though, if one counts NBoF as "published") then we should definitely spit "DnD" up into published OGC and Homebrew. However, right now I do not think we have enough... Maybe when all the UA material is posted we can give it a shot, but until then I do not think we have enough OGC content. Your thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:48, 4 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::: So many acronyms, so few ranks in knowlege-acronyms...--[[User:Mander|Mander]] 01:30, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Age of the internet. Soon everything we be reduced to acronyms, IMHO. [[Help:FAQ#What are OGL, OGC, SRD, and GNU FPL?|OGC]], [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/welcome DnD], [http://datadeco.com/nbofeats/ NBoF], and [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/881560000 UA] (which I really should finish transcribing). —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 02:31, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Actually, speaking of acronyms, it would be helpful to have a list of all the D&D acronyms in [[DnD Other]] (I am sure a list exists on the internet, it just needs to be copied over). Also, sorry about using all those acronyms above. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:31, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
New question: Shouldn't the [[UA:Variant Rules|UA Transcript]] be linked in the sidebar? -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 17:02, 16 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:It should. What should we call it, Unearthed Arcana, UA, Variant SRD, or what? Ideas? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:48, 16 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Maybe UA: Variants? -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 08:34, 17 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::: Or "UA Variant Rules." Either one works for me. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:00, 17 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I have added it. Does it look okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:45, 18 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Looks great! -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 17:01, 21 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Maps? ==<br />
<br />
:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:Dungeons and Dragons#New Section: Maps?]]<small> It dealt with Homebrew specific material, not everything on the site --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:52, 4 December 2007 (MST)</small><br />
<br />
== Tavern Schedule ==<br />
<br />
Should a small Tavern Schedule be placed on the main page on the right side (floating)? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:40, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I think this is a good idea to increase use of the tavern, but it would be best if days that already had events planned were highlighted, a different text color, the only days with links, etc. They need to stand out; otherwise, I have to click each day to even see if there is anything that day. It almost seems to me that a mini-program/extension is needed to code that to make it more useful... still, the calendar is a great idea. That is the best suggestion I have heard to increase usage of the tavern. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:35, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::The days that have events are blue. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:43, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Much better. I like it. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 20:24, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== New Logo ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:D&D logo-test1.png|frame|From Maria C.]]<br />
[[Image:D&D logo-test2.png|frame|From [[User:Xidoraven|Xidoraven]]]]<br />
[[Image:D&D logo-test3.png|frame|Variation 1]]<br />
[[Image:D&D logo-test4.png|frame|Variation 2]]<br />
[[Image:Logo.png|frame|Current logo]]<br />
<br />
We have had two submissions for a new logo. One of them is from [[User:Xidoraven|Xidoraven]], and the other is from Maria C. Both of them are shown below, and we should decide to either keep the current logo or change to one of these. Please leave feedback. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:04, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
: I like the second one. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 15:05, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I vote for Xidoraven's. I like colorful. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 15:06, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I wonder what the first would look like with a bit more color. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 15:10, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I really like the dragon on the first logo, however I feel that the wording on that logo may be a little hard to read. So, I think it may look very nice if both the trial logos were merged into one. The "D&D Wiki" would be cut out of the first logo and the "D&D Wiki" text from xido's image would be pasted over it, albeit a little smaller. Does anyone think this idea has some merit? Is it worth exploring further? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:35, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Variation 2 is great! I give that my vote. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 16:23, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
:::::On second thought... I like Variation 1. Arrrg... It is difficult because the logo seems too big with the dragon, yet too small at the same time. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 16:24, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I like variation 2, except the logo should be moved a bit down and right so that the entire graphic is a bit more square (lest the words encroach on the dragon picture)... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 06:06, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Variation 2 OR Xidoravens. Either way, it's really cool! A new logo for a new edition... --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:46, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Variation 2 has me as well. Also, if anyone wants to compile their own variation or make their own logo please do! We need all the options we can get! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:56, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::My wife votes Xidoravens ''':P'''. I'm actually really not sure. I like Variation 1, 2, and Xidoravens... Perhaps we should set up an official vote? --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 18:01, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Is there going to be an "official vote" (whatever that may mean)? Variation 2 is my preferences, and I agree that it would likely look even better with the dragon picked out in red and gold. Also, whichever one is chosen, is it kosher for me to slap the logo up places (such as my blog) linking back to the wiki, as a means of promotion? --[[User:Arohanui|Arohanui]] 01:03, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
(truncated): Font size is highly important in a logo concept, especially when they are sized down this much. I designed the font spacing and proportions with that in mind. Also, though I enjoy the integration of the two (trust me, my inner artist is inspired - not jealous), it seems a little busy, and the dragons look dim compared to the heavy vibrancy I put into the original 4e-based concept. I know it sounds haughty and rude, but I choose my own. If Miss Maria would be willing to revise her concept, I think they would more accurately meld. Her design would need the words removed fully, and would require a splash of color (like a layer over it, that appears like watercolor, or an expressive way of 'filling in the lines'). The logo I created has heavier contrast even than that of the original 4e logo design. I had not anticipated it being integrated with another black-and-white (or blank) portion. Had I known, I might have prepared an alternative. -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 21:30, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
: I've gotta agree, but with xido's colors, I wouldn't mind seeing the dragon colored as a [[SRD:Half-Dragon|half-gold dragon]] [[SRD:Red Dragon|red dragon]]. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 21:39, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::As a second thought: Here's my other dilemma.<br />
::I do not know Miss Maria, but I know that her artwork is based on Lockwood's, and that is a blatant copyright infringement of one of the most controversial materials produced by Wizards: Commissioned Artwork. ([http://wizards.com/dnd/images/MM35_gallery/MM35_PG76.jpg])<br />
::I am well aware of the fact I pulled a concept from 4e D&D corporate design, knowing full well that it might bring a lawsuit upon me. I am also communicating with the makers of Scrabulous (Scrabulous.com) currently, because I feel that what is happening right now with their product is an issue in international business ethics. I openly state that my work is a mere pseudo-forgery of Wizards own internally-produced corporate graphics, but I appreciate and respect Mr. Lockwood for being such a professional artist in his field, and cannot openly condone utilizing his work in our own endeavors. If the piece was just a tad different from the Red Dragon's stance or appearance, I could see over-looking it, but this is something that is necessary for an artist to understand up-front. I openly admit to pirating the official 4e logo design from Wizards for a good cause, but I would hope that Miss Maria would be able to do the same in her position.<br />
::That being said, the general concensus on what constitutes 'unique artwork' is at least 15% difference from the original piece. Though she has flipped the image on its vertical axis, and turned detailed painting into rough black outlines, I would think it would need just a ''tad'' more work done to it to be considered anything other than outright plagiarism. If Miss Maria is aware of my own intentions, and has the same goals of her own, then I can look the other way. I would prefer to go down alone if I am to go down as an artist. At least this way, no one can say that you paid me for my services, but that I instead gave them openly as a professional operating in the open-source markets under the GNU license.<br />
::That's my last piece. -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 22:09, 24 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::First off I agree, if the dragon was given some color this entire logo could come out very sharp. Secondly, xido, tell me if I am wrong. You are basically saying that you would be okay to work with the dragon image if Maria C. has the same intentions you have of modifying D&D iconic images for a good cause. Since I cannot speak for Maria C. I will contact her and ask her to join this discussion to help discuss her logo and the final outcome of D&D Wiki's logo. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:19, 25 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Hello, this is Maria. First of all, I am not Miss Maria as you have taken a fancy of calling me. Second, I created this wood engraving without the knowledge of what's copyrighted and what is not. Green Dragon is family friend and has been nagging me for months to create a logo understanding that I am a graphic design artist. He handed me d&d books and asked me to make a logo. So I choose something cool, changed it, carved it, printed it, modified it on the computer. Green Dragon did not give any advice for this, only that it needed to be done. I wasn't told of anything so I am sorry for the copyright infringement. I also created this logo not for a profit such, but for this 'community' which may be considered a good cause since I get not one thing out of it. And xudo, you need to work on being respectful. You seem jealous that someone else has submitted artwork and that you aren't the only one with fame. 'Artists' are so competitive and always trying to be the best with their noses in the air. -Maria<br />
<br />
:As a friendly site note to all, I vote that the attacks should stop. This should be a logo design competition in which '''the best''' logo is chosen. There is no need to either of the creators to bicker. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 09:35, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I agree with Blue Dragon. As for my vote for the logos, I like the two combinations, particularly the second one. -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 09:37, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::As to the copyright issues, I believe that the background of our skin is a WoTC copyrighted image. I feel that if we receive a cease and desist letter they will be removed, but beyond that, I feel that it should not be a major issue. Also, I have another interesting idea. I think that Xidoraven's is powerful, and in that sense alone looks quite nice. Would there be any major consideration to have the background of the main page be this dragon, or something similar? A watermark, so to speak? The second combination could also potentially be modified by Xidoraven, seeing that he would know what to do for D&D Wiki's purposes. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 09:40, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I also have to say, I really like the dragon in the middle of Xido's logo. I think that using his for the top logo, and then Maria's for a softer logo, potentially on the main page, could be used. However, I feel that a voting period should exist. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:30, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Actually, both the skin and the logos would be covered under the free use clause of international copyright law, as it is neither being used to make money nor infringes the copyright holder's ability to sell goods. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:53, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::Here is what will happen. A two week submission period will start now, after this time when more logos or variations have been submitted, a one week voting period will take place. So, right now, please upload all the variations of these logos or your own D&D Wiki logo and in two weeks time the D&D Wiki community will decide what the logo will become. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:57, 26 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::you know this isnt much of a wiki since everything is editblocked.if someone vandalizes a page u REVERT it [[User:Zau|Zau]] 03:12, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::? Of course we revert it! Why should we let our work be spoiled by vandal? All wiki's revert vandallism. The point of a wiki is to work together to improve the whole thing, rather than to reck the whole thing by vandalism. And about those editblocked pages- those are mostly SRD, which is official material that we aren't allowed to whimsically edit. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:49, 29 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Sam, I just want to say a quick word about free use (I know you like it, so I won't be too harsh). Essentially, the clause is the "wiggle room" in an otherwise extremely strict copyright law and allows for things like academic criticism, etc. However, exactly what constitues "fair use" and what constitutes "unfair use" is loosely defined in the law, and it is important that you know that the United States judicial system has historically ruled very strictly against those parties who (in their eyes) abuse the clause. So, we should tread a bit softly. However, as was said above, if we (Green Dragon, actually) is issued a cease and desist order from any company (such as those owning HALO and LotR, for example, or especially from Hasbro) then we will have to delete the content. Basically, I just want it to be noted that fair use is limited, especially within the widely respected bounds of legal precedent, so don't be too sure that certain images, etc. can be freely used under "fair use." Further, the likelyhood of abuse increases as more information is added. Thus, if I were to quote a line from the PHB as evidence in an argument, that would certainly pass litmus. The more direct and derivative information that is added, though, the more likely it is that infringement will ensue. (Please also note that all material and information derived from a copyrighted source is also [partially] owned by that source, which includes information and rules we might create for use in, for example, the HALO setting). A final note: Wizards of the Coast is renowned for its aggressive pursual in copyright infringement cases after inherited issues involving TSR, Palladium, and certain other companies, a historical precedent that everyone here should be aware of. In any case, please keep in mind that so long as there are no legal actions served we should be okay (this site is not for profit thus far, though if we begin to earn revenue from advertising this will importantly change), but&mdash;if the issue comes to a head&mdash; we will most definitely be on the losing side and will have to remove content or face court action. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 09:22, 29 January 2008 (MST)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Environmental_Objects_(3.5e_Variant_Rule)&diff=217608Environmental Objects (3.5e Variant Rule)2008-01-28T14:21:01Z<p>EldritchNumen: added cat "supplemental variant rule"</p>
<hr />
<div>== Environmental Objects ==<br />
<br />
{{Author<br />
|author_name=Sulacu<br />
|date_created=January 24, 2008<br />
|status=Pending<br />
}}<br />
<br />
There are times in your campaign where you wish to use the environment to further your needs. Making good use of your environment is a step that can be taken in order to increase your chances to get out of an encounter alive. Using your environment can make the difference between being stamped by insurmountable odds and a glorious victory bought with great hardship. <br />
<br />
Did you ever see one of those old swashbuckling movies, like ''The Count of Monte Cristo'', or a movie featuring Jackie Chan? Then you know what can happen if you use your environment to aid you in your battles. Furthermore, it can make an otherwise boring fight scene of repeated generic attacking and being attacked quite a lot more bearable. For added kick, try to mimic some of the sound that an object makes when it suddenly falls on top of the party's tanker, and the subsequent shrieks of the party wizard that momentarily lost his meatshield.<br />
<br />
=== Interaction with Objects ===<br />
<br />
To an average taverngoer, who steps into the pub for a good old pint, a table is just that. A table. Usually, quite very much an object that is rooted in place. The rougher elements however might have a completely different idea about the functionality of such a basic object. <br />
<br />
==== Flip, Topple, Dislodge ====<br />
<br />
Meet Bob. Bob is the local roughhouser. He goes to a pub to mess it all up. He gets drunk like a demon, screams from one side of the pub to the other, socks your mother-in-law in her face and takes a crap in the kitchen pantry the size of a birthday cake. Bob finds all kinds of different objects that he can use as improvised death machines. An ordinary tankard can become a light improvised weapon doing 1d4 base damage. A chair can be lifted and decked over a person's head (let's say a two-handed improvised weapon, 1d10 base damage). Certain objects are too big to use as weapons in a conventional sense, but they're not too big to influence.<br />
<br />
[[Image:TableFlip.jpg|frame|right|Bob flips a table into Joe's face. Damage ensues.]]<br />
<br />
'''Flip:''' Flip considers objects that can be lifted up and flipped about. Objects that belong to this class are medium sized furniture like a park bench or that sturdy oaken table from before. Flipping actually involves a bit of lifting before said object can be decked down on top of some insolent bar patron. Because of this, flipping is somewhat more difficult based on the weight of the object than pushing. To see if a certain object is fit for flipping, try to think of it as a point mass, before looking at its shape. Is its center of gravity low down? Does it have a broad base that isn't easily pushed over? In that case, it's likely a flippable object. Flipping an object requires a [[SRD:Strength|Strength]] check with a DC of 1 for every 10 lb. that the object weighs. An average table, then, weighing in at about 100 lb. will require a DC 10 [[SRD:Strength|Strength]] check to flip.<br />
<br />
'''Topple:''' When you put your shoulder to a large bookcase, in order to push it over, that can be considered toppling. This category is filled by all manner of furniture that is built up against walls. You can push an archive bookcase on top of an unsuspecting zombie, or put your hand behind a wall mounted bookcase and pull it down on top of the blackguard that is hot on your heels. If the object you are thinking off has a shallow base, like the narrow girth of a bookcase, it is perfect for toppling. Toppling an object requires a [[SRD:Strength|Strength]] check with a DC of 1 for every 25 lb. that the object weighs. A fully loaded bookcase taking in 5 feet of wall will quickly weigh 500 lb. Pushing that over with a DC 20 [[SRD:Strength|Strength]] check shouldn't be a problem for real tough bastards.<br />
<br />
'''Dislodge:''' Certain conveniently placed improvised weapons tend to be affixed to certain things, like a wall-mounted chandelier or a metal bar-rail. In the hands of a somewhat creative brawler, these weapons are quite deadly. The DC for prying loose objects may vary, but a DC of 10 or 15 for a chandelier and a DC of 20 for a bar mounted rail for instance would work quite well.<br />
<br />
====Size and Strength====<br />
<br />
Strength of course is measured in no small part by size. If you're really big, it's easier to push things over on no small account due to your own considerable weight. Flipping and Toppling, as described above, should be considered as no more than an application of carrying capacity, and said carrying capacity differs by size. A Large creature with a [[SRD:Strength|Strength]] score of 15 can carry twice as much as a Medium creature with a [[SRD:Strength|Strength]] score of 15, who can again carry twice as much as a Small creature with a [[SRD:Strength|Strength]] score o 15. Logic would dictate that for Small creatures, Flipping and Toppling DCs should be doubled, and for Large creatures, they should be halved. For the Large creature, pushing over that overflowing 500 lb. bookcase would be a DC 10 piece of cake instead of a DC 20 episode of gruel and sweat, since he himself likely weighs 500 lb. or more himself. For a Small creature, it is likely quite impossible at DC 40. Ever seen a pixie fell a tree?<br />
<br />
====Object Weight====<br />
<br />
If you're going to give the players the option to use objects in this way (I think you should, since tabletop DnD is one of the most customizable form of roleplaying there is), then it is smart to agree on a set weight, like so.<br />
<br />
{| class="d20"<br />
'''Table: Flipping and Toppling Objects'''<br />
! class="left" | Object<br />
! class="left" | Suggested Weight (lb.)<br />
! class="left" | Suggested Action<br />
! class="left" | Suggested Hit Points<br />
! class="left" | Damage<br />
|-<br />
| class="left" | Armoire (empty) || class="left" | 200 || class="left" | Topple || 25 || class="left" | 2d6<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| class="left" | Armoire (full) || class="left" | 300 || class="left" | Topple || 25 || class="left" | 3d6 <br />
|-<br />
| class="left" | Bed (normal) || class="left" | 200 || class="left" | Flip || 25 || class="left" | 2d6 <br />
|- class="even"<br />
| class="left" | Bed (fourposter) || class="left" | 500 || class="left" | Flip / Topple || 50 || class="left" | 5d6<br />
|-<br />
| class="left" | Billiards Table || class="left" | 500 || class="left" | Flip || 50 || class="left" | 5d6<br />
|- class="even" <br />
| class="left" | Bookcase (empty) || class="left" | 200 || class="left" | Topple || 25 || class="left" | 2d6<br />
|-<br />
| class="left" | Bookcase (full) || class="left" | 500 || class="left" | Topple || 25 || class="left" | 5d6<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| class="left" | Cabinet (empty) || class="left" | 150 || class="left" | Flip || 25 || class="left" | 1d6<br />
|- <br />
| class="left" | Cabinet (full) || class="left" | 250 || class="left" | Flip || 25 || class="left" | 2d6<br />
|-<br />
| class="left" | Dresser (empty) || class="left" | 75 || class="left" | Flip / Topple || 12 || class="left" | 1d6<br />
|- <br />
| class="left" | Dresser (full) || class="left" | 150 || class="left" | Flip / Topple || 12 || class="left" | 1d6<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| class="left" | Locker (empty) || class="left" | 100 || class="left" | Topple || 50 || class="left" | 1d6<br />
|- <br />
| class="left" | Locker (full) || class="left" | 150 || class="left" | Topple || 50 || class="left" | 1d6<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| class="left" | Table (flimsy) || class="left" | 50 || class="left" | Flip || 12 || class="left" | 1d6<br />
|- <br />
| class="left" | Table (average) || class="left" | 100 || class="left" | Flip || 25 || class="left" | 1d6<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| class="left" | Table (sturdy oaken) || class="left" | 200 || class="left" | Flip || 37 || class="left" | 2d6<br />
|}<br />
<br />
Bear in mind that these figures roughly translate to Medium objects. A table in a [[SRD:Hill Giant|Hill Giant]]'s household, should it feel it has need of one, may likely be twice as heavy.<br />
<br />
====Object Hit Points====<br />
<br />
A possible rule of thumb for object hit points can be derived as a function of their [[hardness]] and their size as the following;<br />
<br />
Object Hit Points = sturdiness modifier × size modifier × (object hardness)²<br />
<br />
with the size modifiers ''Tiny'' ¼, ''Small'' ½,, ''Medium'' 1, ''Large'' 2, ''Huge'' 4, ''Gargantuan'' 8 and ''Colossal'' 16<br />
<br />
and sturdiness modifiers ''Flimsy'' ½, ''Average'' 1, ''Sturdy'' 1½ and ''Masterwork'' 2.<br />
<br />
====Object Damage====<br />
<br />
The damage an object deals when keeling over on top of a medium creature is 1d6 damage per 100 lb. of the object's weight, rounded to the nearest number divisible by 100 (round down at a remainder of 50 or below) plus, if applicable, the [[SRD:Strength|Strength]] modifier of the creature that flipped or toppled the object on top of it. Minimum weight of an object so usable is 50 pounds, with a minimum of 1d6 damage. <br />
<br />
Creatures should be able to make a DC 15 [[Reflex]] save to avoid damage.<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
Back to [[Main Page]] &rarr; [[Dungeons and Dragons]] &rarr; [[DnD Rules|Rules]]<br />
[[Category:DnD]]<br />
[[Category:User]]<br />
[[Category:Variant Rule]]<br />
[[Category:Supplemental Variant Rule]]</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=214815Talk:Main Page2008-01-24T13:06:04Z<p>EldritchNumen: /* New Logo */ my comments...</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Archives<br />
|label1=Discussions 1&ndash;30<br />
|label2=Discussions 31&ndash;44<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== 4th edition ==<br />
<br />
I don't really want to recreate the rumours and excitement concerning the upcoming 4th edition, but it looks like we need to think about a way to handle it here. It's pretty sure that there will be two editions in parallel use, at least for a while, so we need a way to separate editions. Tagging articles [[:Category:3.5]] and [[:Category:4.0]] wouldn't be too hard, what I'm concerned about is article lemmata for articles that exists in different versions for different editions. <br />
<br />
Also, it's not clear yet whether there will be a 4th edition SRD. I hope there will be one. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 08:50, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Might be a good idea to put SRD 3.5 articles with a template underneath (this is only a suggestion, not an attempt to have a million templates per page):<br />
<br />
:{| style="text-align: center; font-size:0.9em;" width="100%"<br />
| [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|40px]]<br/>This material is published under the [[V3.5 rules]].<br/><small>[[Main Page|&rarr;More]]</small><br />
|}<br />
<br />
:Although, there might be too many templates if we do this. perhaps we could replace the SRD template to this for 3.5 articles:<br />
<br />
:{| class="messagebox protected" style="border:2px solid #99B; padding:0px; font-size:0.9em;"<br />
|-<br />
| valign="top" | [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|45px]]<br />
| This material is published under the '''[[Open Game License v1.0a]]'''. The [[GNU Free Documentation License]] does not apply to this page. This material is for the D&D [[V 3.5 rules]].<br />
|}<br />
<br />
:We don't really need to mark homebrew stuff- it should work for 4.0 rules anyway. Whatre can I find news on the 4th edition, anyway? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:10, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Have you been at the WotC Homepage lately? Did you notice something? --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 09:48, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::If 4e is really coming out we can most likely just slap on a small template on all 4e things or all 3.5e things. Also, the categories you said above will work. I do not see it as too much of a problem... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:55, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::According to my reasearch, it ios not out until 2011 (rather silly really; why advertise it four and a bit years before its release), so we really do not have to bother with it yet, anyway. {{Unsigned|Sam Kay|10:04, 16 August 2007 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
::::::Boo! Hsssss! I had a browser tab open for the last ten minutes of the countdown of the [http://www.wizards.com/dnd D&D] page. Once it finished, I got "Service Unavailable". About as disappointing as 3.0 psionics. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 16:35, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Lol ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:38, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::4th edition is definitely coming. We really need to sit down, argue, butt heads, and work out the namespacing issues now. Thankfully, 3E has a namespace already. We have lots to sort out. Wikiworld will instantly be 4th compatible, as I haven't bothered with stats for most of the writeup. The new MIC style items should also be compatible. There are interesting times ahead. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 18:39, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::It has been stated that the PHB will be out May '08 MM June '08 and DMG July '08 {{Unsigned|Quill|19:11, 16 August 2007 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
::::::::::Yes, we have a year to prepare but it makes it easier later if we start thinking about it now. Btw., I'm still waiting for the WotC Homepage to survive sudden massive attention so I can see the official WotC Press release... --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 03:22, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Just do what I suggested and replace the OGC tgemplate with:<br />
:::::::::::{| class="messagebox protected" style="border:2px solid #99B; padding:0px; font-size:0.9em;"<br />
|-<br />
| valign="top" | [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|45px]]<br />
| This material is published under the '''[[Open Game License v1.0a]]'''. The [[GNU Free Documentation License]] does not apply to this page. This material is for the D&D [[V 3.5 rules]].<br />
|}<br />
<br />
:::::::::::It is alot easier to mark 3.5 in this way. You could also add an image to the template to mark it, I suppose. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:30, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::I vote to leave the V3.5 on the wiki pemanently (unless the wiki runs out of memory), as some people will still use V3.5. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:39, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Btw, [http://rustmonster.net/2007/08/16/dd-4th-edition-announced-gen-con/ here] it says that Wizards announced to continue the OGL. Good decision. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 09:45, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
''&rarr;Reverted indentation to one colon''<br />
<br />
:Can we get a 4E Info/Rumor link up on the landing page? (Though we may as well link it to ENWorld. They will have the best coverage.) [http://www.enworld.org/index.php?page=4e ENWorld 4E Page] It hasn't been updated yet, but it will be. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 14:19, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Great! it will be nice to have 4.0e on the wiki.--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:27, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::A few things. First off we need to figure out if the homebrew material will be compatible with 4e, if it is we are well off. If it is not we need to figure out how we are going to categorize the 3.5e and the 4e homebrew information separately. Oh, and yes, D&D Wiki has enough space to keep the 3.5e material - nothing need ever be deleted to save space on D&D Wiki. Secondly, if we want a link to 4e information from ENWorld then, I feel, that we should add it as a news item. Dmilewski can take care of this if this is the communities decision. Thirdly we need to figure out when the 4e SRD is coming out to see how much time we have to prepare for it. About the SRD (3.5e and 4e); we need to decide if we want a different namespace for the two SRD editions or if we want to organize them by their identifiers. Anyway, if the homebrew information is compatible we are looking at not too much work (and a much more useful and successful D&D Wiki). Let us hope... ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:10, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::I think ther homebrew stuff will mostlky ber compatable with 4e, but if not we will have to work to update the best stuff... --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:22, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Either the homebrew material is almost 100% good-to-go or it is not. We cannot have a medium on D&D Wiki. The reason we can not have a medium is because many many people will not switch over to 4e for a long time (or ever!) and we do want want these people to lose D&D Wiki as a recourse. If the two editions are not compatible we will have to have two separate pages like [[Dungeons and Dragons]] and we will have to have 3.5e classes, races, etc and 4e classes, races, etc. Again, we need to really know if they will be compatible or not (and if someone has any information please cite the source). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:32, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yeah, I know, I was meaning as they are now... I have had a look at the articles on WotC website, and I seem to remember that the playtest report mentioned that a player was playing a psyon (because it was 3.5e) to see if it was compatible.--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:42, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I volenteer to help updating homberew stuff to 4e should the need arise (hopefully it won't). --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:54, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::I think that conversion of each section should be considered on a case-by-case basis. For example, magic items may only need a level assigned to them. That's an easy conversion worth doing. Classes and prestige classes will need to be entirely rewritten as trees, maneuvers, or such, if they are worth translating at all. <br />
<br />
::::::::My current belief is that we will need to split the content. That hoses the entire redirect initiative. (That was a reservation of mine with the redirect initiative. All the pages that I did for the SRD were hard-referenced. I used no redirects.) <br />
<br />
::::::::Campaign environments will be easiest to convert. Many simply implement the existing system, then list some house rules. For example, LotR and Wikiworld are both concept heavy, rules light. Wikiworld has always been rules light, as I wanted Wikiworld to work with any game system. I suggest that Sam keep LotR rules light, so as to keep it universal.<br />
<br />
:::::::::I was at GenCon when they made the announcement of 4e. According to Wizards of the Coast, the 3.5e material will be compatible with a minimum of modification. There were no details given at the time, however, so what that means, I'm not sure. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 14:04, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Many classes and (both base and prestige) might be obsolete under the new rules- if the same effect can be made just by using talents on one of the other classes. I think we'll have to make a big review of everything and check it for 4e compatibility, maybe putting a 4e Compatible template and a 4e Incompatible template (and nothing on pages that haven't nbeen checked yet, obviously). [[User:MorkaisChosen|MorkaisChosen]] 08:25, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Or we could just keep 3.5e material 3.5e material, since not everyone is going to switch right away... Maybe keep it for a couple years than change it to 4e. Thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:16, 4 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
I read on the Wizards page that one thing they're thinking of implementing with all the online stuff they're using in 4th ed is a wiki to allow home brew stuff. If that's true, it may be best to just keep this site in 3.x to avoid competition with the "official" wiki. I'm still uncertain about all that though. Any thoughts? --[[User:Banyan|Banyan]] 23:07, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I don't think a little competition will hurt. If Wizards opens their own wiki, that's an excellent idea, but it doesn't mean we should give up this project here. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 00:57, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I wouldn't bother with the "official wiki" anyway. This one is better. Anyway, why would we be scared of competition? It is not like we are trying to make money, or anything. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:00, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Would someone like to contact them and ask them if this is true? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:35, 26 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
==New Edition Issues==<br />
<br />
The following questions are both technical and procedural. There is no correct answer. These questions are here to collect upcoming issues with the wiki and decisions that should be considered. Please add to the list.<br />
<br />
===General architecture===<br />
<br />
How best to manage a wiki filled with multiple editions and systems (3E, 4E, Modern, Etc.)<br />
<br />
:I am very open to discussion, but I feel that the best way to manage different systems is to make the different edition pages very obvious. For example, we could have all namespace v4 pages come with a slightly darker page background, or something similar. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:22, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I agree. The Wizards message boards use a different skin for each game. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 10:57, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::I am against the changing of the skin, however I think namespaces are the way to go. We could label the namespaces as SRD3.5e, SRD4e, 4e, 3.5e, D20M, etc. What do you guys think about this idea? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:11, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::People will be far too confused if they want to know whether the article is 3.5 or 4.0, and they constantly have to be checking namespaces. It will be much easier if the page background is slightly darker for 4.0, or something similar. I am not talking about a different feel, just a difference. There is a difference :) &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 18:00, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Why not have two menu pages, one for each edition, and label all pages with 3.5 and 4.0? --[[User: Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:02, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Sam Kay, do you mean namespaces? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:04, 26 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Yeah... I did. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:23, 1 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
===Namespaces===<br />
Should we move current SRD pages to a 3E namespace?<br />
<br />
:I assume you mean 3.5E namespace, and I feel that we need to wait a bit until the structure is clear and known to all, but I feel that it definitely needs to happen before 4E comes out. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:23, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
How do we want the namespaces to interact?<br />
<br />
:Why not have two D&D menus: 3.5, and 4.0. That way, you would know whether you where in 3.5 or 4.0. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:33, 3 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
What should we do with articles that are invariant between 3E and 4E (assuming there are any)?<br />
<br />
:This brings up another question: It would be great if there was a way to allow edits on a 3.5E to be reflected, or maybe a reflection would be requested, onto a 4E page. This way the races or whatnot would remain the same. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:25, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I've been wrestling with related questions on [[WikiRPS]]. It's easy to have small (or even large) pieces of shared text, using a template. But what if the bulk of the text is shared, but just the numbers scattered throughout the text are different (for instance)? As far as I know, the only way to do it is to modularize the text into templates as much as possible. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 11:02, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
Redirects point to 3E SRD. Is there a way to have namespace relative redirects, where <nowiki>[[foo]]</nowiki> inside the <nowiki>[[SRD]]</nowiki> context points to <nowiki>[[SRD:Foo]]</nowiki> while <nowiki>[[foo]]</nowiki> in the 4E context points to <nowiki>[[SRD4:Foo]]</nowiki>. <br />
<br />
:I don't think it's possible, but I'm willing to be proven wrong. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 09:55, 21 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::It would be possible with a few minor hacks. However, this will lead to a very confusing website. I am against the idea. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:18, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
===Templates===<br />
<br />
What templates should be used to tag 3E and 4E pages?<br />
<br />
===Homebrew===<br />
<br />
Should homebrew rules be tagged by edition?<br />
<br />
:I strongly feel so. Everything is specific to a version if it falls back on D&D. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:26, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::That depends on whether it is edition specific or not: WotC declaired that 3.5e would be compatable with 4.0e --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:19, 1 September 2007 (MDT)--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:19, 1 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
Should campaigns get their own namespace, or belong to their intended edition?<br />
<br />
:I feel that campaigns should not get their own namespaces because it would remove the items in the campaign from D&D Wiki linking schemes, etc. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:26, 22 August 2007 (MDT)''<br />
<br />
===Site conversion===<br />
<br />
How best to automate changes?<br />
<br />
Should 3E redirect be systematically replace with hard page references?<br />
<br />
:I'm not sure I understand the question. Can you give an example? &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 09:55, 21 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I think it means that rather than mentions of "darkvision" being linked to the darkvision page it says what page information about darkvision can be found at in the core rule books. If so, I am against the idea. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:09, 6 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Another 4e Option ==<br />
<br />
I can't help but feel that the cleanest solution would to be just host a completely separate wiki specifically for 4E, and just circumvent all the aforementioned issues. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:30, 21 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I agree&mdash;having a separate wiki would be very clean, but it may not be as useful, since one would have to switch between the wiki for different versions of D&D. However, I am starting to like the idea... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:24, 21 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Well, I think the ease of having a separate wiki would probably be more valuable than the "convenience" of having them together. Also, my understanding is that 4E is not nearly so compatible with 3.5E. So, perhaps the "clean slate" concept would be much better. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 10:02, 22 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::From what I'm reading it seems like it'll about as compatible as 2e is to 3e.<br />
:::Also, let's not forget that the above issues are merely the ones of which we can conceive. With projects this size, more issues always arise after implementation.<br />
:::4ed20wiki.com anyone? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 19:36, 27 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Wizards did say 4e would be compatible with 3e with a minor amount of modification. Why not have two sub-main pages within this wiki? On the main page you have links to 3rd edition D20 and 4th edition D20. Then each edition could have it's own sub-main page just like our current main page... That would be ''like'' two wikis but without the flicking from wiki to wiki, having two accounts, and the possibility of reduced number of edits on each wiki. Personally, I think it would be better to have one wiki with separate sections. We already have modern and D&D with separate sections on one wiki, so why not do it with 3e and 4e? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:16, 28 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree w/ Sam, we should just include a sub-set for D&D 4E like we did for d20 Modern. That way people can have just one account and since 3.5 will be compatible w/ 4E people can still look at all of our 3.5 Stuff and port it over to 4E. Just Create a Dungeons and Dragons 4E Page and a 4ESRD and everything's fine. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 11:21, 28 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::I know that the "official" announcement was that 4E would be compatible with 3E, however, I've listened to the Podcasts, read much of the forum boards, and tried to pay attention to what is out there and I don't think it will be that compatible. In fact, Dave Noonan said on the D&D Podcast that there won't be a simple process to take a 3E character and just equate it to 4E. The level progression is different, the spread of powers associated with each level will change for each of the classes, and many of the class abilities (especially spell casting) are being changed greatly. Also, monsters are being reworked extensively, and many of the mechanics are being revised, rewritten, or scrapped entirely. I have a feeling that the compatibility will be simply that you can take a story line from a 3E adventure and use it, but the mechanics, though familiar, are not the same. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 09:55, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I still think one wiki would be best. Plus, I have also been reading the announcements, and I think a lot of the things can already be achieved with variants: the saves working like ACs, for example, add 10 to each save, take 10 from the DC, and roll a D20 and add the DC, compare to save. Easy. Critical spells? I have already done a variant for that before they announced it in Design and development. It is on this site under the title [[Spellcasting (DnD Variant Rule)|Spellcasting]]. So 3E-4E conversion could be a case of slight modification using variant rules. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:31, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::I'm not sure I see exactly how variants address the issue of hosting materials for two different versions of the d20 System. Are you suggesting that for every 4E rule component that's different from the corresponding 3.5 rule, it be put under the [[DnD Rules]] or a SRD Variant section? And if so, would this be in addition to or instead of hosting 4E SRD in it's own space?<br />
::::::::And since the d20 Modern section was brought up, I never really cared for it being hosted next to the d20 stuff. Admittedly, it hasn't been a problem, but that could be due to the fact that there's far fewer users using that section than the d20 section (if the amount of user-submitted material is any indication). Whether or not 4E material has it's own wiki, I'm definitely against the 4E d20 Modern and d20 Future being hosted on the same wiki.<br />
::::::::With the issue of multiple accounts, there's a way to have only one account apply to both wikis. I created an account on a [http://www.wikia.com Wikia] site a while ago, and it works with all wikis there. [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue]] would know how complicated such a thing would be to accomplish, and if it'd be worth while. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:20, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::The answer to your question is no, I was merely stating that I think 3E will be compatible with 4E with a minimal of rule conversion. If we can have one account on two seperate wikis, would it be possible to have a single user page (and talk page) for '''BOTH''' wikis? I knows you have seperate pages on wikia... and have links between wikis work as an "inside" link rather than an "external link"? If so, then having two wikis '''Would''' be more... better. Erm... More... practical. Although if we could have a united main page for both that lead to each seperate wiki, that would be good too. About 4E modern and D20 future, starwars ect, ect, yadda yadda yadda, I am not really bothered about them. So long as we have 3E and 4E D&D (and 3E modern would be good, although we could '''completely''' replace it with 4E modern), then I am happy. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 15:25, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::I have strengthened and decided my view, I am against two wikis for a number of reasons. One is that people would have two user pages, two talk pages, and two recent changes lists would exist. It would become a lot to handle. Another reason is that it would divide visitors between two sites, making it look like dandwiki.com is actually not doing as well as it would be, therefore making it not as popular on google, etc. Another reason I am against it is that people will choose one wiki they like and stick with it, disabling half of our growing user base. It would stop prompting people to join random discussions as much, and stop prompting them to help out as much. Another reason is that structure changes would have to be done twice, the same template made two times, one for each wiki. It seems, to me, like a lot more problems would arise than good would come out of it. I am against making two wikis.<br />
::::::::::A solution I see to this problem is namespaces. We could have namespaces such as 3.5e, 4e, 3.5eSRD, and 4eSRD to eliminate confusion as to which version something is. I think namespaces would be the best solution to this problem, not separate wikis. Maybe we should vote? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:00, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Sure. Why not? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 21:25, 31 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Done. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:19, 31 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::If anyone can see a way to make the voting table below clearer please do. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:32, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
''&rarr;Reverted indentation to one colon''<br />
<br />
:I voted for everything. That's because I believe that we will need our whole toolbox to sort this out.<br />
:First, we need to identify the two idea complicating this discussion and table them. I believe that D20 Modern will be best served with it's own sister wiki. Simply by separating it, we greatly simplify our discussion. It then becomes its own discussion (which it deserves). Campaigns also deserves their own discussion. <br />
:This greatly simplifies our problem. <br />
:We already know that we will need new templates for 4.0. (Fact: see the new creature layout block.) We will also need new page preloads. Layout differences will help us tell one page from another. The new class pages will look different than the old class pages simply by being laid out differently. That does the same job as a skin. We also have footer and header templates that can go into a preload and existing pages.<br />
:Namespaces are powerful tools to help us sort out what is what, even at a glance. They provide an absoluteness that chains through everything. The new SRD will most definitely be in a new namespace. For contributor content, I don't see a powerful enough need for a separate namespace when layouts and templates are already providing us good service. Page titles also convey information. '''Page Title (DnD Page)''' is different from '''Page Title (4E Page)'''. <br />
:Categories will be directly impacted by namespaces, but the purpose of categories is not in separating pages, but in collecting like pages. If we try to separate pages too much using Categories, all we do is create a complicated set of categories. We have page titles and namespaces to help a user identify what page goes with which system. These should be sufficient.<br />
:Finally, there is ignorance. If we make the wiki too complex for contributors, we will lose contributors. Any schema that we invent must be apparent to our average contributor.<br />
:That's alot, isn't it?<br />
:My belief is that we should make a new namespace for the new SRD, and let the body of the wiki sort itself out with layouts, footers, and linking. Most sections are clearly one edition or the other. The trouble sections (D20 Modern and Campaigns) need their own discussions to sort out. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 07:52, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::If I didn't know better, I'd swear you were putting together an argument for separate wikis. I think this statement sums it up:<br />
<br />
:::''If we make the wiki too complex for contributors, we will lose contributors.''<br />
<br />
::There's going to be plenty to worry about with just dealing with one edition without having to worry about how keep the editions separate, and too many of the solutions depend on the users maintaining the separation. Right now we have users assigning incorrect categories or neglecting categories, putting non-SRD material in the SRD namespace, not using the preloads, not putting the " (DnD xxxx)" identifier (or putting the wrong identifier) when they create a page, and so on and so on. Trying to maintain a separation between editions is going to add to the problem. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:45, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Nothing on this earth will stop the symptoms above. Ignorance will always exist. I believe the above are symptoms of too-few editors. We have needed editors patrolling their own areas for a while. We must also admit to ourselves that editing is not very interesting to most of our contributors. I really don't know how to address that issue.<br />
:::One reason that I don't want separate wikis is that our Campaign section is always among the most popular sections. How do I maintain Wikiworld across two wikis? If our solutions won't work well for campaigns, we will hurt ourselves.--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 15:09, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Also, on the incorrect editing, most random people who post here don't know all the catagories or how to properly code a wiki. I still don't know all the catagories but I usually go find a page that does and copy and paste. So the incorrect editing will always be a problem. I also firmly stand behind the idea of just one wiki, everything in one place. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:28, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree with Dmilewski. Why was the last sysop elected more than half a year ago? It's because we have a large issue with people not wanting to edit the infrastructure of this site. The last editor that really edited the infrastructure was [[User:Mkill|Mkill]] (albeit with some very controversial edits), who since that time has left D&D Wiki. The infrastructure is not perfect here, many many things need to be improved or are currently wrong, but why is no one stepping up and fixing them? Is D&D Wiki to complex for people to handle? Should we dumb it down? And how do the questions I just asked pertain to 4e material?<br />
:::::Actually, I think the questions I just asked are the core of this issue. A new 4e wiki will eliminate all the issues with people not wanting to edit the infrastructure, and that is why it seems so appealing. It will make a new slate, without D&D Wiki's insane hierarchy (which, by the way, only exists because average users do not edit the infrastructure or help other people's creations on D&D Wiki), and without all of the work that needs to be done on D&D Wiki that is not getting done (publications, dplc's for races, modernizing classes layouts, linking orphaned pages, etc, etc). D&D Wiki has issues, and a new 4e wiki will remove them all... but I don't like to run from my problems.<br />
:::::Yes, D&D Wiki needs some major changes to become what I envision it to be; to become what everyone envisions it to be, but I feel we can accomplish these changes within this current wiki, and just this current wiki. Problems will arise from adding a new edition, but we can solve these problems, we will need to solve these problems... and, of course, the best way to solve these problems is to solve the problem with the average user not editing the infrastructure, because that is where I feel it all stems from. If the average editor feels that D&D Wiki does not just need more content, but rather needs infrastructure help, organizational help, help with making things look good, and help with making everything balanced, then with everyones hard work all the problems on D&D Wiki will soon disappear, creating an environment where adding a new edition will be as smooth as adding a new race. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:29, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Well not everyone wants to just go on a site and edit the way it works just for fun. They might add something but I wouldn't expect them to edit it. Maybe you should try on the equipment page to when you add a new item show some of the various templetes you can use such as the author one and the various catagories you can use. This might help because then you can just copy and paste what you need. I do agree that if we had more people editing and making things right the first or second time then this place would run much smoother. Now I would like to step up and help edit and my area would be the equipment section as I spend most my time there and I am most familar with it. You still might have to make more minor edits to what I have done but I garentee you that there will be less of them. Also, all I would be doing is standardizing and making minor edits as I do not know how to code much more than that; I could learn but that will take time. If you would like me to try to do that I will, it's just anywhere else and I'm not going to be nearly as useful. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 21:18, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I really didn't for my post to be a ''"plea for help"'' (even though it may have come off like that... ''':P'''), but if you want to do something which requires little or no wiki-syntax knowledge thats helps out [[DnD Equipment]] please drop a note on my user-talk page and I will help you find something that needs to get done on [[DnD Equipment]]. Anyway... back to the subject on hand..... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:57, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::When does the vote end? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:38, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Does the 5th of December sound okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:45, 2 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Yeah. I think everybody who wants a vote has voted or will have done by then. We can always send a MOI to people who havent voted. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:26, 3 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Okay, the vote is over. Thanks to everyone that voted, and it appears that we will not be making a separate wiki for 4e material (or holding a book burning convention) but rather organize the different edition by way of categories, namespaces, and possibly changing the identifier. Agiain, thanks to everyone that voted ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:05, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::So, when are we going to start setting it up for 4e? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:40, 15 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Feel free to start whenever you have time... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:04, 15 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
''&rarr;Reverted indentation to one colon''<br />
<br />
:I'd love to, but what do we call the new pages... "4E Dungeons and Dragons", "4E D20 Modern", "4E DnD Base Classes"? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:03, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Or "Dungeons and Dragons (4E)?" There's still a few more details that need to be decided. In what namespace will user content be? Main or "4E"? How do we deal with items independent of rules versions (i.e. maps, campaigns and the like)?<br />
::Personally, I think we can mirror the 3.5 section by replacing all the instances of "DnD" in all the identifiers with "4E" instead (e.g. "4E Character Options," "4E Feats," "4E Creatures," etc...), and the landing page can just be "Fourth Edition." (I always though "Dungeons and Dragons" and "DnD" were bit of misnomers in this context.) —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:37, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Ok. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:33, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I'll start setting it up under 4E Homebrew, 4E Feats, etc. We can move them if need be. If we have stuff under 4E as you suggested, I think DnD should be replaced with 3E or 3.5E for the 3.5 stuff... Thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 02:18, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Started to set it up- see [[4E Homebrew|this page]]. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:17, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== The 4e Movement ===<br />
<br />
I looked over the page and I feel there are a couple kinks to be worked out. First off do we want the pages being labeled as "4E" or "4e"? Secondly, which pages do we want to work with both editions? Should these pages keep the "DnD" while all the other pages would adopt a 3.5e or 4e, respectively, identifier? Thirdly, should we change the descriptions of the sub-pages to say which edition they cover or would that be redundant? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:35, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I think 4e, Maps, campaign settings, possibly deities (depending on changes), Environments, Possibly Quests and Disscussion could be shared, yes, they keep DnD, rest become 3.5e or 4e, yes the rest need to say edition sub-pages cover. Any thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:34, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Yes. How can we make the newly implemented dpl on [[Dungeons and Dragons]] (thank you so much, Sledged) work with non-specific edition pages in all the main categories (for DM's, for Players, or General)? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:27, 24 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Give pages that work for both two categories? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:08, 27 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::[[DnD Campaign Settings|Campaign Settings]], [[DnD Links|Links]], [[DnD Guidelines|Guidelines]], etc. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:37, 27 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Ok, I have done everything except the spells section and the SRD. I have made a 4e version of the pages that I was not sure of (quests and deities), and linked to both (we delete the 4e one if not required or remove the category if the 4e one is required). What do you think? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:27, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::One thing is that everything could be piped so it does not say "4e" all the time. I feel that if one is already on the 4e landing page then having 4e before everything would just come off as repetitive. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:19, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
===Vote===<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" style="text-align: left;"<br />
|+ 4e Solution &mdash; Voting (Please use "#" and extra lines to separate)<br />
! rowspan="2" | For making a new wiki to encompass 4e material !! colspan="6" | For keeping D&D Wiki as a whole, encompassing all editions !! rowspan="2" | Launch a book-burning party which has the goal of burning every 4e book<br />
|-<br />
! Think namespaces are the solution to 4e material !! Think categories are the solution to 4e material !! Think changing the identifier is the solution to 4e material !! Think changing the background color/skin is the solution to 4e material !! Think templates are the solution to 4e material !! Think that more than one of the aforementioned solutions is the best solution for 4e material (Please say which ones would work best together)<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
# [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] (w/ New Skin)<br />
| <br />
# [[User:Sol|Sol]] <br />
# [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]]<br />
| <br />
# [[User:Trogdor|Trogdor]]<br />
|<br />
|<br />
|<br />
|<br />
# [[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] (Namespaces (for SRD material), Categories, Changing the identifier (for homebrew material))<br />
# [[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] (Namespaces, Catagories)<br />
# [[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] (All the above)<br />
# [[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
# [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] (Namespaces, Skin)<br />
# [[User:Pirate-Sorcerer|Pirate-Sorcerer]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
# [[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
|<br />
|}<br />
<br />
::The option to destroy all D&D4e books in the world is not an option. I am upset about this --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 19:20, 30 November 2007 (MST))<br />
<br />
:::LOL! Of course we can't take that action, even if we want to! It is probably unlawful or something. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:12, 1 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::That option has been added ''';)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:09, 2 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::'''LETS GO N' BURN THINGS!!!''' [loads AK47] '''UPRISING AGAINST THE 4E MENACE!!!''' --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:28, 3 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== New Look ==<br />
<br />
I feel that it is high time that we had a new look for the [[Main Page]], for a number of reasons. One is to make it easier for the average user to understand how D&D Wiki is organized, another is so the [[Main Page]] looks nicer. Below is my proposed idea, which is still in the works. Also, I have a couple of questions about it. One, should we use DPL2C to determine the number of items in an area. For example around <DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items exist in [[Dungeons and Dragons]], should we display that below? Also, should we have bullets in front of the link to [[Dungeons and Dragons]], the [[System Reference Document]], etc? Does it look better or worse with them present? Finally, how is the wording of everything? What could be improved? (P.S. the below idea is not mine, it was stolen from [[User:Sledged|Sledged]]'s hard work making [[Dungeons and Dragons]] look nice&mdash;I do not want to take credit which I do not deserve) --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:23, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Yea, the above does look much nicer than the current Main Page, and I do agree it needs an update. As for showing how many things you have in each, that's not necessary but is interesting to see that we have 2900 Homebrew Items, if anything that might bring people in to see that this is a pretty big site and not just some random long forgotten website. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:33, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I have added the number of items to the new look. Any other ideas? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:28, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::This definitely clarified what information is contained in the sections. I would agree with implementing it. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:34, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Let's absolutely add this. The main page definitely needs more information. I like it! &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:48, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I think that if we have 3.5e and 4e on this site, we should have the main page sperating out 3.5e and 4e, and pages for 3.5e and 4e like the above. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:56, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yes, I agree. But that can be added once 4E comes out... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:30, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I'm going to implement this now because I think it is so much better (and I want it as soon as possible). Please, though, continue to post comments here about any revisions we could do to make it look better! &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:32, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::Yeah, I like it. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:38, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::I removed the "d20M" in that SRD link since it is already under the header of d20M. However, I agree, it looks very good and thanks for implementing it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:48, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="column"<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
; <big>Dungeons and Dragons</big><br />
* [[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
; <big>d20 Modern</big><br />
* [[D20 Modern|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=D20M<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[Modern System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=MSRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
|}<br />
<br />
====Main Page after 4e comes out====<br />
<br />
When 4e does come out, we could chang it to this:<br />
<br />
; <big>Dungeons and Dragons</big><br />
* [[Dungeons and Dragons| 3.5e Homebrew Content]] | [[4e Homebrew| 4e Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[System Reference Document|The 3.5e System Reference Document]] | [[4e System Reference Doccument|The 4e System Reference Document]] | [[UA:Variant Rules|Unearthed Arcana]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD|Unearthed Arcana<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
<br />
; <big>d20 Modern</big><br />
* [[D20 Modern|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=D20M<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[Modern System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=MSRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
<br />
Any thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:23, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Or this...?<br />
:; <big>Dungeons and Dragons</big><br />
:; Revised 3rd Edition<br />
:* [[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew]] <div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
category=3.5e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:* [[System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]] | [[UA:Variant Rules|Unearthed Arcana]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD|Unearthed Arcana<br />
category=3.5e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:; 4th Edition<br />
:* [[4e Homebrew|Homebrew]] <div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
category=4e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:* [[System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD<br />
category=4e<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
<br />
:; <big>d20 Modern</big><br />
:* [[D20 Modern|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=D20M<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:* [[Modern System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=MSRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
:--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:17, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Should we make CAPTCHA's present after an IP edits? ==<br />
<br />
Recently a high level of automated spam has been attacking D&D Wiki in the form of inserting nonsense and gibberish into random pages. An example would be [[DnD Flaws]] as of 04:08, 1 November 2007 (MDT) as edited by [[Special:Contributions/200.226.134.53|200.226.134.53]] (permanent link [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=DnD_Flaws&oldid=159600 here]). I think the easiest way to stop this problem would be to provide [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captcha CAPTCHA's] every time an IP makes an edit. The only reason I am asking this is because I am not sure if it would be more beneficial or more harmful to have CAPTCHA's. Do you guys think that IP's would still correct spelling errors if they had to enter a CAPTCHA or would they deem it to difficult? Would it, even if the amount of edits performed by IP's decreased, be worth it? Any ideas would be appreciated. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:41, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Well, if they were just doing it because they were bored then having to spell the correct word to finalize the edit might prevent some people because they are just waaay to lazy. It would also prevent if anyone wanted to create a bot to spam content. Although, it would be annoying for me to have to do that every time I wanted to say, update my User Page with another new item. If you could disable it for users and not IP's, I think that would be a good try to cut down on the spam. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:31, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::The CAPTCHA's would ''only'' be for IP edits, not for when a user edits something. Anyway, that would be terrible if a user had to enter a CAPTCHA to edit something (the reason they would not have to is because to create an account one has to enter a CAPTCHA...) Also, as you may have noticed, all the recent spam attackes have been automated, so hopefully if this is implemented it should help with the problem... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:44, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::So yea, try it and we'll see if the spam goes down. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:24, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::I agree with this completely. Should I go ahead and put them in, or should we wait for more users to comment? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:33, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Go for it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:41, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yeah. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:52, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Okay, it has been added. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 20:50, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::For some odd reason, i have had a captcha come up after all my edits today, despite the fact the captcha is only supposed to come up when an IP edits something (and I am logged in). Why is this, and can someone sort it please? Thanks. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:03, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::This should not be happening. I would recommend doing the following: log out, clear your browser cache, clear your browser history, clear all cookies relating to D&D Wiki, restart your browser, and then log back in and see if it is still giving you troubles. If it is, then I will definitely look into this problem further. I am sorry for the inconvenience that this is causing you, and will try to get it sorted out as soon as is possible. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 13:50, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::It has not worked. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 15:39, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Maybe you're an IP in disguise... ''':P'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:17, 4 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Err... no. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:55, 5 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Okay... Can I change your password (through the database) and login as you to asses the problem? I would like to see what is happening and hopefully give [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] enough information to fix this very strange problem. Would this be okay with you? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:41, 5 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
''&rarr;Reverted indentation to one colon''<br />
<br />
:Yeah, sure. Can you change my password back afterwards though, please? Thanks. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:11, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Am I the only one getting the problem? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:23, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::No, I also experienced this today with my edits. Although, I'm behind a corporate firewall here, so I don't know if that has anything to do with it. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 09:25, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::No, I've gotten one after every edit I've made, even if it was just adding one letter. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:15, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Oops... I guess the setting was set so sysops were the only ones who did not have to give a CAPTCHA whereas everyone else did. The issue should now be fixed, and sorry about that... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:22, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::Much better. ''':D''' Now I can reformate the equipment section in peace. Which as an update I've finished nearly all the back to footers and have all but the magic weapons and over half the wondrous items updated to the MIC format. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 20:42, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Yeah, sorted. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:59, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Glad to hear it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:44, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Move towards new DPL ==<br />
<br />
Hello all, this site is running on a very outdated version of DPL, which has caused several hacks to have to be thrown together, and is potentially not allowing things to get done. When I upgraded this wiki to v11, I upgraded DPL as well, but most all pages that used DPL immediately stopped working. Is there an interest for me to get a test wiki running, and people can figure out how the DPL should be working, and then implement it? Or should we instead stick with what we have and wait until we really need the next version? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:07, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I honestly have no idea what the DPL is. So could someone tell me what it is and/or what it does? Then I could answer your questions. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:27, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::What are the new features of the new DPL version? For most purposes, the DPLs seem to be working well, but I know we've especially had to hack some DPL2 stuff. Would the new version fix this? [Watsyurname529, DPLs are dynamically assembled lists generally based off of category tags, e.g. [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_Base_Classes&action=edit this code] yields [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/User_Base_Classes this page].] &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 18:21, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I feel that we should implement the new dpl version. The DPL2 (at least according to [[User:Sledged|Sledged]]) would make it so we would not need three main different modifications of the dpl to be running on this site, the dpl, dplc, and the dpl2c (full list [[Special:Version|here]]). I think it would help D&D Wiki greatly to implement the newest version of the dpl, and make things easier for a new user to understand. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:48, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::There's a demo site for DPL with a manual [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page here].<br />
::::Is there a way to get a list of all the pages using dpl*? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 16:29, 8 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::[[MediaWiki:Pages using DPL]] is what True Orphans uses. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 18:17, 8 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::It's only listing the pages in the main/default namespace. What about the SRD pages? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 14:58, 13 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::The extension that page is for specifically excludes all SRD dpl pages, so those have never been added to that dpl list. We will have to compile a list on our own for SRD pages. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:54, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I see. Also, when I said "pages using <tt>dpl*</tt>," I meant also the <tt>dpl2c</tt>, <tt>dplc</tt>, and <tt>dpl2cu</tt> tags. I don't see any of the pages using those tags listed. If those pages can be identified before hand, it'll make an upgrade a bit easier. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:48, 15 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::To answer [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]]'s first question. This wiki is running version 0.7.7 of DPL2. The latest version is 1.5.2, so there is a significant number of changes. For brevity, I'll just list a few of the new features that apply to this wiki:<br />
:::*You can specify your own format for the output. For example you could list each result as a row in a table instead of getting the standard three column output.<br />
:::*In conjunction with the previous feature, DPL2 pull content from the listed pages for displaying as part of the output.<br />
:::*You can get results based on pages names and page content in addition to categories and namespaces. For instance, all the [[User Prestige Classes with Descriptions|user PrCs]] are assigned to the category beginning with the first letter of the page title. Those categories can be completely removed because DPL2 lets you return pages whose title's first letter matches one specified in the DPL2 call.<br />
:::*DPL2 can used to compensate for user error. Broken links like the one titled "Anima and Animus Mage" on the [[User Prestige Classes with Descriptions|user PrCs page]] can be eliminated.<br />
:::*With the latest version of DPL2 (an one other specific extension) users can create spell/feat/monster/etc filters like the one seen [http://www.penpaperpixel.org/tools/d20spellfilter/ here].<br />
:::*It can be used as a parser function (which I personally prefer over tags).<br />
:::*Pages that are linked to only from DPL calls are not listed as [[Special:Lonelypages|orphaned pages]].<br />
:::—[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 14:58, 13 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Okay, lets do it. What are the changes that need to be made to dpl pages to make this not be broken when implemented? What is the best way of going about this change? Should we change the pages first, then implement it, or implement it then fix all the errors on the dpl pages? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:54, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::There's one more complication to take into consideration; All the pages with the <tt>dpl*</tt> mod tags (<tt>dpl2c</tt>, <tt>dplc</tt>, and <tt>dpl2cu</tt>) have to be changed, not just list pages. So we'll have to go through all the class pages (base, prestige, npc, and racial paragon) and NPC pages. I think Blue's suggestion of a test wiki is the best way to do it. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:48, 15 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::It might not be necessary to set up a test wiki. I [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Issue:No_More_Globals submitted a request] over at the [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page DPL2 site] to transition all the globals to class members. If Gero decides to adopt it, the latest version and the currently installed version can be installed side-by-side without one conflicting with the other. The only caveat is that the line that reads<br />
<br />
::::::<pre>$wgParser->setHook( "DPL", array( __CLASS__, "dplTag" ) );</pre><br />
<br />
::::::in the new version will have to be commented out. This will disable using new version as a tag extension, but it will still be available as a parser function call; <tt>{<nowiki/>{#dpl:}}</tt>. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:23, 21 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::And [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page DPL2] version 1.6.0 (no more globals) has been released. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 09:42, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Okay, I upgraded to the latest version. Let me know if there are any errors. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 12:18, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== A Small Sample ===<br />
<br />
So here's a sample list of the user base classes, which I've limited to the 'A's:<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" style="text-align: left;"<br />
|+ Homebrew Base Classes with Descriptions<br />
|- {{#vardefine:odd|0}}<br />
! Name !! style="text-align: center;" | Balance<sup>[[#1|1]]</sup> (out of 10) !! Type<sup>[[#2|2]]</sup> !! Description<sup>[[#3|3]]</sup><br />
{{#dpl:category=DnD<br />
|titlematch=A%<br />
|category=User<br />
|category=Base Class<br />
|include={Balance}:1,{x0}:type:desc<br />
|mode=userformat<br />
|format=,¦- ²{#vardefine:odd¦²{#ifexpr: ²{#var:odd}²¦0¦1}²}²²{#ifexpr: ²{#var:odd}²¦¦class="even"}²\n¦ [[%PAGE%¦²{#replace:%PAGE%¦(DnD Class)¦}²]]\n,,<br />
|tablerow=¦style="text-align: center;" ¦ ²{#if: %%¦%%¦NR}²,\n¦%%,%%\n<br />
}}|-<br />
| colspan="7" class="foot" |<br />
# <span id="1">Shows how balanced a certain Class is, the number is out of 10. The Balance rating is from the actual Class's page; it is not made on this page. More information [[Balance System|here]].</span><br />
# <span id="2">A general category the Class fits into. e.g. Strong Spellcasting, Combat Focused, etc.</span><br />
# <span id="3"> A concise description of the Class-- should advertise the Class.</span><br />
|}<br />
—[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 13:59, 27 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I like it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:27, 29 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:: The Alchemist... I don't know if i would consider it a spell caster --[[User:Cerin616|Cerin616, Drew]] 15:58, 11 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Better now? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:20, 11 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== 4,000th Item! ==<br />
<br />
Whoo! I just posted the 4,000th homebrew item on this site! Amazing how much stuff we've got on here. Just want to say congrats to everyone who's posted/edited here. Also here is the 4,000th item: [[Fried Frying Pan (DnD Equipment)|Fried Frying Pan]] --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:29, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:If that number is correct.... ''':P'''. I think we may actually have more, they are just not categorized (that number is actually the number of items in [[:Category:DnD]]). Although, I agree. Congratulations all! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:51, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Hey, it says 4000 Items on the main page and that's good enough for me ''':P''' to you too, lol. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 20:56, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Meh... ''':)'''. Also, if you want to make that number more accurate please take a look at the [[Special:TrueOrphans|TrueOrphans]] (which may not be true&mdash;I think [[MediaWiki:Pages_using_DPL]] needs to be updated...). However, feel free to categorize those things and, overall, make things on D&D Wiki be linked to! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:14, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
==Sidebar Change==<br />
Dungeons and Dragons or Homebrew?<br />
<br />
The side bar has an option called "Dungeons and Dragons" that takes you to the Homebrew section. This seems to me to be misleading and should be changed to "Homebrew." This is not that big of a deal, but it would be more consistant. --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 15:09, 18 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Actually, there's more than just homebrew material there (though the vast majority of it is homebrew). It also contains OGC from source books like ''Unearthed Arcana'', ''Relics and Rituals'', ''Creature Collection'', ''Monster Manual II'', and such. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:38, 21 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Currently on the [[Main Page]] we call that entire section "Homebrew Content" even though it has more than just that (as [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] pointed out above). If we want to be nitpicky, that is also a problem. Anyway, the reason it is called "Dungeons and Dragons" on the sidebar is that the sidebar cannot have any real wiki-syntax. The ideal organization for that would be something like:<br />
::D&D<br />
:::[[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew]] (even though it's not all homebrew...)<br />
:::[[System Reference Document|SRD]]<br />
::D20M<br />
:::[[D20 Modern|Homebrew]] (even though it's not all homebrew...)<br />
:::[[Modern System Reference Document|MSRD]]<br />
::However, that is not possible. Since that is not possible we try to do the best we can, and that is the current way. Actually, this post has given me an idea... Maybe another box, labeled "D&D" and one labeled "D20M" could exist, with the links in them... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:43, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I just changed it. What does everyone think? Better? Worse? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:45, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I dont mean to be picky. I also dont mean to make extra work for ya all. I just through out ideas when I have them. I like the change, but I also like the reasons given above for why it was the way it was. That is why I like wiki format. I hardly ever make changes, but I do add my ideas to disscution.--[[User:Mander|Mander]] 22:44, 29 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I hesitate to bring it up, but I think it might be worth mentioning; The D&D section could be split up into "homebrew" and "published OGC" sections. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:07, 30 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::First off you were not a bother at all, [[User:Mander|Mander]]. The sidebar is very easy to change and it's always great to improve things. Anyway, I feel that as soon as we have enough published OGC material (we are reaching it though, if one counts NBoF as "published") then we should definitely spit "DnD" up into published OGC and Homebrew. However, right now I do not think we have enough... Maybe when all the UA material is posted we can give it a shot, but until then I do not think we have enough OGC content. Your thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:48, 4 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::: So many acronyms, so few ranks in knowlege-acronyms...--[[User:Mander|Mander]] 01:30, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Age of the internet. Soon everything we be reduced to acronyms, IMHO. [[Help:FAQ#What are OGL, OGC, SRD, and GNU FPL?|OGC]], [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/welcome DnD], [http://datadeco.com/nbofeats/ NBoF], and [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/881560000 UA] (which I really should finish transcribing). —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 02:31, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Actually, speaking of acronyms, it would be helpful to have a list of all the D&D acronyms in [[DnD Other]] (I am sure a list exists on the internet, it just needs to be copied over). Also, sorry about using all those acronyms above. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:31, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
New question: Shouldn't the [[UA:Variant Rules|UA Transcript]] be linked in the sidebar? -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 17:02, 16 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:It should. What should we call it, Unearthed Arcana, UA, Variant SRD, or what? Ideas? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:48, 16 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Maybe UA: Variants? -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 08:34, 17 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::: Or "UA Variant Rules." Either one works for me. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:00, 17 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I have added it. Does it look okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:45, 18 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Looks great! -- [[User:OptimizationFanatic|OptimizationFanatic]] 17:01, 21 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Maps? ==<br />
<br />
:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:Dungeons and Dragons#New Section: Maps?]]<small> It dealt with Homebrew specific material, not everything on the site --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:52, 4 December 2007 (MST)</small><br />
<br />
== Tavern Schedule ==<br />
<br />
Should a small Tavern Schedule be placed on the main page on the right side (floating)? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:40, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I think this is a good idea to increase use of the tavern, but it would be best if days that already had events planned were highlighted, a different text color, the only days with links, etc. They need to stand out; otherwise, I have to click each day to even see if there is anything that day. It almost seems to me that a mini-program/extension is needed to code that to make it more useful... still, the calendar is a great idea. That is the best suggestion I have heard to increase usage of the tavern. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:35, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::The days that have events are blue. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:43, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Much better. I like it. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 20:24, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== New Logo ==<br />
<br />
[[Image:D&D logo-test1.png|frame|From Maria Creasey-Baldwin]]<br />
[[Image:D&D logo-test2.png|frame|From [[User:Xidoraven|Xidoraven]]]]<br />
[[Image:D&D logo-test3.png|frame|Variation 1]]<br />
[[Image:D&D logo-test4.png|frame|Variation 2]]<br />
[[Image:Logo.png|frame|Current logo]]<br />
<br />
We have had two submissions for a new logo. One of them is from [[User:Xidoraven|Xidoraven]], and the other is from Maria Creasey-Baldwin. Both of them are shown below, and we should decide to either keep the current logo or change to one of these. Please leave feedback. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:04, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
: I like the second one. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 15:05, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I vote for Xidoraven's. I like colorful. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 15:06, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I wonder what the first would look like with a bit more color. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 15:10, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I really like the dragon on the first logo, however I feel that the wording on that logo may be a little hard to read. So, I think it may look very nice if both the trial logos were merged into one. The "D&D Wiki" would be cut out of the first logo and the "D&D Wiki" text from xido's image would be pasted over it, albeit a little smaller. Does anyone think this idea has some merit? Is it worth exploring further? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:35, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Variation 2 is great! I give that my vote. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 16:23, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
:::::On second thought... I like Variation 1. Arrrg... It is difficult because the logo seems too big with the dragon, yet too small at the same time. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 16:24, 23 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I like variation 2, except the logo should be moved a bit down and right so that the entire graphic is a bit more square (lest the words encroach on the dragon picture)... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 06:06, 24 January 2008 (MST)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=206474Talk:Main Page2008-01-16T03:24:51Z<p>EldritchNumen: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Archives<br />
|label1=Discussions 1&ndash;30<br />
|label2=Discussions 31&ndash;44<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== 4th edition ==<br />
<br />
I don't really want to recreate the rumours and excitement concerning the upcoming 4th edition, but it looks like we need to think about a way to handle it here. It's pretty sure that there will be two editions in parallel use, at least for a while, so we need a way to separate editions. Tagging articles [[:Category:3.5]] and [[:Category:4.0]] wouldn't be too hard, what I'm concerned about is article lemmata for articles that exists in different versions for different editions. <br />
<br />
Also, it's not clear yet whether there will be a 4th edition SRD. I hope there will be one. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 08:50, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Might be a good idea to put SRD 3.5 articles with a template underneath (this is only a suggestion, not an attempt to have a million templates per page):<br />
<br />
:{| style="text-align: center; font-size:0.9em;" width="100%"<br />
| [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|40px]]<br/>This material is published under the [[V3.5 rules]].<br/><small>[[Main Page|&rarr;More]]</small><br />
|}<br />
<br />
:Although, there might be too many templates if we do this. perhaps we could replace the SRD template to this for 3.5 articles:<br />
<br />
:{| class="messagebox protected" style="border:2px solid #99B; padding:0px; font-size:0.9em;"<br />
|-<br />
| valign="top" | [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|45px]]<br />
| This material is published under the '''[[Open Game License v1.0a]]'''. The [[GNU Free Documentation License]] does not apply to this page. This material is for the D&D [[V 3.5 rules]].<br />
|}<br />
<br />
:We don't really need to mark homebrew stuff- it should work for 4.0 rules anyway. Whatre can I find news on the 4th edition, anyway? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:10, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Have you been at the WotC Homepage lately? Did you notice something? --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 09:48, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::If 4e is really coming out we can most likely just slap on a small template on all 4e things or all 3.5e things. Also, the categories you said above will work. I do not see it as too much of a problem... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:55, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::According to my reasearch, it ios not out until 2011 (rather silly really; why advertise it four and a bit years before its release), so we really do not have to bother with it yet, anyway. {{Unsigned|Sam Kay|10:04, 16 August 2007 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
::::::Boo! Hsssss! I had a browser tab open for the last ten minutes of the countdown of the [http://www.wizards.com/dnd D&D] page. Once it finished, I got "Service Unavailable". About as disappointing as 3.0 psionics. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 16:35, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Lol ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:38, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::4th edition is definitely coming. We really need to sit down, argue, butt heads, and work out the namespacing issues now. Thankfully, 3E has a namespace already. We have lots to sort out. Wikiworld will instantly be 4th compatible, as I haven't bothered with stats for most of the writeup. The new MIC style items should also be compatible. There are interesting times ahead. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 18:39, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::It has been stated that the PHB will be out May '08 MM June '08 and DMG July '08 {{Unsigned|Quill|19:11, 16 August 2007 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
::::::::::Yes, we have a year to prepare but it makes it easier later if we start thinking about it now. Btw., I'm still waiting for the WotC Homepage to survive sudden massive attention so I can see the official WotC Press release... --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 03:22, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Just do what I suggested and replace the OGC tgemplate with:<br />
:::::::::::{| class="messagebox protected" style="border:2px solid #99B; padding:0px; font-size:0.9em;"<br />
|-<br />
| valign="top" | [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|45px]]<br />
| This material is published under the '''[[Open Game License v1.0a]]'''. The [[GNU Free Documentation License]] does not apply to this page. This material is for the D&D [[V 3.5 rules]].<br />
|}<br />
<br />
:::::::::::It is alot easier to mark 3.5 in this way. You could also add an image to the template to mark it, I suppose. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:30, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::I vote to leave the V3.5 on the wiki pemanently (unless the wiki runs out of memory), as some people will still use V3.5. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:39, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Btw, [http://rustmonster.net/2007/08/16/dd-4th-edition-announced-gen-con/ here] it says that Wizards announced to continue the OGL. Good decision. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 09:45, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
''&rarr;Reverted indentation to one colon''<br />
<br />
:Can we get a 4E Info/Rumor link up on the landing page? (Though we may as well link it to ENWorld. They will have the best coverage.) [http://www.enworld.org/index.php?page=4e ENWorld 4E Page] It hasn't been updated yet, but it will be. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 14:19, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Great! it will be nice to have 4.0e on the wiki.--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:27, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::A few things. First off we need to figure out if the homebrew material will be compatible with 4e, if it is we are well off. If it is not we need to figure out how we are going to categorize the 3.5e and the 4e homebrew information separately. Oh, and yes, D&D Wiki has enough space to keep the 3.5e material - nothing need ever be deleted to save space on D&D Wiki. Secondly, if we want a link to 4e information from ENWorld then, I feel, that we should add it as a news item. Dmilewski can take care of this if this is the communities decision. Thirdly we need to figure out when the 4e SRD is coming out to see how much time we have to prepare for it. About the SRD (3.5e and 4e); we need to decide if we want a different namespace for the two SRD editions or if we want to organize them by their identifiers. Anyway, if the homebrew information is compatible we are looking at not too much work (and a much more useful and successful D&D Wiki). Let us hope... ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:10, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::I think ther homebrew stuff will mostlky ber compatable with 4e, but if not we will have to work to update the best stuff... --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:22, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Either the homebrew material is almost 100% good-to-go or it is not. We cannot have a medium on D&D Wiki. The reason we can not have a medium is because many many people will not switch over to 4e for a long time (or ever!) and we do want want these people to lose D&D Wiki as a recourse. If the two editions are not compatible we will have to have two separate pages like [[Dungeons and Dragons]] and we will have to have 3.5e classes, races, etc and 4e classes, races, etc. Again, we need to really know if they will be compatible or not (and if someone has any information please cite the source). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:32, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yeah, I know, I was meaning as they are now... I have had a look at the articles on WotC website, and I seem to remember that the playtest report mentioned that a player was playing a psyon (because it was 3.5e) to see if it was compatible.--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:42, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I volenteer to help updating homberew stuff to 4e should the need arise (hopefully it won't). --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:54, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::I think that conversion of each section should be considered on a case-by-case basis. For example, magic items may only need a level assigned to them. That's an easy conversion worth doing. Classes and prestige classes will need to be entirely rewritten as trees, maneuvers, or such, if they are worth translating at all. <br />
<br />
::::::::My current belief is that we will need to split the content. That hoses the entire redirect initiative. (That was a reservation of mine with the redirect initiative. All the pages that I did for the SRD were hard-referenced. I used no redirects.) <br />
<br />
::::::::Campaign environments will be easiest to convert. Many simply implement the existing system, then list some house rules. For example, LotR and Wikiworld are both concept heavy, rules light. Wikiworld has always been rules light, as I wanted Wikiworld to work with any game system. I suggest that Sam keep LotR rules light, so as to keep it universal.<br />
<br />
:::::::::I was at GenCon when they made the announcement of 4e. According to Wizards of the Coast, the 3.5e material will be compatible with a minimum of modification. There were no details given at the time, however, so what that means, I'm not sure. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 14:04, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Many classes and (both base and prestige) might be obsolete under the new rules- if the same effect can be made just by using talents on one of the other classes. I think we'll have to make a big review of everything and check it for 4e compatibility, maybe putting a 4e Compatible template and a 4e Incompatible template (and nothing on pages that haven't nbeen checked yet, obviously). [[User:MorkaisChosen|MorkaisChosen]] 08:25, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Or we could just keep 3.5e material 3.5e material, since not everyone is going to switch right away... Maybe keep it for a couple years than change it to 4e. Thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:16, 4 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
I read on the Wizards page that one thing they're thinking of implementing with all the online stuff they're using in 4th ed is a wiki to allow home brew stuff. If that's true, it may be best to just keep this site in 3.x to avoid competition with the "official" wiki. I'm still uncertain about all that though. Any thoughts? --[[User:Banyan|Banyan]] 23:07, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I don't think a little competition will hurt. If Wizards opens their own wiki, that's an excellent idea, but it doesn't mean we should give up this project here. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 00:57, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I wouldn't bother with the "official wiki" anyway. This one is better. Anyway, why would we be scared of competition? It is not like we are trying to make money, or anything. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:00, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Would someone like to contact them and ask them if this is true? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:35, 26 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
==New Edition Issues==<br />
<br />
The following questions are both technical and procedural. There is no correct answer. These questions are here to collect upcoming issues with the wiki and decisions that should be considered. Please add to the list.<br />
<br />
===General architecture===<br />
<br />
How best to manage a wiki filled with multiple editions and systems (3E, 4E, Modern, Etc.)<br />
<br />
:I am very open to discussion, but I feel that the best way to manage different systems is to make the different edition pages very obvious. For example, we could have all namespace v4 pages come with a slightly darker page background, or something similar. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:22, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I agree. The Wizards message boards use a different skin for each game. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 10:57, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::I am against the changing of the skin, however I think namespaces are the way to go. We could label the namespaces as SRD3.5e, SRD4e, 4e, 3.5e, D20M, etc. What do you guys think about this idea? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:11, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::People will be far too confused if they want to know whether the article is 3.5 or 4.0, and they constantly have to be checking namespaces. It will be much easier if the page background is slightly darker for 4.0, or something similar. I am not talking about a different feel, just a difference. There is a difference :) &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 18:00, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Why not have two menu pages, one for each edition, and label all pages with 3.5 and 4.0? --[[User: Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:02, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Sam Kay, do you mean namespaces? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:04, 26 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Yeah... I did. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:23, 1 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
===Namespaces===<br />
Should we move current SRD pages to a 3E namespace?<br />
<br />
:I assume you mean 3.5E namespace, and I feel that we need to wait a bit until the structure is clear and known to all, but I feel that it definitely needs to happen before 4E comes out. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:23, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
How do we want the namespaces to interact?<br />
<br />
:Why not have two D&D menus: 3.5, and 4.0. That way, you would know whether you where in 3.5 or 4.0. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:33, 3 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
What should we do with articles that are invariant between 3E and 4E (assuming there are any)?<br />
<br />
:This brings up another question: It would be great if there was a way to allow edits on a 3.5E to be reflected, or maybe a reflection would be requested, onto a 4E page. This way the races or whatnot would remain the same. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:25, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I've been wrestling with related questions on [[WikiRPS]]. It's easy to have small (or even large) pieces of shared text, using a template. But what if the bulk of the text is shared, but just the numbers scattered throughout the text are different (for instance)? As far as I know, the only way to do it is to modularize the text into templates as much as possible. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 11:02, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
Redirects point to 3E SRD. Is there a way to have namespace relative redirects, where <nowiki>[[foo]]</nowiki> inside the <nowiki>[[SRD]]</nowiki> context points to <nowiki>[[SRD:Foo]]</nowiki> while <nowiki>[[foo]]</nowiki> in the 4E context points to <nowiki>[[SRD4:Foo]]</nowiki>. <br />
<br />
:I don't think it's possible, but I'm willing to be proven wrong. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 09:55, 21 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::It would be possible with a few minor hacks. However, this will lead to a very confusing website. I am against the idea. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:18, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
===Templates===<br />
<br />
What templates should be used to tag 3E and 4E pages?<br />
<br />
===Homebrew===<br />
<br />
Should homebrew rules be tagged by edition?<br />
<br />
:I strongly feel so. Everything is specific to a version if it falls back on D&D. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:26, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::That depends on whether it is edition specific or not: WotC declaired that 3.5e would be compatable with 4.0e --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:19, 1 September 2007 (MDT)--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:19, 1 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
Should campaigns get their own namespace, or belong to their intended edition?<br />
<br />
:I feel that campaigns should not get their own namespaces because it would remove the items in the campaign from D&D Wiki linking schemes, etc. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:26, 22 August 2007 (MDT)''<br />
<br />
===Site conversion===<br />
<br />
How best to automate changes?<br />
<br />
Should 3E redirect be systematically replace with hard page references?<br />
<br />
:I'm not sure I understand the question. Can you give an example? &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 09:55, 21 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I think it means that rather than mentions of "darkvision" being linked to the darkvision page it says what page information about darkvision can be found at in the core rule books. If so, I am against the idea. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:09, 6 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Another 4e Option ==<br />
<br />
I can't help but feel that the cleanest solution would to be just host a completely separate wiki specifically for 4E, and just circumvent all the aforementioned issues. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:30, 21 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I agree&mdash;having a separate wiki would be very clean, but it may not be as useful, since one would have to switch between the wiki for different versions of D&D. However, I am starting to like the idea... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:24, 21 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Well, I think the ease of having a separate wiki would probably be more valuable than the "convenience" of having them together. Also, my understanding is that 4E is not nearly so compatible with 3.5E. So, perhaps the "clean slate" concept would be much better. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 10:02, 22 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::From what I'm reading it seems like it'll about as compatible as 2e is to 3e.<br />
:::Also, let's not forget that the above issues are merely the ones of which we can conceive. With projects this size, more issues always arise after implementation.<br />
:::4ed20wiki.com anyone? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 19:36, 27 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Wizards did say 4e would be compatible with 3e with a minor amount of modification. Why not have two sub-main pages within this wiki? On the main page you have links to 3rd edition D20 and 4th edition D20. Then each edition could have it's own sub-main page just like our current main page... That would be ''like'' two wikis but without the flicking from wiki to wiki, having two accounts, and the possibility of reduced number of edits on each wiki. Personally, I think it would be better to have one wiki with separate sections. We already have modern and D&D with separate sections on one wiki, so why not do it with 3e and 4e? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:16, 28 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree w/ Sam, we should just include a sub-set for D&D 4E like we did for d20 Modern. That way people can have just one account and since 3.5 will be compatible w/ 4E people can still look at all of our 3.5 Stuff and port it over to 4E. Just Create a Dungeons and Dragons 4E Page and a 4ESRD and everything's fine. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 11:21, 28 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::I know that the "official" announcement was that 4E would be compatible with 3E, however, I've listened to the Podcasts, read much of the forum boards, and tried to pay attention to what is out there and I don't think it will be that compatible. In fact, Dave Noonan said on the D&D Podcast that there won't be a simple process to take a 3E character and just equate it to 4E. The level progression is different, the spread of powers associated with each level will change for each of the classes, and many of the class abilities (especially spell casting) are being changed greatly. Also, monsters are being reworked extensively, and many of the mechanics are being revised, rewritten, or scrapped entirely. I have a feeling that the compatibility will be simply that you can take a story line from a 3E adventure and use it, but the mechanics, though familiar, are not the same. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 09:55, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I still think one wiki would be best. Plus, I have also been reading the announcements, and I think a lot of the things can already be achieved with variants: the saves working like ACs, for example, add 10 to each save, take 10 from the DC, and roll a D20 and add the DC, compare to save. Easy. Critical spells? I have already done a variant for that before they announced it in Design and development. It is on this site under the title [[Spellcasting (DnD Variant Rule)|Spellcasting]]. So 3E-4E conversion could be a case of slight modification using variant rules. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:31, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::I'm not sure I see exactly how variants address the issue of hosting materials for two different versions of the d20 System. Are you suggesting that for every 4E rule component that's different from the corresponding 3.5 rule, it be put under the [[DnD Rules]] or a SRD Variant section? And if so, would this be in addition to or instead of hosting 4E SRD in it's own space?<br />
::::::::And since the d20 Modern section was brought up, I never really cared for it being hosted next to the d20 stuff. Admittedly, it hasn't been a problem, but that could be due to the fact that there's far fewer users using that section than the d20 section (if the amount of user-submitted material is any indication). Whether or not 4E material has it's own wiki, I'm definitely against the 4E d20 Modern and d20 Future being hosted on the same wiki.<br />
::::::::With the issue of multiple accounts, there's a way to have only one account apply to both wikis. I created an account on a [http://www.wikia.com Wikia] site a while ago, and it works with all wikis there. [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue]] would know how complicated such a thing would be to accomplish, and if it'd be worth while. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:20, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::The answer to your question is no, I was merely stating that I think 3E will be compatible with 4E with a minimal of rule conversion. If we can have one account on two seperate wikis, would it be possible to have a single user page (and talk page) for '''BOTH''' wikis? I knows you have seperate pages on wikia... and have links between wikis work as an "inside" link rather than an "external link"? If so, then having two wikis '''Would''' be more... better. Erm... More... practical. Although if we could have a united main page for both that lead to each seperate wiki, that would be good too. About 4E modern and D20 future, starwars ect, ect, yadda yadda yadda, I am not really bothered about them. So long as we have 3E and 4E D&D (and 3E modern would be good, although we could '''completely''' replace it with 4E modern), then I am happy. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 15:25, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::I have strengthened and decided my view, I am against two wikis for a number of reasons. One is that people would have two user pages, two talk pages, and two recent changes lists would exist. It would become a lot to handle. Another reason is that it would divide visitors between two sites, making it look like dandwiki.com is actually not doing as well as it would be, therefore making it not as popular on google, etc. Another reason I am against it is that people will choose one wiki they like and stick with it, disabling half of our growing user base. It would stop prompting people to join random discussions as much, and stop prompting them to help out as much. Another reason is that structure changes would have to be done twice, the same template made two times, one for each wiki. It seems, to me, like a lot more problems would arise than good would come out of it. I am against making two wikis.<br />
::::::::::A solution I see to this problem is namespaces. We could have namespaces such as 3.5e, 4e, 3.5eSRD, and 4eSRD to eliminate confusion as to which version something is. I think namespaces would be the best solution to this problem, not separate wikis. Maybe we should vote? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:00, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Sure. Why not? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 21:25, 31 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Done. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:19, 31 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::If anyone can see a way to make the voting table below clearer please do. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:32, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
''&rarr;Reverted indentation to one colon''<br />
<br />
:I voted for everything. That's because I believe that we will need our whole toolbox to sort this out.<br />
:First, we need to identify the two idea complicating this discussion and table them. I believe that D20 Modern will be best served with it's own sister wiki. Simply by separating it, we greatly simplify our discussion. It then becomes its own discussion (which it deserves). Campaigns also deserves their own discussion. <br />
:This greatly simplifies our problem. <br />
:We already know that we will need new templates for 4.0. (Fact: see the new creature layout block.) We will also need new page preloads. Layout differences will help us tell one page from another. The new class pages will look different than the old class pages simply by being laid out differently. That does the same job as a skin. We also have footer and header templates that can go into a preload and existing pages.<br />
:Namespaces are powerful tools to help us sort out what is what, even at a glance. They provide an absoluteness that chains through everything. The new SRD will most definitely be in a new namespace. For contributor content, I don't see a powerful enough need for a separate namespace when layouts and templates are already providing us good service. Page titles also convey information. '''Page Title (DnD Page)''' is different from '''Page Title (4E Page)'''. <br />
:Categories will be directly impacted by namespaces, but the purpose of categories is not in separating pages, but in collecting like pages. If we try to separate pages too much using Categories, all we do is create a complicated set of categories. We have page titles and namespaces to help a user identify what page goes with which system. These should be sufficient.<br />
:Finally, there is ignorance. If we make the wiki too complex for contributors, we will lose contributors. Any schema that we invent must be apparent to our average contributor.<br />
:That's alot, isn't it?<br />
:My belief is that we should make a new namespace for the new SRD, and let the body of the wiki sort itself out with layouts, footers, and linking. Most sections are clearly one edition or the other. The trouble sections (D20 Modern and Campaigns) need their own discussions to sort out. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 07:52, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::If I didn't know better, I'd swear you were putting together an argument for separate wikis. I think this statement sums it up:<br />
<br />
:::''If we make the wiki too complex for contributors, we will lose contributors.''<br />
<br />
::There's going to be plenty to worry about with just dealing with one edition without having to worry about how keep the editions separate, and too many of the solutions depend on the users maintaining the separation. Right now we have users assigning incorrect categories or neglecting categories, putting non-SRD material in the SRD namespace, not using the preloads, not putting the " (DnD xxxx)" identifier (or putting the wrong identifier) when they create a page, and so on and so on. Trying to maintain a separation between editions is going to add to the problem. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:45, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Nothing on this earth will stop the symptoms above. Ignorance will always exist. I believe the above are symptoms of too-few editors. We have needed editors patrolling their own areas for a while. We must also admit to ourselves that editing is not very interesting to most of our contributors. I really don't know how to address that issue.<br />
:::One reason that I don't want separate wikis is that our Campaign section is always among the most popular sections. How do I maintain Wikiworld across two wikis? If our solutions won't work well for campaigns, we will hurt ourselves.--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 15:09, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Also, on the incorrect editing, most random people who post here don't know all the catagories or how to properly code a wiki. I still don't know all the catagories but I usually go find a page that does and copy and paste. So the incorrect editing will always be a problem. I also firmly stand behind the idea of just one wiki, everything in one place. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:28, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree with Dmilewski. Why was the last sysop elected more than half a year ago? It's because we have a large issue with people not wanting to edit the infrastructure of this site. The last editor that really edited the infrastructure was [[User:Mkill|Mkill]] (albeit with some very controversial edits), who since that time has left D&D Wiki. The infrastructure is not perfect here, many many things need to be improved or are currently wrong, but why is no one stepping up and fixing them? Is D&D Wiki to complex for people to handle? Should we dumb it down? And how do the questions I just asked pertain to 4e material?<br />
:::::Actually, I think the questions I just asked are the core of this issue. A new 4e wiki will eliminate all the issues with people not wanting to edit the infrastructure, and that is why it seems so appealing. It will make a new slate, without D&D Wiki's insane hierarchy (which, by the way, only exists because average users do not edit the infrastructure or help other people's creations on D&D Wiki), and without all of the work that needs to be done on D&D Wiki that is not getting done (publications, dplc's for races, modernizing classes layouts, linking orphaned pages, etc, etc). D&D Wiki has issues, and a new 4e wiki will remove them all... but I don't like to run from my problems.<br />
:::::Yes, D&D Wiki needs some major changes to become what I envision it to be; to become what everyone envisions it to be, but I feel we can accomplish these changes within this current wiki, and just this current wiki. Problems will arise from adding a new edition, but we can solve these problems, we will need to solve these problems... and, of course, the best way to solve these problems is to solve the problem with the average user not editing the infrastructure, because that is where I feel it all stems from. If the average editor feels that D&D Wiki does not just need more content, but rather needs infrastructure help, organizational help, help with making things look good, and help with making everything balanced, then with everyones hard work all the problems on D&D Wiki will soon disappear, creating an environment where adding a new edition will be as smooth as adding a new race. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:29, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Well not everyone wants to just go on a site and edit the way it works just for fun. They might add something but I wouldn't expect them to edit it. Maybe you should try on the equipment page to when you add a new item show some of the various templetes you can use such as the author one and the various catagories you can use. This might help because then you can just copy and paste what you need. I do agree that if we had more people editing and making things right the first or second time then this place would run much smoother. Now I would like to step up and help edit and my area would be the equipment section as I spend most my time there and I am most familar with it. You still might have to make more minor edits to what I have done but I garentee you that there will be less of them. Also, all I would be doing is standardizing and making minor edits as I do not know how to code much more than that; I could learn but that will take time. If you would like me to try to do that I will, it's just anywhere else and I'm not going to be nearly as useful. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 21:18, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I really didn't for my post to be a ''"plea for help"'' (even though it may have come off like that... ''':P'''), but if you want to do something which requires little or no wiki-syntax knowledge thats helps out [[DnD Equipment]] please drop a note on my user-talk page and I will help you find something that needs to get done on [[DnD Equipment]]. Anyway... back to the subject on hand..... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:57, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::When does the vote end? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:38, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Does the 5th of December sound okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:45, 2 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Yeah. I think everybody who wants a vote has voted or will have done by then. We can always send a MOI to people who havent voted. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:26, 3 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Okay, the vote is over. Thanks to everyone that voted, and it appears that we will not be making a separate wiki for 4e material (or holding a book burning convention) but rather organize the different edition by way of categories, namespaces, and possibly changing the identifier. Agiain, thanks to everyone that voted ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:05, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::So, when are we going to start setting it up for 4e? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:40, 15 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Feel free to start whenever you have time... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:04, 15 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
''&rarr;Reverted indentation to one colon''<br />
<br />
:I'd love to, but what do we call the new pages... "4E Dungeons and Dragons", "4E D20 Modern", "4E DnD Base Classes"? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:03, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Or "Dungeons and Dragons (4E)?" There's still a few more details that need to be decided. In what namespace will user content be? Main or "4E"? How do we deal with items independent of rules versions (i.e. maps, campaigns and the like)?<br />
::Personally, I think we can mirror the 3.5 section by replacing all the instances of "DnD" in all the identifiers with "4E" instead (e.g. "4E Character Options," "4E Feats," "4E Creatures," etc...), and the landing page can just be "Fourth Edition." (I always though "Dungeons and Dragons" and "DnD" were bit of misnomers in this context.) —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:37, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Ok. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:33, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I'll start setting it up under 4E Homebrew, 4E Feats, etc. We can move them if need be. If we have stuff under 4E as you suggested, I think DnD should be replaced with 3E or 3.5E for the 3.5 stuff... Thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 02:18, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Started to set it up- see [[4E Homebrew|this page]]. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:17, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== The 4e Movement ===<br />
<br />
I looked over the page and I feel there are a couple kinks to be worked out. First off do we want the pages being labeled as "4E" or "4e"? Secondly, which pages do we want to work with both editions? Should these pages keep the "DnD" while all the other pages would adopt a 3.5e or 4e, respectively, identifier? Thirdly, should we change the descriptions of the sub-pages to say which edition they cover or would that be redundant? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:35, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I think 4e, Maps, campaign settings, possibly deities (depending on changes), Environments, Possibly Quests and Disscussion could be shared, yes, they keep DnD, rest become 3.5e or 4e, yes the rest need to say edition sub-pages cover. Any thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:34, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Yes. How can we make the newly implemented dpl on [[Dungeons and Dragons]] (thank you so much, Sledged) work with non-specific edition pages in all the main categories (for DM's, for Players, or General)? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:27, 24 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Give pages that work for both two categories? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:08, 27 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::[[DnD Campaign Settings|Campaign Settings]], [[DnD Links|Links]], [[DnD Guidelines|Guidelines]], etc. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:37, 27 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
===Vote===<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" style="text-align: left;"<br />
|+ 4e Solution &mdash; Voting (Please use "#" and extra lines to separate)<br />
! rowspan="2" | For making a new wiki to encompass 4e material !! colspan="6" | For keeping D&D Wiki as a whole, encompassing all editions !! rowspan="2" | Launch a book-burning party which has the goal of burning every 4e book<br />
|-<br />
! Think namespaces are the solution to 4e material !! Think categories are the solution to 4e material !! Think changing the identifier is the solution to 4e material !! Think changing the background color/skin is the solution to 4e material !! Think templates are the solution to 4e material !! Think that more than one of the aforementioned solutions is the best solution for 4e material (Please say which ones would work best together)<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
# [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] (w/ New Skin)<br />
| <br />
# [[User:Sol|Sol]] <br />
# [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]]<br />
| <br />
# [[User:Trogdor|Trogdor]]<br />
|<br />
|<br />
|<br />
|<br />
# [[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] (Namespaces (for SRD material), Categories, Changing the identifier (for homebrew material))<br />
# [[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] (Namespaces, Catagories)<br />
# [[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] (All the above)<br />
# [[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
# [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] (Namespaces, Skin)<br />
# [[User:Pirate-Sorcerer|Pirate-Sorcerer]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
# [[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
|<br />
|}<br />
<br />
::The option to destroy all D&D4e books in the world is not an option. I am upset about this --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 19:20, 30 November 2007 (MST))<br />
<br />
:::LOL! Of course we can't take that action, even if we want to! It is probably unlawful or something. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:12, 1 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::That option has been added ''';)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:09, 2 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::'''LETS GO N' BURN THINGS!!!''' [loads AK47] '''UPRISING AGAINST THE 4E MENACE!!!''' --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:28, 3 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== New Look ==<br />
<br />
I feel that it is high time that we had a new look for the [[Main Page]], for a number of reasons. One is to make it easier for the average user to understand how D&D Wiki is organized, another is so the [[Main Page]] looks nicer. Below is my proposed idea, which is still in the works. Also, I have a couple of questions about it. One, should we use DPL2C to determine the number of items in an area. For example around <DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items exist in [[Dungeons and Dragons]], should we display that below? Also, should we have bullets in front of the link to [[Dungeons and Dragons]], the [[System Reference Document]], etc? Does it look better or worse with them present? Finally, how is the wording of everything? What could be improved? (P.S. the below idea is not mine, it was stolen from [[User:Sledged|Sledged]]'s hard work making [[Dungeons and Dragons]] look nice&mdash;I do not want to take credit which I do not deserve) --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:23, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Yea, the above does look much nicer than the current Main Page, and I do agree it needs an update. As for showing how many things you have in each, that's not necessary but is interesting to see that we have 2900 Homebrew Items, if anything that might bring people in to see that this is a pretty big site and not just some random long forgotten website. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:33, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I have added the number of items to the new look. Any other ideas? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:28, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::This definitely clarified what information is contained in the sections. I would agree with implementing it. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:34, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Let's absolutely add this. The main page definitely needs more information. I like it! &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:48, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I think that if we have 3.5e and 4e on this site, we should have the main page sperating out 3.5e and 4e, and pages for 3.5e and 4e like the above. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:56, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yes, I agree. But that can be added once 4E comes out... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:30, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I'm going to implement this now because I think it is so much better (and I want it as soon as possible). Please, though, continue to post comments here about any revisions we could do to make it look better! &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:32, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::Yeah, I like it. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:38, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::I removed the "d20M" in that SRD link since it is already under the header of d20M. However, I agree, it looks very good and thanks for implementing it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:48, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="column"<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
; <big>Dungeons and Dragons</big><br />
* [[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
; <big>d20 Modern</big><br />
* [[D20 Modern|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=D20M<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[Modern System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=MSRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Should we make CAPTCHA's present after an IP edits? ==<br />
<br />
Recently a high level of automated spam has been attacking D&D Wiki in the form of inserting nonsense and gibberish into random pages. An example would be [[DnD Flaws]] as of 04:08, 1 November 2007 (MDT) as edited by [[Special:Contributions/200.226.134.53|200.226.134.53]] (permanent link [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=DnD_Flaws&oldid=159600 here]). I think the easiest way to stop this problem would be to provide [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captcha CAPTCHA's] every time an IP makes an edit. The only reason I am asking this is because I am not sure if it would be more beneficial or more harmful to have CAPTCHA's. Do you guys think that IP's would still correct spelling errors if they had to enter a CAPTCHA or would they deem it to difficult? Would it, even if the amount of edits performed by IP's decreased, be worth it? Any ideas would be appreciated. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:41, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Well, if they were just doing it because they were bored then having to spell the correct word to finalize the edit might prevent some people because they are just waaay to lazy. It would also prevent if anyone wanted to create a bot to spam content. Although, it would be annoying for me to have to do that every time I wanted to say, update my User Page with another new item. If you could disable it for users and not IP's, I think that would be a good try to cut down on the spam. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:31, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::The CAPTCHA's would ''only'' be for IP edits, not for when a user edits something. Anyway, that would be terrible if a user had to enter a CAPTCHA to edit something (the reason they would not have to is because to create an account one has to enter a CAPTCHA...) Also, as you may have noticed, all the recent spam attackes have been automated, so hopefully if this is implemented it should help with the problem... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:44, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::So yea, try it and we'll see if the spam goes down. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:24, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::I agree with this completely. Should I go ahead and put them in, or should we wait for more users to comment? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:33, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Go for it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:41, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yeah. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:52, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Okay, it has been added. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 20:50, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::For some odd reason, i have had a captcha come up after all my edits today, despite the fact the captcha is only supposed to come up when an IP edits something (and I am logged in). Why is this, and can someone sort it please? Thanks. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:03, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::This should not be happening. I would recommend doing the following: log out, clear your browser cache, clear your browser history, clear all cookies relating to D&D Wiki, restart your browser, and then log back in and see if it is still giving you troubles. If it is, then I will definitely look into this problem further. I am sorry for the inconvenience that this is causing you, and will try to get it sorted out as soon as is possible. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 13:50, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::It has not worked. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 15:39, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Maybe you're an IP in disguise... ''':P'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:17, 4 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Err... no. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:55, 5 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Okay... Can I change your password (through the database) and login as you to asses the problem? I would like to see what is happening and hopefully give [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] enough information to fix this very strange problem. Would this be okay with you? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:41, 5 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
''&rarr;Reverted indentation to one colon''<br />
<br />
:Yeah, sure. Can you change my password back afterwards though, please? Thanks. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:11, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Am I the only one getting the problem? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:23, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::No, I also experienced this today with my edits. Although, I'm behind a corporate firewall here, so I don't know if that has anything to do with it. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 09:25, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::No, I've gotten one after every edit I've made, even if it was just adding one letter. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:15, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Oops... I guess the setting was set so sysops were the only ones who did not have to give a CAPTCHA whereas everyone else did. The issue should now be fixed, and sorry about that... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:22, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::Much better. ''':D''' Now I can reformate the equipment section in peace. Which as an update I've finished nearly all the back to footers and have all but the magic weapons and over half the wondrous items updated to the MIC format. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 20:42, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Yeah, sorted. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:59, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Glad to hear it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:44, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Move towards new DPL ==<br />
<br />
Hello all, this site is running on a very outdated version of DPL, which has caused several hacks to have to be thrown together, and is potentially not allowing things to get done. When I upgraded this wiki to v11, I upgraded DPL as well, but most all pages that used DPL immediately stopped working. Is there an interest for me to get a test wiki running, and people can figure out how the DPL should be working, and then implement it? Or should we instead stick with what we have and wait until we really need the next version? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:07, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I honestly have no idea what the DPL is. So could someone tell me what it is and/or what it does? Then I could answer your questions. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:27, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::What are the new features of the new DPL version? For most purposes, the DPLs seem to be working well, but I know we've especially had to hack some DPL2 stuff. Would the new version fix this? [Watsyurname529, DPLs are dynamically assembled lists generally based off of category tags, e.g. [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_Base_Classes&action=edit this code] yields [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/User_Base_Classes this page].] &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 18:21, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I feel that we should implement the new dpl version. The DPL2 (at least according to [[User:Sledged|Sledged]]) would make it so we would not need three main different modifications of the dpl to be running on this site, the dpl, dplc, and the dpl2c (full list [[Special:Version|here]]). I think it would help D&D Wiki greatly to implement the newest version of the dpl, and make things easier for a new user to understand. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:48, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::There's a demo site for DPL with a manual [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page here].<br />
::::Is there a way to get a list of all the pages using dpl*? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 16:29, 8 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::[[MediaWiki:Pages using DPL]] is what True Orphans uses. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 18:17, 8 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::It's only listing the pages in the main/default namespace. What about the SRD pages? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 14:58, 13 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::The extension that page is for specifically excludes all SRD dpl pages, so those have never been added to that dpl list. We will have to compile a list on our own for SRD pages. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:54, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I see. Also, when I said "pages using <tt>dpl*</tt>," I meant also the <tt>dpl2c</tt>, <tt>dplc</tt>, and <tt>dpl2cu</tt> tags. I don't see any of the pages using those tags listed. If those pages can be identified before hand, it'll make an upgrade a bit easier. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:48, 15 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::To answer [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]]'s first question. This wiki is running version 0.7.7 of DPL2. The latest version is 1.5.2, so there is a significant number of changes. For brevity, I'll just list a few of the new features that apply to this wiki:<br />
:::*You can specify your own format for the output. For example you could list each result as a row in a table instead of getting the standard three column output.<br />
:::*In conjunction with the previous feature, DPL2 pull content from the listed pages for displaying as part of the output.<br />
:::*You can get results based on pages names and page content in addition to categories and namespaces. For instance, all the [[User Prestige Classes with Descriptions|user PrCs]] are assigned to the category beginning with the first letter of the page title. Those categories can be completely removed because DPL2 lets you return pages whose title's first letter matches one specified in the DPL2 call.<br />
:::*DPL2 can used to compensate for user error. Broken links like the one titled "Anima and Animus Mage" on the [[User Prestige Classes with Descriptions|user PrCs page]] can be eliminated.<br />
:::*With the latest version of DPL2 (an one other specific extension) users can create spell/feat/monster/etc filters like the one seen [http://www.penpaperpixel.org/tools/d20spellfilter/ here].<br />
:::*It can be used as a parser function (which I personally prefer over tags).<br />
:::*Pages that are linked to only from DPL calls are not listed as [[Special:Lonelypages|orphaned pages]].<br />
:::—[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 14:58, 13 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Okay, lets do it. What are the changes that need to be made to dpl pages to make this not be broken when implemented? What is the best way of going about this change? Should we change the pages first, then implement it, or implement it then fix all the errors on the dpl pages? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:54, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::There's one more complication to take into consideration; All the pages with the <tt>dpl*</tt> mod tags (<tt>dpl2c</tt>, <tt>dplc</tt>, and <tt>dpl2cu</tt>) have to be changed, not just list pages. So we'll have to go through all the class pages (base, prestige, npc, and racial paragon) and NPC pages. I think Blue's suggestion of a test wiki is the best way to do it. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:48, 15 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::It might not be necessary to set up a test wiki. I [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Issue:No_More_Globals submitted a request] over at the [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page DPL2 site] to transition all the globals to class members. If Gero decides to adopt it, the latest version and the currently installed version can be installed side-by-side without one conflicting with the other. The only caveat is that the line that reads<br />
<br />
::::::<pre>$wgParser->setHook( "DPL", array( __CLASS__, "dplTag" ) );</pre><br />
<br />
::::::in the new version will have to be commented out. This will disable using new version as a tag extension, but it will still be available as a parser function call; <tt>{<nowiki/>{#dpl:}}</tt>. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:23, 21 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::And [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page DPL2] version 1.6.0 (no more globals) has been released. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 09:42, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Okay, I upgraded to the latest version. Let me know if there are any errors. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 12:18, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== A Small Sample ===<br />
<br />
So here's a sample list of the user base classes, which I've limited to the 'A's:<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" style="text-align: left;"<br />
|+ Homebrew Base Classes with Descriptions<br />
|- {{#vardefine:odd|0}}<br />
! Name !! style="text-align: center;" | Balance<sup>[[#1|1]]</sup> (out of 10) !! Type<sup>[[#2|2]]</sup> !! Description<sup>[[#3|3]]</sup><br />
{{#dpl:category=DnD<br />
|titlematch=A%<br />
|category=User<br />
|category=Base Class<br />
|include={Balance}:1,{x0}:type:desc<br />
|mode=userformat<br />
|format=,¦- ²{#vardefine:odd¦²{#ifexpr: ²{#var:odd}²¦0¦1}²}²²{#ifexpr: ²{#var:odd}²¦¦class="even"}²\n¦ [[%PAGE%¦²{#replace:%PAGE%¦(DnD Class)¦}²]]\n,,<br />
|tablerow=¦style="text-align: center;" ¦ ²{#if: %%¦%%¦NR}²,\n¦%%,%%\n<br />
}}|-<br />
| colspan="7" class="foot" |<br />
# <span id="1">Shows how balanced a certain Class is, the number is out of 10. The Balance rating is from the actual Class's page; it is not made on this page. More information [[Balance System|here]].</span><br />
# <span id="2">A general category the Class fits into. e.g. Strong Spellcasting, Combat Focused, etc.</span><br />
# <span id="3"> A concise description of the Class-- should advertise the Class.</span><br />
|}<br />
—[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 13:59, 27 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I like it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:27, 29 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:: The Alchemist... I don't know if i would consider it a spell caster --[[User:Cerin616|Cerin616, Drew]] 15:58, 11 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Better now? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:20, 11 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== 4,000th Item! ==<br />
<br />
Whoo! I just posted the 4,000th homebrew item on this site! Amazing how much stuff we've got on here. Just want to say congrats to everyone who's posted/edited here. Also here is the 4,000th item: [[Fried Frying Pan (DnD Equipment)|Fried Frying Pan]] --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:29, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:If that number is correct.... ''':P'''. I think we may actually have more, they are just not categorized (that number is actually the number of items in [[:Category:DnD]]). Although, I agree. Congratulations all! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:51, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Hey, it says 4000 Items on the main page and that's good enough for me ''':P''' to you too, lol. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 20:56, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Meh... ''':)'''. Also, if you want to make that number more accurate please take a look at the [[Special:TrueOrphans|TrueOrphans]] (which may not be true&mdash;I think [[MediaWiki:Pages_using_DPL]] needs to be updated...). However, feel free to categorize those things and, overall, make things on D&D Wiki be linked to! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:14, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
==Sidebar Change==<br />
Dungeons and Dragons or Homebrew?<br />
<br />
The side bar has an option called "Dungeons and Dragons" that takes you to the Homebrew section. This seems to me to be misleading and should be changed to "Homebrew." This is not that big of a deal, but it would be more consistant. --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 15:09, 18 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Actually, there's more than just homebrew material there (though the vast majority of it is homebrew). It also contains OGC from source books like ''Unearthed Arcana'', ''Relics and Rituals'', ''Creature Collection'', ''Monster Manual II'', and such. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:38, 21 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Currently on the [[Main Page]] we call that entire section "Homebrew Content" even though it has more than just that (as [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] pointed out above). If we want to be nitpicky, that is also a problem. Anyway, the reason it is called "Dungeons and Dragons" on the sidebar is that the sidebar cannot have any real wiki-syntax. The ideal organization for that would be something like:<br />
::D&D<br />
:::[[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew]] (even though it's not all homebrew...)<br />
:::[[System Reference Document|SRD]]<br />
::D20M<br />
:::[[D20 Modern|Homebrew]] (even though it's not all homebrew...)<br />
:::[[Modern System Reference Document|MSRD]]<br />
::However, that is not possible. Since that is not possible we try to do the best we can, and that is the current way. Actually, this post has given me an idea... Maybe another box, labeled "D&D" and one labeled "D20M" could exist, with the links in them... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:43, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I just changed it. What does everyone think? Better? Worse? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:45, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I dont mean to be picky. I also dont mean to make extra work for ya all. I just through out ideas when I have them. I like the change, but I also like the reasons given above for why it was the way it was. That is why I like wiki format. I hardly ever make changes, but I do add my ideas to disscution.--[[User:Mander|Mander]] 22:44, 29 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I hesitate to bring it up, but I think it might be worth mentioning; The D&D section could be split up into "homebrew" and "published OGC" sections. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:07, 30 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::First off you were not a bother at all, [[User:Mander|Mander]]. The sidebar is very easy to change and it's always great to improve things. Anyway, I feel that as soon as we have enough published OGC material (we are reaching it though, if one counts NBoF as "published") then we should definitely spit "DnD" up into published OGC and Homebrew. However, right now I do not think we have enough... Maybe when all the UA material is posted we can give it a shot, but until then I do not think we have enough OGC content. Your thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:48, 4 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::: So many acronyms, so few ranks in knowlege-acronyms...--[[User:Mander|Mander]] 01:30, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Age of the internet. Soon everything we be reduced to acronyms, IMHO. [[Help:FAQ#What are OGL, OGC, SRD, and GNU FPL?|OGC]], [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/welcome DnD], [http://datadeco.com/nbofeats/ NBoF], and [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/881560000 UA] (which I really should finish transcribing). —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 02:31, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Actually, speaking of acronyms, it would be helpful to have a list of all the D&D acronyms in [[DnD Other]] (I am sure a list exists on the internet, it just needs to be copied over). Also, sorry about using all those acronyms above. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:31, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Maps? ==<br />
<br />
:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:Dungeons and Dragons#New Section: Maps?]]<small> It dealt with Homebrew specific material, not everything on the site --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:52, 4 December 2007 (MST)</small><br />
<br />
== Tavern Schedule ==<br />
<br />
Should a small Tavern Schedule be placed on the main page on the right side (floating)? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:40, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I think this is a good idea to increase use of the tavern, but it would be best if days that already had events planned were highlighted, a different text color, the only days with links, etc. They need to stand out; otherwise, I have to click each day to even see if there is anything that day. It almost seems to me that a mini-program/extension is needed to code that to make it more useful... still, the calendar is a great idea. That is the best suggestion I have heard to increase usage of the tavern. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:35, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::The days that have events are blue. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:43, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Much better. I like it. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 20:24, 15 January 2008 (MST)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=206331Talk:Main Page2008-01-15T23:35:29Z<p>EldritchNumen: /* Tavern Schedule */ calendar program?</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Archives<br />
|label1=Discussions 1&ndash;30<br />
|label2=Discussions 31&ndash;44<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== 4th edition ==<br />
<br />
I don't really want to recreate the rumours and excitement concerning the upcoming 4th edition, but it looks like we need to think about a way to handle it here. It's pretty sure that there will be two editions in parallel use, at least for a while, so we need a way to separate editions. Tagging articles [[:Category:3.5]] and [[:Category:4.0]] wouldn't be too hard, what I'm concerned about is article lemmata for articles that exists in different versions for different editions. <br />
<br />
Also, it's not clear yet whether there will be a 4th edition SRD. I hope there will be one. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 08:50, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Might be a good idea to put SRD 3.5 articles with a template underneath (this is only a suggestion, not an attempt to have a million templates per page):<br />
<br />
:{| style="text-align: center; font-size:0.9em;" width="100%"<br />
| [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|40px]]<br/>This material is published under the [[V3.5 rules]].<br/><small>[[Main Page|&rarr;More]]</small><br />
|}<br />
<br />
:Although, there might be too many templates if we do this. perhaps we could replace the SRD template to this for 3.5 articles:<br />
<br />
:{| class="messagebox protected" style="border:2px solid #99B; padding:0px; font-size:0.9em;"<br />
|-<br />
| valign="top" | [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|45px]]<br />
| This material is published under the '''[[Open Game License v1.0a]]'''. The [[GNU Free Documentation License]] does not apply to this page. This material is for the D&D [[V 3.5 rules]].<br />
|}<br />
<br />
:We don't really need to mark homebrew stuff- it should work for 4.0 rules anyway. Whatre can I find news on the 4th edition, anyway? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:10, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Have you been at the WotC Homepage lately? Did you notice something? --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 09:48, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::If 4e is really coming out we can most likely just slap on a small template on all 4e things or all 3.5e things. Also, the categories you said above will work. I do not see it as too much of a problem... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:55, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::According to my reasearch, it ios not out until 2011 (rather silly really; why advertise it four and a bit years before its release), so we really do not have to bother with it yet, anyway. {{Unsigned|Sam Kay|10:04, 16 August 2007 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
::::::Boo! Hsssss! I had a browser tab open for the last ten minutes of the countdown of the [http://www.wizards.com/dnd D&D] page. Once it finished, I got "Service Unavailable". About as disappointing as 3.0 psionics. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 16:35, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Lol ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:38, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::4th edition is definitely coming. We really need to sit down, argue, butt heads, and work out the namespacing issues now. Thankfully, 3E has a namespace already. We have lots to sort out. Wikiworld will instantly be 4th compatible, as I haven't bothered with stats for most of the writeup. The new MIC style items should also be compatible. There are interesting times ahead. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 18:39, 16 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::It has been stated that the PHB will be out May '08 MM June '08 and DMG July '08 {{Unsigned|Quill|19:11, 16 August 2007 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
::::::::::Yes, we have a year to prepare but it makes it easier later if we start thinking about it now. Btw., I'm still waiting for the WotC Homepage to survive sudden massive attention so I can see the official WotC Press release... --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 03:22, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Just do what I suggested and replace the OGC tgemplate with:<br />
:::::::::::{| class="messagebox protected" style="border:2px solid #99B; padding:0px; font-size:0.9em;"<br />
|-<br />
| valign="top" | [[Image:D20 logo 4.jpg|45px]]<br />
| This material is published under the '''[[Open Game License v1.0a]]'''. The [[GNU Free Documentation License]] does not apply to this page. This material is for the D&D [[V 3.5 rules]].<br />
|}<br />
<br />
:::::::::::It is alot easier to mark 3.5 in this way. You could also add an image to the template to mark it, I suppose. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:30, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::I vote to leave the V3.5 on the wiki pemanently (unless the wiki runs out of memory), as some people will still use V3.5. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:39, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Btw, [http://rustmonster.net/2007/08/16/dd-4th-edition-announced-gen-con/ here] it says that Wizards announced to continue the OGL. Good decision. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 09:45, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
''&rarr;Reverted indentation to one colon''<br />
<br />
:Can we get a 4E Info/Rumor link up on the landing page? (Though we may as well link it to ENWorld. They will have the best coverage.) [http://www.enworld.org/index.php?page=4e ENWorld 4E Page] It hasn't been updated yet, but it will be. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 14:19, 17 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Great! it will be nice to have 4.0e on the wiki.--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:27, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::A few things. First off we need to figure out if the homebrew material will be compatible with 4e, if it is we are well off. If it is not we need to figure out how we are going to categorize the 3.5e and the 4e homebrew information separately. Oh, and yes, D&D Wiki has enough space to keep the 3.5e material - nothing need ever be deleted to save space on D&D Wiki. Secondly, if we want a link to 4e information from ENWorld then, I feel, that we should add it as a news item. Dmilewski can take care of this if this is the communities decision. Thirdly we need to figure out when the 4e SRD is coming out to see how much time we have to prepare for it. About the SRD (3.5e and 4e); we need to decide if we want a different namespace for the two SRD editions or if we want to organize them by their identifiers. Anyway, if the homebrew information is compatible we are looking at not too much work (and a much more useful and successful D&D Wiki). Let us hope... ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:10, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::I think ther homebrew stuff will mostlky ber compatable with 4e, but if not we will have to work to update the best stuff... --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:22, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Either the homebrew material is almost 100% good-to-go or it is not. We cannot have a medium on D&D Wiki. The reason we can not have a medium is because many many people will not switch over to 4e for a long time (or ever!) and we do want want these people to lose D&D Wiki as a recourse. If the two editions are not compatible we will have to have two separate pages like [[Dungeons and Dragons]] and we will have to have 3.5e classes, races, etc and 4e classes, races, etc. Again, we need to really know if they will be compatible or not (and if someone has any information please cite the source). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:32, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yeah, I know, I was meaning as they are now... I have had a look at the articles on WotC website, and I seem to remember that the playtest report mentioned that a player was playing a psyon (because it was 3.5e) to see if it was compatible.--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:42, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I volenteer to help updating homberew stuff to 4e should the need arise (hopefully it won't). --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:54, 18 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::I think that conversion of each section should be considered on a case-by-case basis. For example, magic items may only need a level assigned to them. That's an easy conversion worth doing. Classes and prestige classes will need to be entirely rewritten as trees, maneuvers, or such, if they are worth translating at all. <br />
<br />
::::::::My current belief is that we will need to split the content. That hoses the entire redirect initiative. (That was a reservation of mine with the redirect initiative. All the pages that I did for the SRD were hard-referenced. I used no redirects.) <br />
<br />
::::::::Campaign environments will be easiest to convert. Many simply implement the existing system, then list some house rules. For example, LotR and Wikiworld are both concept heavy, rules light. Wikiworld has always been rules light, as I wanted Wikiworld to work with any game system. I suggest that Sam keep LotR rules light, so as to keep it universal.<br />
<br />
:::::::::I was at GenCon when they made the announcement of 4e. According to Wizards of the Coast, the 3.5e material will be compatible with a minimum of modification. There were no details given at the time, however, so what that means, I'm not sure. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 14:04, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Many classes and (both base and prestige) might be obsolete under the new rules- if the same effect can be made just by using talents on one of the other classes. I think we'll have to make a big review of everything and check it for 4e compatibility, maybe putting a 4e Compatible template and a 4e Incompatible template (and nothing on pages that haven't nbeen checked yet, obviously). [[User:MorkaisChosen|MorkaisChosen]] 08:25, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Or we could just keep 3.5e material 3.5e material, since not everyone is going to switch right away... Maybe keep it for a couple years than change it to 4e. Thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:16, 4 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
I read on the Wizards page that one thing they're thinking of implementing with all the online stuff they're using in 4th ed is a wiki to allow home brew stuff. If that's true, it may be best to just keep this site in 3.x to avoid competition with the "official" wiki. I'm still uncertain about all that though. Any thoughts? --[[User:Banyan|Banyan]] 23:07, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I don't think a little competition will hurt. If Wizards opens their own wiki, that's an excellent idea, but it doesn't mean we should give up this project here. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 00:57, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I wouldn't bother with the "official wiki" anyway. This one is better. Anyway, why would we be scared of competition? It is not like we are trying to make money, or anything. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:00, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Would someone like to contact them and ask them if this is true? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:35, 26 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
==New Edition Issues==<br />
<br />
The following questions are both technical and procedural. There is no correct answer. These questions are here to collect upcoming issues with the wiki and decisions that should be considered. Please add to the list.<br />
<br />
===General architecture===<br />
<br />
How best to manage a wiki filled with multiple editions and systems (3E, 4E, Modern, Etc.)<br />
<br />
:I am very open to discussion, but I feel that the best way to manage different systems is to make the different edition pages very obvious. For example, we could have all namespace v4 pages come with a slightly darker page background, or something similar. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:22, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I agree. The Wizards message boards use a different skin for each game. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 10:57, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::I am against the changing of the skin, however I think namespaces are the way to go. We could label the namespaces as SRD3.5e, SRD4e, 4e, 3.5e, D20M, etc. What do you guys think about this idea? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:11, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::People will be far too confused if they want to know whether the article is 3.5 or 4.0, and they constantly have to be checking namespaces. It will be much easier if the page background is slightly darker for 4.0, or something similar. I am not talking about a different feel, just a difference. There is a difference :) &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 18:00, 23 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Why not have two menu pages, one for each edition, and label all pages with 3.5 and 4.0? --[[User: Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:02, 24 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Sam Kay, do you mean namespaces? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:04, 26 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Yeah... I did. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:23, 1 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
===Namespaces===<br />
Should we move current SRD pages to a 3E namespace?<br />
<br />
:I assume you mean 3.5E namespace, and I feel that we need to wait a bit until the structure is clear and known to all, but I feel that it definitely needs to happen before 4E comes out. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:23, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
How do we want the namespaces to interact?<br />
<br />
:Why not have two D&D menus: 3.5, and 4.0. That way, you would know whether you where in 3.5 or 4.0. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:33, 3 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
What should we do with articles that are invariant between 3E and 4E (assuming there are any)?<br />
<br />
:This brings up another question: It would be great if there was a way to allow edits on a 3.5E to be reflected, or maybe a reflection would be requested, onto a 4E page. This way the races or whatnot would remain the same. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:25, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I've been wrestling with related questions on [[WikiRPS]]. It's easy to have small (or even large) pieces of shared text, using a template. But what if the bulk of the text is shared, but just the numbers scattered throughout the text are different (for instance)? As far as I know, the only way to do it is to modularize the text into templates as much as possible. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 11:02, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
Redirects point to 3E SRD. Is there a way to have namespace relative redirects, where <nowiki>[[foo]]</nowiki> inside the <nowiki>[[SRD]]</nowiki> context points to <nowiki>[[SRD:Foo]]</nowiki> while <nowiki>[[foo]]</nowiki> in the 4E context points to <nowiki>[[SRD4:Foo]]</nowiki>. <br />
<br />
:I don't think it's possible, but I'm willing to be proven wrong. &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 09:55, 21 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::It would be possible with a few minor hacks. However, this will lead to a very confusing website. I am against the idea. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:18, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
===Templates===<br />
<br />
What templates should be used to tag 3E and 4E pages?<br />
<br />
===Homebrew===<br />
<br />
Should homebrew rules be tagged by edition?<br />
<br />
:I strongly feel so. Everything is specific to a version if it falls back on D&D. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:26, 22 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::That depends on whether it is edition specific or not: WotC declaired that 3.5e would be compatable with 4.0e --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:19, 1 September 2007 (MDT)--[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:19, 1 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
Should campaigns get their own namespace, or belong to their intended edition?<br />
<br />
:I feel that campaigns should not get their own namespaces because it would remove the items in the campaign from D&D Wiki linking schemes, etc. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 10:26, 22 August 2007 (MDT)''<br />
<br />
===Site conversion===<br />
<br />
How best to automate changes?<br />
<br />
Should 3E redirect be systematically replace with hard page references?<br />
<br />
:I'm not sure I understand the question. Can you give an example? &ndash;[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] <small>([[User talk:Cuthalion|talk]])</small> 09:55, 21 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I think it means that rather than mentions of "darkvision" being linked to the darkvision page it says what page information about darkvision can be found at in the core rule books. If so, I am against the idea. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:09, 6 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Another 4e Option ==<br />
<br />
I can't help but feel that the cleanest solution would to be just host a completely separate wiki specifically for 4E, and just circumvent all the aforementioned issues. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:30, 21 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I agree&mdash;having a separate wiki would be very clean, but it may not be as useful, since one would have to switch between the wiki for different versions of D&D. However, I am starting to like the idea... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:24, 21 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Well, I think the ease of having a separate wiki would probably be more valuable than the "convenience" of having them together. Also, my understanding is that 4E is not nearly so compatible with 3.5E. So, perhaps the "clean slate" concept would be much better. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 10:02, 22 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::From what I'm reading it seems like it'll about as compatible as 2e is to 3e.<br />
:::Also, let's not forget that the above issues are merely the ones of which we can conceive. With projects this size, more issues always arise after implementation.<br />
:::4ed20wiki.com anyone? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 19:36, 27 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Wizards did say 4e would be compatible with 3e with a minor amount of modification. Why not have two sub-main pages within this wiki? On the main page you have links to 3rd edition D20 and 4th edition D20. Then each edition could have it's own sub-main page just like our current main page... That would be ''like'' two wikis but without the flicking from wiki to wiki, having two accounts, and the possibility of reduced number of edits on each wiki. Personally, I think it would be better to have one wiki with separate sections. We already have modern and D&D with separate sections on one wiki, so why not do it with 3e and 4e? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:16, 28 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree w/ Sam, we should just include a sub-set for D&D 4E like we did for d20 Modern. That way people can have just one account and since 3.5 will be compatible w/ 4E people can still look at all of our 3.5 Stuff and port it over to 4E. Just Create a Dungeons and Dragons 4E Page and a 4ESRD and everything's fine. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 11:21, 28 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::I know that the "official" announcement was that 4E would be compatible with 3E, however, I've listened to the Podcasts, read much of the forum boards, and tried to pay attention to what is out there and I don't think it will be that compatible. In fact, Dave Noonan said on the D&D Podcast that there won't be a simple process to take a 3E character and just equate it to 4E. The level progression is different, the spread of powers associated with each level will change for each of the classes, and many of the class abilities (especially spell casting) are being changed greatly. Also, monsters are being reworked extensively, and many of the mechanics are being revised, rewritten, or scrapped entirely. I have a feeling that the compatibility will be simply that you can take a story line from a 3E adventure and use it, but the mechanics, though familiar, are not the same. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 09:55, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I still think one wiki would be best. Plus, I have also been reading the announcements, and I think a lot of the things can already be achieved with variants: the saves working like ACs, for example, add 10 to each save, take 10 from the DC, and roll a D20 and add the DC, compare to save. Easy. Critical spells? I have already done a variant for that before they announced it in Design and development. It is on this site under the title [[Spellcasting (DnD Variant Rule)|Spellcasting]]. So 3E-4E conversion could be a case of slight modification using variant rules. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:31, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::I'm not sure I see exactly how variants address the issue of hosting materials for two different versions of the d20 System. Are you suggesting that for every 4E rule component that's different from the corresponding 3.5 rule, it be put under the [[DnD Rules]] or a SRD Variant section? And if so, would this be in addition to or instead of hosting 4E SRD in it's own space?<br />
::::::::And since the d20 Modern section was brought up, I never really cared for it being hosted next to the d20 stuff. Admittedly, it hasn't been a problem, but that could be due to the fact that there's far fewer users using that section than the d20 section (if the amount of user-submitted material is any indication). Whether or not 4E material has it's own wiki, I'm definitely against the 4E d20 Modern and d20 Future being hosted on the same wiki.<br />
::::::::With the issue of multiple accounts, there's a way to have only one account apply to both wikis. I created an account on a [http://www.wikia.com Wikia] site a while ago, and it works with all wikis there. [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue]] would know how complicated such a thing would be to accomplish, and if it'd be worth while. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:20, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::The answer to your question is no, I was merely stating that I think 3E will be compatible with 4E with a minimal of rule conversion. If we can have one account on two seperate wikis, would it be possible to have a single user page (and talk page) for '''BOTH''' wikis? I knows you have seperate pages on wikia... and have links between wikis work as an "inside" link rather than an "external link"? If so, then having two wikis '''Would''' be more... better. Erm... More... practical. Although if we could have a united main page for both that lead to each seperate wiki, that would be good too. About 4E modern and D20 future, starwars ect, ect, yadda yadda yadda, I am not really bothered about them. So long as we have 3E and 4E D&D (and 3E modern would be good, although we could '''completely''' replace it with 4E modern), then I am happy. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 15:25, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::I have strengthened and decided my view, I am against two wikis for a number of reasons. One is that people would have two user pages, two talk pages, and two recent changes lists would exist. It would become a lot to handle. Another reason is that it would divide visitors between two sites, making it look like dandwiki.com is actually not doing as well as it would be, therefore making it not as popular on google, etc. Another reason I am against it is that people will choose one wiki they like and stick with it, disabling half of our growing user base. It would stop prompting people to join random discussions as much, and stop prompting them to help out as much. Another reason is that structure changes would have to be done twice, the same template made two times, one for each wiki. It seems, to me, like a lot more problems would arise than good would come out of it. I am against making two wikis.<br />
::::::::::A solution I see to this problem is namespaces. We could have namespaces such as 3.5e, 4e, 3.5eSRD, and 4eSRD to eliminate confusion as to which version something is. I think namespaces would be the best solution to this problem, not separate wikis. Maybe we should vote? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:00, 30 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Sure. Why not? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 21:25, 31 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Done. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:19, 31 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::If anyone can see a way to make the voting table below clearer please do. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:32, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
''&rarr;Reverted indentation to one colon''<br />
<br />
:I voted for everything. That's because I believe that we will need our whole toolbox to sort this out.<br />
:First, we need to identify the two idea complicating this discussion and table them. I believe that D20 Modern will be best served with it's own sister wiki. Simply by separating it, we greatly simplify our discussion. It then becomes its own discussion (which it deserves). Campaigns also deserves their own discussion. <br />
:This greatly simplifies our problem. <br />
:We already know that we will need new templates for 4.0. (Fact: see the new creature layout block.) We will also need new page preloads. Layout differences will help us tell one page from another. The new class pages will look different than the old class pages simply by being laid out differently. That does the same job as a skin. We also have footer and header templates that can go into a preload and existing pages.<br />
:Namespaces are powerful tools to help us sort out what is what, even at a glance. They provide an absoluteness that chains through everything. The new SRD will most definitely be in a new namespace. For contributor content, I don't see a powerful enough need for a separate namespace when layouts and templates are already providing us good service. Page titles also convey information. '''Page Title (DnD Page)''' is different from '''Page Title (4E Page)'''. <br />
:Categories will be directly impacted by namespaces, but the purpose of categories is not in separating pages, but in collecting like pages. If we try to separate pages too much using Categories, all we do is create a complicated set of categories. We have page titles and namespaces to help a user identify what page goes with which system. These should be sufficient.<br />
:Finally, there is ignorance. If we make the wiki too complex for contributors, we will lose contributors. Any schema that we invent must be apparent to our average contributor.<br />
:That's alot, isn't it?<br />
:My belief is that we should make a new namespace for the new SRD, and let the body of the wiki sort itself out with layouts, footers, and linking. Most sections are clearly one edition or the other. The trouble sections (D20 Modern and Campaigns) need their own discussions to sort out. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 07:52, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::If I didn't know better, I'd swear you were putting together an argument for separate wikis. I think this statement sums it up:<br />
<br />
:::''If we make the wiki too complex for contributors, we will lose contributors.''<br />
<br />
::There's going to be plenty to worry about with just dealing with one edition without having to worry about how keep the editions separate, and too many of the solutions depend on the users maintaining the separation. Right now we have users assigning incorrect categories or neglecting categories, putting non-SRD material in the SRD namespace, not using the preloads, not putting the " (DnD xxxx)" identifier (or putting the wrong identifier) when they create a page, and so on and so on. Trying to maintain a separation between editions is going to add to the problem. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:45, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Nothing on this earth will stop the symptoms above. Ignorance will always exist. I believe the above are symptoms of too-few editors. We have needed editors patrolling their own areas for a while. We must also admit to ourselves that editing is not very interesting to most of our contributors. I really don't know how to address that issue.<br />
:::One reason that I don't want separate wikis is that our Campaign section is always among the most popular sections. How do I maintain Wikiworld across two wikis? If our solutions won't work well for campaigns, we will hurt ourselves.--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 15:09, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Also, on the incorrect editing, most random people who post here don't know all the catagories or how to properly code a wiki. I still don't know all the catagories but I usually go find a page that does and copy and paste. So the incorrect editing will always be a problem. I also firmly stand behind the idea of just one wiki, everything in one place. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:28, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I agree with Dmilewski. Why was the last sysop elected more than half a year ago? It's because we have a large issue with people not wanting to edit the infrastructure of this site. The last editor that really edited the infrastructure was [[User:Mkill|Mkill]] (albeit with some very controversial edits), who since that time has left D&D Wiki. The infrastructure is not perfect here, many many things need to be improved or are currently wrong, but why is no one stepping up and fixing them? Is D&D Wiki to complex for people to handle? Should we dumb it down? And how do the questions I just asked pertain to 4e material?<br />
:::::Actually, I think the questions I just asked are the core of this issue. A new 4e wiki will eliminate all the issues with people not wanting to edit the infrastructure, and that is why it seems so appealing. It will make a new slate, without D&D Wiki's insane hierarchy (which, by the way, only exists because average users do not edit the infrastructure or help other people's creations on D&D Wiki), and without all of the work that needs to be done on D&D Wiki that is not getting done (publications, dplc's for races, modernizing classes layouts, linking orphaned pages, etc, etc). D&D Wiki has issues, and a new 4e wiki will remove them all... but I don't like to run from my problems.<br />
:::::Yes, D&D Wiki needs some major changes to become what I envision it to be; to become what everyone envisions it to be, but I feel we can accomplish these changes within this current wiki, and just this current wiki. Problems will arise from adding a new edition, but we can solve these problems, we will need to solve these problems... and, of course, the best way to solve these problems is to solve the problem with the average user not editing the infrastructure, because that is where I feel it all stems from. If the average editor feels that D&D Wiki does not just need more content, but rather needs infrastructure help, organizational help, help with making things look good, and help with making everything balanced, then with everyones hard work all the problems on D&D Wiki will soon disappear, creating an environment where adding a new edition will be as smooth as adding a new race. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:29, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Well not everyone wants to just go on a site and edit the way it works just for fun. They might add something but I wouldn't expect them to edit it. Maybe you should try on the equipment page to when you add a new item show some of the various templetes you can use such as the author one and the various catagories you can use. This might help because then you can just copy and paste what you need. I do agree that if we had more people editing and making things right the first or second time then this place would run much smoother. Now I would like to step up and help edit and my area would be the equipment section as I spend most my time there and I am most familar with it. You still might have to make more minor edits to what I have done but I garentee you that there will be less of them. Also, all I would be doing is standardizing and making minor edits as I do not know how to code much more than that; I could learn but that will take time. If you would like me to try to do that I will, it's just anywhere else and I'm not going to be nearly as useful. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 21:18, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I really didn't for my post to be a ''"plea for help"'' (even though it may have come off like that... ''':P'''), but if you want to do something which requires little or no wiki-syntax knowledge thats helps out [[DnD Equipment]] please drop a note on my user-talk page and I will help you find something that needs to get done on [[DnD Equipment]]. Anyway... back to the subject on hand..... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:57, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::When does the vote end? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:38, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Does the 5th of December sound okay? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:45, 2 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Yeah. I think everybody who wants a vote has voted or will have done by then. We can always send a MOI to people who havent voted. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:26, 3 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Okay, the vote is over. Thanks to everyone that voted, and it appears that we will not be making a separate wiki for 4e material (or holding a book burning convention) but rather organize the different edition by way of categories, namespaces, and possibly changing the identifier. Agiain, thanks to everyone that voted ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:05, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::So, when are we going to start setting it up for 4e? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:40, 15 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Feel free to start whenever you have time... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:04, 15 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
''&rarr;Reverted indentation to one colon''<br />
<br />
:I'd love to, but what do we call the new pages... "4E Dungeons and Dragons", "4E D20 Modern", "4E DnD Base Classes"? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:03, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Or "Dungeons and Dragons (4E)?" There's still a few more details that need to be decided. In what namespace will user content be? Main or "4E"? How do we deal with items independent of rules versions (i.e. maps, campaigns and the like)?<br />
::Personally, I think we can mirror the 3.5 section by replacing all the instances of "DnD" in all the identifiers with "4E" instead (e.g. "4E Character Options," "4E Feats," "4E Creatures," etc...), and the landing page can just be "Fourth Edition." (I always though "Dungeons and Dragons" and "DnD" were bit of misnomers in this context.) —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 10:37, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Ok. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:33, 16 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I'll start setting it up under 4E Homebrew, 4E Feats, etc. We can move them if need be. If we have stuff under 4E as you suggested, I think DnD should be replaced with 3E or 3.5E for the 3.5 stuff... Thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 02:18, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Started to set it up- see [[4E Homebrew|this page]]. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:17, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== The 4e Movement ===<br />
<br />
I looked over the page and I feel there are a couple kinks to be worked out. First off do we want the pages being labeled as "4E" or "4e"? Secondly, which pages do we want to work with both editions? Should these pages keep the "DnD" while all the other pages would adopt a 3.5e or 4e, respectively, identifier? Thirdly, should we change the descriptions of the sub-pages to say which edition they cover or would that be redundant? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:35, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I think 4e, Maps, campaign settings, possibly deities (depending on changes), Environments, Possibly Quests and Disscussion could be shared, yes, they keep DnD, rest become 3.5e or 4e, yes the rest need to say edition sub-pages cover. Any thoughts? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:34, 22 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Yes. How can we make the newly implemented dpl on [[Dungeons and Dragons]] (thank you so much, Sledged) work with non-specific edition pages in all the main categories (for DM's, for Players, or General)? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:27, 24 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Give pages that work for both two categories? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 06:08, 27 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::[[DnD Campaign Settings|Campaign Settings]], [[DnD Links|Links]], [[DnD Guidelines|Guidelines]], etc. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:37, 27 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
===Vote===<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" style="text-align: left;"<br />
|+ 4e Solution &mdash; Voting (Please use "#" and extra lines to separate)<br />
! rowspan="2" | For making a new wiki to encompass 4e material !! colspan="6" | For keeping D&D Wiki as a whole, encompassing all editions !! rowspan="2" | Launch a book-burning party which has the goal of burning every 4e book<br />
|-<br />
! Think namespaces are the solution to 4e material !! Think categories are the solution to 4e material !! Think changing the identifier is the solution to 4e material !! Think changing the background color/skin is the solution to 4e material !! Think templates are the solution to 4e material !! Think that more than one of the aforementioned solutions is the best solution for 4e material (Please say which ones would work best together)<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
# [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] (w/ New Skin)<br />
| <br />
# [[User:Sol|Sol]] <br />
# [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]]<br />
| <br />
# [[User:Trogdor|Trogdor]]<br />
|<br />
|<br />
|<br />
|<br />
# [[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] (Namespaces (for SRD material), Categories, Changing the identifier (for homebrew material))<br />
# [[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] (Namespaces, Catagories)<br />
# [[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] (All the above)<br />
# [[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
# [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] (Namespaces, Skin)<br />
# [[User:Pirate-Sorcerer|Pirate-Sorcerer]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
# [[User:Daniel Draco|Daniel Draco]] (Namespaces, Categories)<br />
|<br />
|}<br />
<br />
::The option to destroy all D&D4e books in the world is not an option. I am upset about this --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 19:20, 30 November 2007 (MST))<br />
<br />
:::LOL! Of course we can't take that action, even if we want to! It is probably unlawful or something. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:12, 1 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::That option has been added ''';)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:09, 2 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::'''LETS GO N' BURN THINGS!!!''' [loads AK47] '''UPRISING AGAINST THE 4E MENACE!!!''' --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:28, 3 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== New Look ==<br />
<br />
I feel that it is high time that we had a new look for the [[Main Page]], for a number of reasons. One is to make it easier for the average user to understand how D&D Wiki is organized, another is so the [[Main Page]] looks nicer. Below is my proposed idea, which is still in the works. Also, I have a couple of questions about it. One, should we use DPL2C to determine the number of items in an area. For example around <DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items exist in [[Dungeons and Dragons]], should we display that below? Also, should we have bullets in front of the link to [[Dungeons and Dragons]], the [[System Reference Document]], etc? Does it look better or worse with them present? Finally, how is the wording of everything? What could be improved? (P.S. the below idea is not mine, it was stolen from [[User:Sledged|Sledged]]'s hard work making [[Dungeons and Dragons]] look nice&mdash;I do not want to take credit which I do not deserve) --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:23, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Yea, the above does look much nicer than the current Main Page, and I do agree it needs an update. As for showing how many things you have in each, that's not necessary but is interesting to see that we have 2900 Homebrew Items, if anything that might bring people in to see that this is a pretty big site and not just some random long forgotten website. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:33, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I have added the number of items to the new look. Any other ideas? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:28, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::This definitely clarified what information is contained in the sections. I would agree with implementing it. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:34, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Let's absolutely add this. The main page definitely needs more information. I like it! &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:48, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I think that if we have 3.5e and 4e on this site, we should have the main page sperating out 3.5e and 4e, and pages for 3.5e and 4e like the above. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:56, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yes, I agree. But that can be added once 4E comes out... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:30, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I'm going to implement this now because I think it is so much better (and I want it as soon as possible). Please, though, continue to post comments here about any revisions we could do to make it look better! &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:32, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::Yeah, I like it. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:38, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::I removed the "d20M" in that SRD link since it is already under the header of d20M. However, I agree, it looks very good and thanks for implementing it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:48, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="column"<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
; <big>Dungeons and Dragons</big><br />
* [[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=DnD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=SRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
; <big>d20 Modern</big><br />
* [[D20 Modern|Homebrew Content]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New classes, equipment, feats, races, creatures, deities, etc. (<DPL2C><br />
category=D20M<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
* [[Modern System Reference Document|The System Reference Document]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Everything published by WotC that we are allowed to have on D&D Wiki. (<DPL2C><br />
category=MSRD<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL2C> items)</div><br />
|}<br />
<br />
== Should we make CAPTCHA's present after an IP edits? ==<br />
<br />
Recently a high level of automated spam has been attacking D&D Wiki in the form of inserting nonsense and gibberish into random pages. An example would be [[DnD Flaws]] as of 04:08, 1 November 2007 (MDT) as edited by [[Special:Contributions/200.226.134.53|200.226.134.53]] (permanent link [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=DnD_Flaws&oldid=159600 here]). I think the easiest way to stop this problem would be to provide [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captcha CAPTCHA's] every time an IP makes an edit. The only reason I am asking this is because I am not sure if it would be more beneficial or more harmful to have CAPTCHA's. Do you guys think that IP's would still correct spelling errors if they had to enter a CAPTCHA or would they deem it to difficult? Would it, even if the amount of edits performed by IP's decreased, be worth it? Any ideas would be appreciated. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:41, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Well, if they were just doing it because they were bored then having to spell the correct word to finalize the edit might prevent some people because they are just waaay to lazy. It would also prevent if anyone wanted to create a bot to spam content. Although, it would be annoying for me to have to do that every time I wanted to say, update my User Page with another new item. If you could disable it for users and not IP's, I think that would be a good try to cut down on the spam. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:31, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::The CAPTCHA's would ''only'' be for IP edits, not for when a user edits something. Anyway, that would be terrible if a user had to enter a CAPTCHA to edit something (the reason they would not have to is because to create an account one has to enter a CAPTCHA...) Also, as you may have noticed, all the recent spam attackes have been automated, so hopefully if this is implemented it should help with the problem... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:44, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::So yea, try it and we'll see if the spam goes down. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:24, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::I agree with this completely. Should I go ahead and put them in, or should we wait for more users to comment? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:33, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Go for it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:41, 1 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Yeah. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:52, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Okay, it has been added. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 20:50, 2 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::For some odd reason, i have had a captcha come up after all my edits today, despite the fact the captcha is only supposed to come up when an IP edits something (and I am logged in). Why is this, and can someone sort it please? Thanks. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 05:03, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::This should not be happening. I would recommend doing the following: log out, clear your browser cache, clear your browser history, clear all cookies relating to D&D Wiki, restart your browser, and then log back in and see if it is still giving you troubles. If it is, then I will definitely look into this problem further. I am sorry for the inconvenience that this is causing you, and will try to get it sorted out as soon as is possible. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 13:50, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::It has not worked. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 15:39, 3 November 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Maybe you're an IP in disguise... ''':P'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:17, 4 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Err... no. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:55, 5 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Okay... Can I change your password (through the database) and login as you to asses the problem? I would like to see what is happening and hopefully give [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] enough information to fix this very strange problem. Would this be okay with you? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:41, 5 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
''&rarr;Reverted indentation to one colon''<br />
<br />
:Yeah, sure. Can you change my password back afterwards though, please? Thanks. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:11, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Am I the only one getting the problem? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:23, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::No, I also experienced this today with my edits. Although, I'm behind a corporate firewall here, so I don't know if that has anything to do with it. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 09:25, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::No, I've gotten one after every edit I've made, even if it was just adding one letter. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 14:15, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Oops... I guess the setting was set so sysops were the only ones who did not have to give a CAPTCHA whereas everyone else did. The issue should now be fixed, and sorry about that... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:22, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::Much better. ''':D''' Now I can reformate the equipment section in peace. Which as an update I've finished nearly all the back to footers and have all but the magic weapons and over half the wondrous items updated to the MIC format. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 20:42, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Yeah, sorted. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:59, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Glad to hear it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:44, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Move towards new DPL ==<br />
<br />
Hello all, this site is running on a very outdated version of DPL, which has caused several hacks to have to be thrown together, and is potentially not allowing things to get done. When I upgraded this wiki to v11, I upgraded DPL as well, but most all pages that used DPL immediately stopped working. Is there an interest for me to get a test wiki running, and people can figure out how the DPL should be working, and then implement it? Or should we instead stick with what we have and wait until we really need the next version? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:07, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I honestly have no idea what the DPL is. So could someone tell me what it is and/or what it does? Then I could answer your questions. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:27, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::What are the new features of the new DPL version? For most purposes, the DPLs seem to be working well, but I know we've especially had to hack some DPL2 stuff. Would the new version fix this? [Watsyurname529, DPLs are dynamically assembled lists generally based off of category tags, e.g. [http://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_Base_Classes&action=edit this code] yields [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/User_Base_Classes this page].] &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 18:21, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I feel that we should implement the new dpl version. The DPL2 (at least according to [[User:Sledged|Sledged]]) would make it so we would not need three main different modifications of the dpl to be running on this site, the dpl, dplc, and the dpl2c (full list [[Special:Version|here]]). I think it would help D&D Wiki greatly to implement the newest version of the dpl, and make things easier for a new user to understand. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:48, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::There's a demo site for DPL with a manual [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page here].<br />
::::Is there a way to get a list of all the pages using dpl*? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 16:29, 8 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::[[MediaWiki:Pages using DPL]] is what True Orphans uses. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 18:17, 8 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::It's only listing the pages in the main/default namespace. What about the SRD pages? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 14:58, 13 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::The extension that page is for specifically excludes all SRD dpl pages, so those have never been added to that dpl list. We will have to compile a list on our own for SRD pages. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:54, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I see. Also, when I said "pages using <tt>dpl*</tt>," I meant also the <tt>dpl2c</tt>, <tt>dplc</tt>, and <tt>dpl2cu</tt> tags. I don't see any of the pages using those tags listed. If those pages can be identified before hand, it'll make an upgrade a bit easier. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:48, 15 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::To answer [[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]]'s first question. This wiki is running version 0.7.7 of DPL2. The latest version is 1.5.2, so there is a significant number of changes. For brevity, I'll just list a few of the new features that apply to this wiki:<br />
:::*You can specify your own format for the output. For example you could list each result as a row in a table instead of getting the standard three column output.<br />
:::*In conjunction with the previous feature, DPL2 pull content from the listed pages for displaying as part of the output.<br />
:::*You can get results based on pages names and page content in addition to categories and namespaces. For instance, all the [[User Prestige Classes with Descriptions|user PrCs]] are assigned to the category beginning with the first letter of the page title. Those categories can be completely removed because DPL2 lets you return pages whose title's first letter matches one specified in the DPL2 call.<br />
:::*DPL2 can used to compensate for user error. Broken links like the one titled "Anima and Animus Mage" on the [[User Prestige Classes with Descriptions|user PrCs page]] can be eliminated.<br />
:::*With the latest version of DPL2 (an one other specific extension) users can create spell/feat/monster/etc filters like the one seen [http://www.penpaperpixel.org/tools/d20spellfilter/ here].<br />
:::*It can be used as a parser function (which I personally prefer over tags).<br />
:::*Pages that are linked to only from DPL calls are not listed as [[Special:Lonelypages|orphaned pages]].<br />
:::—[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 14:58, 13 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Okay, lets do it. What are the changes that need to be made to dpl pages to make this not be broken when implemented? What is the best way of going about this change? Should we change the pages first, then implement it, or implement it then fix all the errors on the dpl pages? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:54, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::There's one more complication to take into consideration; All the pages with the <tt>dpl*</tt> mod tags (<tt>dpl2c</tt>, <tt>dplc</tt>, and <tt>dpl2cu</tt>) have to be changed, not just list pages. So we'll have to go through all the class pages (base, prestige, npc, and racial paragon) and NPC pages. I think Blue's suggestion of a test wiki is the best way to do it. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:48, 15 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::It might not be necessary to set up a test wiki. I [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Issue:No_More_Globals submitted a request] over at the [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page DPL2 site] to transition all the globals to class members. If Gero decides to adopt it, the latest version and the currently installed version can be installed side-by-side without one conflicting with the other. The only caveat is that the line that reads<br />
<br />
::::::<pre>$wgParser->setHook( "DPL", array( __CLASS__, "dplTag" ) );</pre><br />
<br />
::::::in the new version will have to be commented out. This will disable using new version as a tag extension, but it will still be available as a parser function call; <tt>{<nowiki/>{#dpl:}}</tt>. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:23, 21 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::And [http://semeb.com/dpldemo/index.php?title=Main_Page DPL2] version 1.6.0 (no more globals) has been released. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 09:42, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Okay, I upgraded to the latest version. Let me know if there are any errors. &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 12:18, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
=== A Small Sample ===<br />
<br />
So here's a sample list of the user base classes, which I've limited to the 'A's:<br />
<br />
{| class="d20" style="text-align: left;"<br />
|+ Homebrew Base Classes with Descriptions<br />
|- {{#vardefine:odd|0}}<br />
! Name !! style="text-align: center;" | Balance<sup>[[#1|1]]</sup> (out of 10) !! Type<sup>[[#2|2]]</sup> !! Description<sup>[[#3|3]]</sup><br />
{{#dpl:category=DnD<br />
|titlematch=A%<br />
|category=User<br />
|category=Base Class<br />
|include={Balance}:1,{x0}:type:desc<br />
|mode=userformat<br />
|format=,¦- ²{#vardefine:odd¦²{#ifexpr: ²{#var:odd}²¦0¦1}²}²²{#ifexpr: ²{#var:odd}²¦¦class="even"}²\n¦ [[%PAGE%¦²{#replace:%PAGE%¦(DnD Class)¦}²]]\n,,<br />
|tablerow=¦style="text-align: center;" ¦ ²{#if: %%¦%%¦NR}²,\n¦%%,%%\n<br />
}}|-<br />
| colspan="7" class="foot" |<br />
# <span id="1">Shows how balanced a certain Class is, the number is out of 10. The Balance rating is from the actual Class's page; it is not made on this page. More information [[Balance System|here]].</span><br />
# <span id="2">A general category the Class fits into. e.g. Strong Spellcasting, Combat Focused, etc.</span><br />
# <span id="3"> A concise description of the Class-- should advertise the Class.</span><br />
|}<br />
—[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 13:59, 27 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I like it ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:27, 29 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:: The Alchemist... I don't know if i would consider it a spell caster --[[User:Cerin616|Cerin616, Drew]] 15:58, 11 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Better now? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:20, 11 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== 4,000th Item! ==<br />
<br />
Whoo! I just posted the 4,000th homebrew item on this site! Amazing how much stuff we've got on here. Just want to say congrats to everyone who's posted/edited here. Also here is the 4,000th item: [[Fried Frying Pan (DnD Equipment)|Fried Frying Pan]] --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 15:29, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:If that number is correct.... ''':P'''. I think we may actually have more, they are just not categorized (that number is actually the number of items in [[:Category:DnD]]). Although, I agree. Congratulations all! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:51, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Hey, it says 4000 Items on the main page and that's good enough for me ''':P''' to you too, lol. --[[User:Watsyurname529|Watsyurname529]] 20:56, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Meh... ''':)'''. Also, if you want to make that number more accurate please take a look at the [[Special:TrueOrphans|TrueOrphans]] (which may not be true&mdash;I think [[MediaWiki:Pages_using_DPL]] needs to be updated...). However, feel free to categorize those things and, overall, make things on D&D Wiki be linked to! --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:14, 7 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
==Sidebar Change==<br />
Dungeons and Dragons or Homebrew?<br />
<br />
The side bar has an option called "Dungeons and Dragons" that takes you to the Homebrew section. This seems to me to be misleading and should be changed to "Homebrew." This is not that big of a deal, but it would be more consistant. --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 15:09, 18 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Actually, there's more than just homebrew material there (though the vast majority of it is homebrew). It also contains OGC from source books like ''Unearthed Arcana'', ''Relics and Rituals'', ''Creature Collection'', ''Monster Manual II'', and such. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:38, 21 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Currently on the [[Main Page]] we call that entire section "Homebrew Content" even though it has more than just that (as [[User:Sledged|Sledged]] pointed out above). If we want to be nitpicky, that is also a problem. Anyway, the reason it is called "Dungeons and Dragons" on the sidebar is that the sidebar cannot have any real wiki-syntax. The ideal organization for that would be something like:<br />
::D&D<br />
:::[[Dungeons and Dragons|Homebrew]] (even though it's not all homebrew...)<br />
:::[[System Reference Document|SRD]]<br />
::D20M<br />
:::[[D20 Modern|Homebrew]] (even though it's not all homebrew...)<br />
:::[[Modern System Reference Document|MSRD]]<br />
::However, that is not possible. Since that is not possible we try to do the best we can, and that is the current way. Actually, this post has given me an idea... Maybe another box, labeled "D&D" and one labeled "D20M" could exist, with the links in them... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:43, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I just changed it. What does everyone think? Better? Worse? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:45, 25 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I dont mean to be picky. I also dont mean to make extra work for ya all. I just through out ideas when I have them. I like the change, but I also like the reasons given above for why it was the way it was. That is why I like wiki format. I hardly ever make changes, but I do add my ideas to disscution.--[[User:Mander|Mander]] 22:44, 29 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I hesitate to bring it up, but I think it might be worth mentioning; The D&D section could be split up into "homebrew" and "published OGC" sections. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:07, 30 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::First off you were not a bother at all, [[User:Mander|Mander]]. The sidebar is very easy to change and it's always great to improve things. Anyway, I feel that as soon as we have enough published OGC material (we are reaching it though, if one counts NBoF as "published") then we should definitely spit "DnD" up into published OGC and Homebrew. However, right now I do not think we have enough... Maybe when all the UA material is posted we can give it a shot, but until then I do not think we have enough OGC content. Your thoughts? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:48, 4 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::: So many acronyms, so few ranks in knowlege-acronyms...--[[User:Mander|Mander]] 01:30, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Age of the internet. Soon everything we be reduced to acronyms, IMHO. [[Help:FAQ#What are OGL, OGC, SRD, and GNU FPL?|OGC]], [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/welcome DnD], [http://datadeco.com/nbofeats/ NBoF], and [http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/881560000 UA] (which I really should finish transcribing). —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 02:31, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::Actually, speaking of acronyms, it would be helpful to have a list of all the D&D acronyms in [[DnD Other]] (I am sure a list exists on the internet, it just needs to be copied over). Also, sorry about using all those acronyms above. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:31, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Maps? ==<br />
<br />
:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:Dungeons and Dragons#New Section: Maps?]]<small> It dealt with Homebrew specific material, not everything on the site --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:52, 4 December 2007 (MST)</small><br />
<br />
== Tavern Schedule ==<br />
<br />
Should a small Tavern Schedule be placed on the main page on the right side (floating)? &mdash; <span style="color:#002137;">[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] <small> ([[User_talk:Blue Dragon|talk]])</small></span> 15:40, 15 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I think this is a good idea to increase use of the tavern, but it would be best if days that already had events planned were highlighted, a different text color, the only days with links, etc. They need to stand out; otherwise, I have to click each day to even see if there is anything that day. It almost seems to me that a mini-program/extension is needed to code that to make it more useful... still, the calendar is a great idea. That is the best suggestion I have heard to increase usage of the tavern. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:35, 15 January 2008 (MST)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Shadowlings_(D20_Modern_Race)&diff=201515Shadowlings (D20 Modern Race)2008-01-14T13:11:36Z<p>EldritchNumen: /* Game Statistics */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{author|author_name=EldritchNumen|date_created=27 November 2006|status=Complete}}<br />
<br />
== Description ==<br />
<br />
Soft-spoken and gentle, Shadowlings are a passive, contemplative race. They prefer to dedicate themselves to art, magic, literature, philosophy, and study. They often dwell upon a decision for a long time before making a decision, but then are quick to act and, when necessary, can be ruthless. Shadowlings are shorter than humans, averaging about four feet in both genders, and weigh between 80 and 120 pounds.<br />
<br />
Shadowling society is very orderly; each individual is left to his/her own devices, and all decisions are made by a consensus of all the adults in the population. Settlements are often small, containing less than 200 members, and seek to live an integrated, non-intrusive lifestyle with the surrounding environment, whether that be a forest or the inner city.<br />
<br />
Most mortals view Shadowlings as particularly quiet children, but those who can see creatures of Shadow see them as they really are. Shadowlings tend to dress in subdued tones of grey, black, blue, and green, and wear little extraneous ornamentation. They are, however, fond of tattoos (often in swirling and flowing patterns of subdued colors). Most adult Shadowlings have at least one tattoo.<br />
<br />
'''Common Names''' (both genders): Kumaril, Vilurin, Esmark, Menthor, Olvaris. <br><br />
'''Typical Alignment:''' Neutral Good<br />
<br />
== Game Statistics ==<br />
<br />
'''Small Humanoid (Shadowling)''' <br><br />
'''Low Light Vision''' <br><br />
'''Base Speed:''' 20 feet <br><br />
'''Not Human:''' No bonus feat at first level and no extra skill points.<br />
;Ability Score Adjustments:<br />
:Dexterity +2 <br><br />
:Charisma +2 <br><br />
:Wisdom +2 <br><br />
:Strength -2 <br><br />
:Constitution -2<br />
;Racial Skill Bonuses:<br />
:Hide +2 (increases to +4 in shadow) <br><br />
:Move Silently +2<br />
;Automatic Languages<br />
:Latin<br />
:Any one modern language<br />
;Bonus Languages<br />
:Ancient Greek<br />
:Hebrew<br />
:Old Coptic<br />
:Aramaic<br />
:Pali<br />
:Sanskrit<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
Back to [[Main Page]] &rarr; [[D20 Modern]] &rarr; [[D20 Modern Races]].<br />
[[Category:D20M]]<br />
[[Category:User]]<br />
[[Category:Race]]<br />
[[Category:Humanoid Type]]</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Sacrificial_Dagger_(3.5e_Equipment)&diff=201514Sacrificial Dagger (3.5e Equipment)2008-01-14T13:08:53Z<p>EldritchNumen: formatting</p>
<hr />
<div>{{author|author_name=EldritchNumen|date_created=7 February 2007|status=Complete}}<br />
<br />
A sacrificial dagger is an ornate dagger designed for ritual sacrifices. It has been profaned by an evil priest. In the hands of a skilled user, a sacrificial dagger is a boon to any dark ceremony. It is in all respects equal to a [[Dagger (SRD Weapon)|normal dagger]] except as follows: <br><br />
<br />
::'''Effect:''' When used as part of a sacrifice, the circle leader receives a +1 equipment bonus on his [[Knowledge (SRD Skill)|Knowledge (Religion)]] check. This effect is negated if the leader has no ranks in Knowledge (Religion). Further, the dagger adds a +1 to the [[Saving Throw (SRD Rules)|Fortitude]] save necessary to resist death from a coup d'grace attack.<br />
<br />
'''Cost:''' 15 gp <br><br />
'''Weight:''' 2 lbs<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
Back to [[Main Page]] &rarr; [[Dungeons and Dragons]] &rarr; [[DnD Equipment|Equipment]].<br />
[[Category:DnD]]<br />
[[Category:User]]<br />
[[Category:Equipment]]<br />
[[Category:Mundane]]<br />
[[Category:Weapon]]<br />
[[Category:Simple Weapon]]<br />
[[Category:Light Weapon]]<br />
[[Category:Thrown Weapon]]<br />
[[Category:Melee Weapon]]<br />
[[Category:Piercing Weapon]]<br />
[[Category:Thrown Weapon]]</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Anti-Aircraft_Wraith_(D20_Modern_Vehicle)&diff=201513Anti-Aircraft Wraith (D20 Modern Vehicle)2008-01-14T13:01:58Z<p>EldritchNumen: /* Anti-Aircraft Wraith */</p>
<hr />
<div>=Anti-Aircraft Wraith=<br />
[[Image:AAWraith.jpg|thumb|A Wraith.]]<br />
'''Anti-Aircraft Wraith'''<br />
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="d20"<br />
!<br />
!Vehicle<br />
|-<br />
| '''Crew''' || 1<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| '''Pass''' || 1<br />
|-<br />
| '''Cargo''' || 425lbs<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| '''Init.''' || -6<br />
|- <br />
| '''Maneuver''' || -6<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| '''Top Speed''' || 50 (8)<br />
|- <br />
| '''Defense''' || 7<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| '''Hardness''' || 12<br />
|- <br />
| '''Hit Points''' || 72<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| '''Size''' || H<br />
|- <br />
| '''Purchase DC''' || 35<br />
|- class="even"<br />
| '''Restriction''' || Mil +3<br />
|- <br />
|}<br />
<br />
===Anti-Aircraft Wraith===<br />
<br />
The Anti-Aircraft Wraith is a modified wraith. It is equiped with a twin-linked [[Fuel Rod Cannon (D20 Modern Equipment)|Fuel Rod Cannon]] (can autofire) and a fronal partial-turret mounted [[Plasma Cannon (D20 Modern Equipment)|Plasma Cannon]] controled by the passenger. The Wraith hovers about three feet from the ground when activated.<br />
<br />
See {{Halo Background Information}}Type-52_Anti_Aircraft_Wraith this page] for background information.<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
Back to [[Main Page]] &rarr; [[D20 Modern]] &rarr; [[D20 Modern Vehicles|Vehicles]].<Br><br />
Back to [[Main Page]] &rarr; [[D20 Modern]] &rarr; [[D20 Modern Campaign Settings|Campaign Settings]] &rarr; [[Halo (D20 Modern Campaign Setting)|Halo]] &rarr; [[Equipment (Halo Supplement)|Equipment]] &rarr; [[Vehicles (Halo Supplement)|Vehicles]] &rarr; [[Military Vehicles (Halo Supplement)|Military Vehicles]].<br />
{{Copyright Disclaimer}}<br />
[[Category:D20M]]<br />
[[Category:User]]<br />
[[Category:Vehicle]]<br />
[[Category:Mundane]]<br />
[[Category:Halo Setting]]</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=D20_Modern_Campaign_Settings&diff=201511D20 Modern Campaign Settings2008-01-14T12:49:56Z<p>EldritchNumen: </p>
<hr />
<div>{| style="width: 100%;" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"<br />
|- style="text-align: left; font-size: larger;"<br />
|- style="vertical-align: top;"<br />
| style="width: 30%; padding: 0.077em 0.385em;" |<br />
Back to [[D20 Modern]]<br />
| style="width: 70%; padding: 0.077em 0.385em;" |<br />
'''[[Add a New D20 Modern Campaign Setting|Add your own D20M Campaign Setting]]''' to D&D Wiki by clicking the link and following the instructions.<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<br />
==Campaign Settings==<br />
<br />
{| class="column"<br />
|-<br />
===Rated: 5/5===<br />
This is very comprehensive in most aspects.<br />
<DPL><br />
debug=1<br />
category=D20M<br />
category=User<br />
category=Setting<br />
category=CS Rating 5<br />
notcategory=Supplement<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL><br />
|-<br />
===Rated: 4/5===<br />
This is complete in many aspects, but information is sparse in a few categories.<br />
<DPL><br />
debug=1<br />
category=D20M<br />
category=User<br />
category=Setting<br />
category=CS Rating 4<br />
notcategory=Supplement<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL><br />
|-<br />
===Rated: 3/5===<br />
This has some, but often sparse, information in most categories.<br />
<DPL><br />
debug=1<br />
category=D20M<br />
category=User<br />
category=Setting<br />
category=CS Rating 3<br />
notcategory=Supplement<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL><br />
|-<br />
===Rated: 2/5===<br />
This has some sparse information, but large amounts of material are missing.<br />
<DPL><br />
debug=1<br />
category=D20M<br />
category=User<br />
category=Setting<br />
category=CS Rating 2<br />
notcategory=Supplement<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL><br />
|-<br />
===Rated: 1/5===<br />
This is a very minimal page, and is most likely a Stub.<br />
<DPL><br />
debug=1<br />
category=D20M<br />
category=User<br />
category=Setting<br />
category=CS Rating 1<br />
notcategory=Supplement<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL><br />
|}<br />
<br />
<!-- UNCATEGORIZED VARIANT RULES!!! --><br />
===Unrated===<br />
<DPL><br />
debug=1<br />
category=D20M<br />
category=User<br />
category=Setting<br />
notcategory=Supplement<br />
notcategory=Templates<br />
notcategory=CS Rating 1<br />
notcategory=CS Rating 2<br />
notcategory=CS Rating 3<br />
notcategory=CS Rating 4<br />
notcategory=CS Rating 5<br />
order=ascending<br />
</DPL></div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User:EldritchNumen/About_Me&diff=201454User:EldritchNumen/About Me2008-01-13T22:57:16Z<p>EldritchNumen: /* About Me */</p>
<hr />
<div>=== About Me ===<br />
<br />
EldritchNumen studies far too much. College takes up much of his time while the rest is readily devoured by living life. When he has time, he likes to just sit and think, which he feels is an admirable pursuit (as is evinced by his inclination for philosophy).<br />
<br />
EldritchNumen is also active on this wiki, where he is an [[D&D Wiki:Administrators|admin]].<br />
<br />
In his 9 years of roleplaying, EldritchNumen has taught DnD to over 20 people.</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Vorpal_Sword_(3.5e_Equipment)&diff=201429Vorpal Sword (3.5e Equipment)2008-01-13T18:19:38Z<p>EldritchNumen: The Vorpal sword (DnD Equipment) moved to Vorpal Sword (DnD Equipment): Capitalized title; made non-unique (since this is a minor artifact)</p>
<hr />
<div>This weapon was originally weilded by a human who, late in his adolecence, slew a [[Jabberwock (DnD Creature)]] that terrorized his village. He even had a poem written about him recorded by a passing bard.<br />
<br />
This blade is simply a +1 [[Vorpal (SRD Weapon Enhancement)|Vorpal]] [[Sword, Bastard (SRD Weapon)|Bastard Sword]], with a strange enchantment that makes it go "Sniker Snak' when swung, making it unusable for sneak attacks.<br />
<br />
The Blade currently hangs above the mantelplace of the Winding Path Inn, an inn on the western coast, slightly off the side of the north-south trade routes.<br />
<br />
The innkeeper, who protects the blade and will use it in his defense if attacked, will not sell to blade for any less than 2,000,000gp, far over market price. The blade is warded, and cannot be removed from its sheath without the owners approval. The bracket from which it hangs is also warded, and will cast Obleck's Resilient Sphere on any one that attempts to remove the blade, trapping the character in a 10' sphere of force. He ''could'' be convinced to trade it, but to that would probably require the an even more impressive weapon.<br />
<br />
==DM Notes==<br />
Our DM was on a satirical streak when he introduced this weapon. It eventually found it's way into the hands of our paladin, who, after a brief bit of use, returned it to the inn keeper, much to the anger of the rest of the party<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
Back to [[Main Page]] &rarr; [[Dungeons and Dragons]] &rarr; [[DnD Equipment|Equipment]] &rarr; [[User Minor Artifacts|Minor Artifacts]].<br />
[[Category:DnD]]<br />
[[Category:User]]<br />
[[Category:Equipment]]<br />
[[Category:Weapon]]<br />
[[Category:Artifact]]<br />
[[Category:Artifact, Minor]]</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User:EldritchNumen/DnD_Contributions&diff=201428User:EldritchNumen/DnD Contributions2008-01-13T18:18:05Z<p>EldritchNumen: /* DnD Pages */ added stone of sympathy</p>
<hr />
<div>=== DnD Pages ===<br />
<br />
*'''Campaign Setting Pages:'''<br />
** [[Anazar (DnD Campaign Setting)|Anazar Campaign Setting]]<br />
*** [[History (Anazar Supplement)|History]]<br />
*** [[The Prophesy (Anazar Supplement)|The Prophesy]]<br />
*** [[Religion (Anazar Supplement)|Religion]] (28 Deities)<br />
*** [[Geography (Anazar Supplement)|Geography]]<br />
*** [[Organizations (Anazar Supplement)|Organizations]] (5 Organizations)<br />
*** [[Creatures (Anazar Supplement)|Creatures]]<br />
*** [[Quests of Anazar (Anazar Supplement)|Quests of Anazar]] (1 Quest)<br />
** [[Hellas (DnD Campaign Setting)|Hellas Campaign Setting]]<br />
*** [[Adventures in the Ancient World (Hellas Supplement)|Adventures in the Ancient World]]<br />
*** [[Religion (Hellas Supplement)|Religion]]<br />
*** [[Iconic Foes (Hellas Supplement)|Iconic Foes]]<br />
*'''DnD Creatures and Races:'''<br />
** [[Wolfoceros (DnD Creature)]]<br />
** [[War Wolfoceros (DnD Creature)]]<br />
*'''Quests and Related Pages:'''<br />
** [[Zokusho's Sword (DnD Quest)]]<br />
*** [[Zokusho's Greatsword (Quest Item)]]<br />
*** [[Orcish Warband (Zokusho's Sword Supplement)]]<br />
*** [[Zokusho's Sword Tactical Encounters (Zokusho's Sword Supplement)]]<br />
*** [[Anselm Random Encounters (Zokusho's Sword Supplement)]]<br />
***NPCs:<br />
**** [[Don-Dul (DnD NPC)]] Orc Barbarian 13<br />
**** [[Gnalk (DnD NPC)]] Orc Druid 10 / Barbarian 4<br />
**** [[Zokusho (DnD NPC)]] Vampire Fighter 6 / Rogue 6<br />
**** [[King Marak (DnD NPC)]] Aristocrat 16<br />
**** [[Baron Solnorm (DnD NPC)]] Fighter 10 / Rogue 4<br />
**** [[Jaida (DnD NPC)]] Diviner 7<br />
**** [[Troll Bodyguard (DnD NPC)]] Troll Fighter 2<br />
*'''DnD Equipment:'''<br />
** [[Stone of Sympathy (DnD Equipment)]]<br />
** [[Zephyrium Ore (DnD Equipment)]]<br />
** [[Darknut Extract (DnD Equipment)]]<br />
** [[Violet Mold Paste (DnD Equipment)]]<br />
** [[Korath Gas (DnD Equipment)]]<br />
** [[Elf Whistle (DnD Equipment)]]<br />
** [[Smuggler's Locket (DnD Equipment)]]<br />
** [[Sacrificial Dagger (DnD Equipment)]]<br />
*'''DnD Rules:'''<br />
** [[Evil Weather (DnD Variant Rule)]]: <br />
*** [[Green Rain (DnD Rule)]]<br />
*** [[Twilight Hex (DnD Rule)]]<br />
*** [[Frozen Ruin (DnD Rule)]]<br />
*'''DnD Maps:'''<br />
** [[:Image:Simple_Cottage.png|Simple Woodlands Cottage]]</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Stone_of_Sympathy_(3.5e_Equipment)&diff=201427Stone of Sympathy (3.5e Equipment)2008-01-13T18:17:19Z<p>EldritchNumen: creation</p>
<hr />
<div>{{author|author_name=EldritchNumen|date_created=13 January 2008|status=Complete}}<br />
<br />
=Stone of Sympathy=<br />
<br />
'''Description:''' The Stone of Sympathy is a minor artifact. It radiates a permanent [[SRD:Sympathy (Spell)|Sympathy]] effect that effects a certain race or subtype of creature, including intelligent creatures. Creatures that meet the criteria for a specific type of stone, such as a <i>Stone of Sympathy: Dragons</i> or <i>Stone of Sympathy: Elves</i>, must make a Will save (DC 22) when within 40 feet of the Stone or when it is intentionally presented to them (within their direct line of sight). Affected creatures feel elated and pleased to be in the area or desire to touch or to possess the Stone. The compulsion to stay in the area of the stone or to touch it is overpowering. If the save is successful, the creature is released from the enchantment, but a subsequent save must be made 1d6x10 minutes later (if the creature is still in the area). If this save fails, the affected creature attempts to return to the area or object.<br />
<br />
An ambitious and powerful human wizard, Yvez Endark, is rumored to possess several of the Stones of Sympathy, including the coveted <i>Stone of Sympathy: Humans</i>. Just what he plans to do with the stones is unknown, but the portent is unfavorable...<br />
<br />
'''Price:''' Not for sale; only found as an artifact. <br><br />
'''Construction:''' The method for constructing new Stones has been lost; new Stones can only be found.<br />
<br />
<br />
----<br />
Back to [[Main Page]] &rarr; [[Dungeons and Dragons]] &rarr; [[DnD Equipment|Equipment]]<br />
[[Category:DnD]]<br />
[[Category:User]]<br />
[[Category:Equipment]]<br />
[[Category:Artifact]]<br />
[[Category:Artifact, Minor]]</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=SRD_Talk:Tower_Shield&diff=201423SRD Talk:Tower Shield2008-01-13T17:28:39Z<p>EldritchNumen: </p>
<hr />
<div>The entry for Darkwood should indicate a +2 bonus to the armor check penalty. Also, this shouldn't be in the "metal armor" category. --[[User:72.93.166.17|72.93.166.17]] 01:12, 13 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Yes, it should. Tower shields are made of metal. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 02:52, 13 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Actually, in the SRD I think they are technically wood only. You cannot have an adamantine tower shield for example. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 05:04, 13 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I double-checked the references. Updated this to non-metal armor. Added a line for the armor check penalty.--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 08:46, 13 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Yep, my bad. I thought that metal tower shields were SRD... &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 10:28, 13 January 2008 (MST)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=SRD_Talk:Tower_Shield&diff=201396SRD Talk:Tower Shield2008-01-13T09:52:37Z<p>EldritchNumen: </p>
<hr />
<div>The entry for Darkwood should indicate a +2 bonus to the armor check penalty. Also, this shouldn't be in the "metal armor" category. --[[User:72.93.166.17|72.93.166.17]] 01:12, 13 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Yes, it should. Tower shields are made of metal. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 02:52, 13 January 2008 (MST)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=SRD_Talk:Fighter&diff=201395SRD Talk:Fighter2008-01-13T09:51:42Z<p>EldritchNumen: /* No Professional Soliders? */</p>
<hr />
<div>== No Professional Soliders? ==<br />
<br />
What kind of crack was WOTC smoking when they decided that fighter's don't get profession. Who's most likely person to take Profession: Solider? The bard?! -- [[User:Flession|Flession]] 17:42, 22 July 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:What's a solider? --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 18:46, 22 July 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Soldier...it's what I meant... >_> Statement still stands. -- [[User:Flession|Flession]] 20:01, 22 July 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::They where smoking brown sugar. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 08:38, 1 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::It really doesn't matter. I've never actually seen any of my players user the Profession skill. NEVER. Not in seven years. The Profession skill has nothing to do with adventure. No class should be able to put skill points into useless skills. No skill should be useless. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 13:59, 3 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I think you are right, though the hole point of the brown sugar thing was a joke. Smoking brown sugar is pretty random. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 11:01, 6 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::I agree, it is pretty random as I do not think it would have any effect (except to damage the lungs). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:39, 6 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I always make sure to throw in 2 skill points into one profession when I make a character mainly because it's part of his background. Seems kinda twinkish to say your character grew up on a farm until he was taken up to a military academy if you don't even know the first thing about farming. I actually do not allow players to build any weapons or armor unless they have that said profession. You can have all the craft skills you want, but it doesn't mean dick if you don't know how to use a forge. You ran out of food in the middle of the forest? You've found some deer. Great. How do you cook it? Bet you had some profession: cook now, didn't you. Trying to make some alchemy, I see? Great! Now how do you start? Don't know? Bet you wish you had Profession: Brewer now, didn't you? Unless your character's name is [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra_Cain Cassandra Cain], you need some sort of profession. -- [[User:Flession|Flession]] 01:24, 13 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Now that's just silly. Seriously. Craft skill is for making things that will be used, for creating weapons, armor, jewelry, what have you. Profession is for doing something as a trade, for directing subordinates, for running at least a part of a business for a whole week. Yes, it makes the most sense to have ranks in both, but honestly, to force all your players to take ranks in multiple Profession skills just so they can eat a hot meal is just silly. It takes less skill to cook a leg of venison than it does to make money as a chef for a month, or to make a sword in a couple days instead of run a whole forge for a week, or such. To make players roll Profession just to be able to sustain themselves in the wilderness isn't right. Unless they plan on doing it for a week and charging the other characters, that is. -- [[User:Cronocke|Cronocke]] 02:30, 13 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::On the other hand, there are plenty of things that Profession can and is well used for. For example, have you ever had a campaign in which the characters did anything more than merely sit in the hull of a boat? Because if they want to do anything else in any sort of sailing vessel (excepting tie rope, and that is even a little grey) then Profession (Sailor) is crucial. Also, any reasonable DM allows synergy bonuses from Profession. Have (5 or more ranks in) Profession (Hunter)? +2 to Survival when tracking. Profession (Blacksmith)? +2 to Craft when forging weapons. Profession (Entertainer)? +2 to Perform while entertaining. Profession (Clergy)? +2 to Perform (Oratory) or Knowledge (Religion)... you get the idea. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 02:51, 13 January 2008 (MST)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:3.5e_Homebrew&diff=199152Talk:3.5e Homebrew2008-01-11T00:54:48Z<p>EldritchNumen: /* New Section: Maps? */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{Archives<br />
|label1=Archive 1 (Discussions 1 &ndash; 30)<br />
}}<br />
<br />
==Knowledge Arcana==<br />
I'm working with Dave on this. This article is currently slated for 3-5 issues out. That means that we have the article in the development pipeline, but we do not yet have a home for it.<br />
<br />
--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 05:36, 21 April 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== New Server ==<br />
<br />
DanDWiki has recently undergone a major change in its configuration. I have moved the server from being hosted by [http://www.godaddy.com GoDaddy] to my own server. The site should be quite a bit faster now. <br />
<br />
--[[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] 22:42, 29 April 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Deleting DnD Vehicles ==<br />
<br />
I am going to be deleting DnD Vehicles, as I see no reason for it. D&D is ''not'' like D20 Modern where vehicles are a big deal. If anyone ever actually makes a vehicle it can go in [[DnD Other]]. A new section is not needed, although if more than 5 vehicles are put in [[DnD Other]] then I consider making a new section. Deleted the it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:19, 12 June 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:That was my idea, Green_Dragon. --[[User:Pz.Az.04Maus|Pz.Az.04Maus]] 13:29, 12 June 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Yes, I know, I just think that it has no reason to be there. Put the vehicles you make in [[DnD Other]], if enough are made, then a DnD Vehicles can be made. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:50, 12 June 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::I'm thinking of adding my friends airship template into here, it's rather cool, and i'll be making sandships shortly. --[[User:Shadethedemon|Shadethedemon]] 0:30, 06 August 2006 (NewYork time)<br />
<br />
:::: Enough vehicles for a new section? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 21:33, 3 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::: Why not put them under [[DnD Equipment]]? &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 18:08, 7 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::: Very good idea, I think that would work well. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:36, 8 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::: Yeah it is, should I just make the Vehicle header when I put it up? --[[User:Shadethedemon|DeadlyNightShade]] 08:37, 14 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::: Yes, just make a new section when you put your first vehicle on D&D Wiki. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:33, 15 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Template Links ==<br />
<br />
Shouldn't links to the templates be within the respective subject pages (e.g. Link to the NPC template on the [[DnD NPCs|NPCs page]], link to the PrC template on the [[DnD Classes|PrCs page]], etc...)?<br />
<br />
: Yes they should, I just have not got around to putting them in their places... Would you like to? Or should I when I am not doing something else on the site? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 09:47, 30 September 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:: I'd say whoever has time to do them first. I've put it on my TODO list. Would you like to keeps the links on D&D page, in addition to having them in their respective pages, or no? &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 13:18, 30 September 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::: No, get rid of the links from this page.... Just makes it more confusing and look worse. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:58, 30 September 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::: Does that look better? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:05, 1 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::: Looks great! &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 12:02, 2 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Merge Class Pages ==<br />
<br />
I think classes and PrCs should be merged together. Is anyone opposed to such an idea? &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 11:00, 5 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
: I don't think I really want that. I consider PrC's very different from Classes, and I don't see any reason why it would be good to merge them. What is your reason for wanting this? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:31, 5 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:: The foremost reason is the same for why I want to merge the pages dealing with special abilities in the SRD. It does little good to separate out items that fall under the same category. Next, though you may consider PrCs different, others may not feel the same, and the fact of the matter is that PrCs '''are''' classes. Lastly, I think it would be good to have some consistancy with how the classes are laid out. Base classes and NPC classes are grouped together on one page, but PrCs are on another. They should either each have their own page&mdash;one for base classes, one for NPC classes, and one for PrCs&mdash;or they should all be under one page. I'd prefer the latter just to cut down on the number of pages. &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 19:28, 6 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::: I consider PrC's very different from classes. The reason I believe that it would be good to have a separate page for PrC's is because when many people come here they would not consider PrC's to be under Classes, and they would then assume that D&D Wiki has no PrC's. However, on the other hand, it would help to merge Classes and PrC's, it would create one less thing on [[Dungeons and Dragons]]. Still, however, I believe that visitors would have a hard time finding the PrC's. I think most people do not consider PrC's to be Classes. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:13, 7 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::: What if the link was qualified like so:<br />
<br />
::::* [[DnD Classes|Classes]] (Base, Prestige, and NPC)<br />
<br />
:::: &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 13:20, 7 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::: I was thinking about that, but then that one would be the only link with black words after it, making it stand out where all the other do not. I still am not sure what a good solution would be. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:53, 7 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::: Could do the same for the other sections:<br />
<br />
<br />
::::::{| style="width: 100%;"<br />
|-<br />
| [[DnD Campaign Settings|Campaign Settings]]<br />
| style="text-align: right;" | Worlds and Options<br />
|-<br />
| [[DnD Optimized Character Builds|Character Optimizations]]<br />
| style="text-align: right;" | Anything You Can Do, I Can Do Better<br />
|-<br />
| [[DnD Classes|Classes]]<br />
| style="text-align: right;" | Base, Prestige, and NPC<br />
|-<br />
| [[DnD Deities|Deities]]<br />
| style="text-align: right;" | Phenomenal Cosmic Power!<br />
|-<br />
| [[DnD Equipment|Equipment]]<br />
| style="text-align: right;" | Weapons, Armor, Food & Drink, Vehicles, Magic Items, etc...<br />
|-<br />
| [[DnD Feats|Feats]]<br />
| style="text-align: right;" | General, Epic, Divine, Racial, etc...<br />
|-<br />
| [[DnD Monsters|Monsters]]<br />
| style="text-align: right;" | Creatures and Templates<br />
|-<br />
| [[DnD NPCs|NPCs]]<br />
| style="text-align: right;" | Good Guys, Bad Guys, and Ugly Guys<br />
|-<br />
| [[DnD Other|Other]]<br />
| style="text-align: right;" | Leftovers, Anyone?<br />
|-<br />
| [[DnD Quests|Quests]]<br />
| style="text-align: right;" | Where Do You Want To Go Today?<br />
|-<br />
| [[DnD Races|Races]]<br />
| style="text-align: right;" | Dragons, Giants, Aberrations, Oh My!<br />
|-<br />
| [[DnD Spells/Powers|Spells/Powers]]<br />
| style="text-align: right;" | 0&ndash;9th and Epic<br />
|-<br />
| [[DnD Rules|Variant Rules]]<br />
| style="text-align: right;" | Marching to the Beat of a Different Drummer<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<br />
:::::: &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 18:08, 7 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::: I think the above way would work very well. By the way, I love some of the description you made. Lastly, when you merge [[DnD Classes|DnD Prestige Classes]] into [[DnD Classes]] please make a seperate section for Classes, PrC's, and NPCs. I hope all goes well with this new way. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:40, 8 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::: I'm glad you're amused. I was hoping they'd get a chuckle. I threw in a lot of the descriptions simply so we could see how they'd look, and I was having trouble thinking of clear and concise descriptions using ten words or less. &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 16:42, 9 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::: I must say, they turned out very well. Good job. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 11:34, 15 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
==Getting more people to the site==<br />
<br />
I added a link the this site under the wikipedia article for Dungeons and Dragons. I hope that helps drive some people here.--[[User:Sand-reckoner|Sand-reckoner]] 12:27, 22 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:It looks good, and I hope it does make more people come here. Thanks for doing that. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:53, 22 October 2006 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Honestly, it helped a ton. Before the links D&D Wiki was averaging 150 unique visitors per day, now it is averaging 500 unique visitors per day. Thanks again for doing that. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:25, 2 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::You know, most of the D&D related articles on Wikipedia (last I checked, anyway), don't have a link to this wiki. I happened to stumble across one that did, which is how I ended up here. If you want more traffic, it would behoove you to put links on as many pages as possible. --[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] 22:28, 17 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Why not make a page for Dandwiki itself on wikipedia? --[[User:Shadethedemon|DeadlyNightShade]] 13:37, 22 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::That's how I found DnDWiki! And a wikipedia page might be a good idea. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 13:47, 22 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Same here. THe link on other wikipedias does work. --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 04:45, 11 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Someone go for it. Also, we are now averaging 1200 unique visitors/day and 57,000 hits a day (quite an improvement). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:54, 11 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Design... ==<br />
<br />
Hey guys,<br />
I'm new here, but I registered just to say that this page's design is really not made for all monitors. The descriptions for the sections are too far on the right from the article sections, and quite frankly I didn't notice them at first. By the way, I'm writing from a laptop monitor, and I find it rather hard to read.<br />
<br />
Just a suggestion, but I think you should work the template so that the descriptions are much closer to the article titles. <br />
<br />
Thanks!<br />
--[[User:CDevine|CDevine]] 19:31, 1 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Thanks for the feedback. How bad is it? Do you have to scroll to see the descriptions? What browser are you using. &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 19:52, 1 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I have a fairly large monitor on my desktop PC, (21 inch) and it is a bit of a pain to look over to the far other site to find the description. I think this is what CDevine is talking about, the large gap of nothing between the links and the descriptions. So, I would also say it would not hurt to change it round. Any ideas of how to make it look good, make it easy to find what one is looking for, ''and'' make sure the Dungeons and Dragons page does not get to long? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:22, 2 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"<br />
|- style="vertical-align: top;"<br />
|<br />
'''<big>For Players</big>'''<br />
<br />
* [[DnD Optimized Character Builds|Character Optimizations]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Anything You Can Do, I Can Do Better</div><br />
* [[DnD Classes|Classes]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Base, Prestige, and NPC</div><br />
* [[DnD Equipment|Equipment]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Weapons, Armor, Food & Drink, Vehicles, Magic Items, etc...</div><br />
* [[DnD Feats|Feats]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">General, Epic, Divine, Racial, etc...</div><br />
* [[DnD Other|Other]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Leftovers, Anyone?</div><br />
* [[DnD Races|Races]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Dragons, Giants, Aberrations, Oh My!</div><br />
* [[DnD Spells/Powers|Spells/Powers]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">0&ndash;9th and Epic</div><br />
<br />
| style="padding-left: 1em;" |<br />
'''<big>For DMs</big>'''<br />
<br />
* [[DnD Campaign Settings|Campaign Settings]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Worlds and Options</div><br />
* [[DnD Creatures|Creatures]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Monsters and Templates</div><br />
* [[DnD Deities|Deities]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Phenomenal Cosmic Power!</div><br />
* [[DnD NPCs|NPCs]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Good Guys, Bad Guys, and Ugly Guys</div><br />
* [[DnD Quests|Quests]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Where Do You Want To Go Today?</div><br />
* [[DnD Rules|Variant Rules]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Marching to the Beat of a Different Drummer</div><br />
|}<br />
<br />
<br />
:::What do you think of this? &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 20:14, 4 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::I don't really like it, to long. It might be good to shorten it so smaller screens (laptops in particular) can see all the links at once. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:09, 4 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::How about now? &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 09:27, 5 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::This is more in line with the direction of development of other pages. I'm all for giving the listing pages a more coherent look and feel. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 10:36, 5 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::Much better. However, it could be improved by getting some order other than alphabetical into the re-design. Such as (I know, I know...) For the Player, For the DM, etc. Your ideas? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:33, 5 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::: Don't see why not. Let's try this. &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 18:27, 5 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::: I like it. Fits with the new style well. --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 18:24, 6 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::It's good, go for it. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:32, 6 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::Much better and easier to read. Looks good. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:50, 6 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Just noticed the change, I like it. --[[User:Calidore Chase|Calidore Chase]] 02:37, 8 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== New D&D DM help page ==<br />
<br />
Yeah sorry if Im posting this in the wrong place, but I'd like to propose an Idea: My Idea is to put up an editable space in the site where more seasoned DM's could post some useful tricks of the trade which they think newer DM's might be able to use. just an idea {{unsigned|Tjaden|2007-01-15, 18:00:03}}<br />
<br />
: Right now the place for that kind of material is [[DnD Other|Other]]. &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 17:09, 15 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Thats correct, other is the place for such a thing. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:37, 15 January 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Open Game License Content? ==<br />
<br />
There's lots of open game license content out there we could host. Should we integrate it? How do we want to integrate it? Do we want an Open Game License (OGL) namespace? Do we want namespaces for each source? What's the best practice? --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 12:47, 10 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:For the moment just add it like normal with the correct templates and a locked page. OGL content is treated as normal content that cannot be edited except for formatting. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:05, 10 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I like the idea of an OGL namespace, although I'm not sure I could articulate why. --[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] 07:59, 16 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I could. OGC from marketed products have a different weight (for lack of a better term) to them than, the user contributions. This is partly because we like to think that said products have gone though several review process and have been play-tested (whether or not this is actually the case). Because of this, people will tend to favor them over other material (except for possibly their own). Personally, I was thinking instead of having a OGL namespace, have one namespace for each publisher that produces d20 and d20M OGC (e.g. WotC, WW (White Wolf), MG (Mongoose), GR (Green Ronin), SP (Sovern Press), etc...). And all the OGC they've published would go under their respective namespaces (except, of course, for the SRD and the MSRD which already have their own namespaces). &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 15:55, 16 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Hm... For now I say keep it as normal namespace, we can change it later once namespace probems are fixed (maybe change the namespace - I am not sure yet). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:32, 16 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Other => Discussion & Guidelines ==<br />
<br />
"Other" in this context sounds like game mechanics that are not classes, feats, etc., and hence not central to the game. The subtext makes it sound like you'd never want to look there unless you're having trouble sleeping. It's a rare newbie who would bother.<br />
<br />
In practice, most of the [[DnD Other|Other]] contents are discussion or guidelines for development -- exactly what newbies need to read. How about splitting it into three sections:<br />
* Guidelines : guidelines for content creation<br />
* Discussion : general discussion on various topics<br />
* Variant Rules : homebrew content not covered by the other headings (move to [[DnD Rules|existing section]])<br />
<br />
Some additional hierarchy might also be helpful. Something like:<br />
<br />
: '''For Players'''<br />
<br />
:* Content<br />
:** Classes<br />
:** Equipment<br />
:** Feats/Flaws<br />
:** Races<br />
:** Spells/Powers<br />
:* Guidelines<br />
:* Discussion<br />
:* Examples<br />
:** Character Optimizations<br />
<br />
: '''For DMs'''<br />
<br />
:* ...<br />
<br />
What do you think? --[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] 08:25, 16 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:That would more closely match the SRD. In general, good observations. Make a full mockup of it. The more complete, the better. When we agree, we'll implement the new landing page directly off the mockup.--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 09:37, 16 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:: Hmm... How about this? --[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] 10:35, 16 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"<br />
|- style="vertical-align: top;"<br />
|<br />
'''<big>For Players</big>'''<br />
<br />
* Content<br />
** [[DnD Classes|Classes]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Base, Prestige, Racial Paragon, and NPC</div><br />
** [[DnD Equipment|Equipment]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Weapons, armor, food & drink, vehicles, magic items, etc...</div><br />
** [[DnD Feats|Feats and Flaws]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">General, Epic, Divine, Racial, etc...</div><br />
** [[DnD Races|Races]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Dragons, giants, aberrations, oh my!</div><br />
** [[DnD Spells/Powers|Spells/Powers]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">0&ndash;9th and Epic</div><br />
* Resources<br />
** [[DnD Guidelines|Guidelines]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Helpful guidelines for creating wiki content</div><br />
** [[DnD Discussion|Discussion]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">General discussion on various topics</div><br />
** [[DnD Optimized Character Builds|Optimized Character Designs]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Anything you can do, I can do better</div><br />
<br />
| style="padding-left: 1em;" |<br />
'''<big>For DMs</big>'''<br />
<br />
* [[DnD Campaign Settings|Campaign Settings]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Worlds and options</div><br />
* [[DnD Creatures|Creatures]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Monsters and templates</div><br />
* [[DnD Deities|Deities]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Phenomenal cosmic power!</div><br />
* [[DnD NPCs|NPCs]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Good Guys, Bad Guys, and Ugly Guys</div><br />
* [[DnD Quests|Quests]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Where do you want to go today?</div><br />
* [[DnD Rules|Variant Rules]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Marching to the beat of a different drummer</div><br />
|}<br />
<br />
:: Note that I ordered the resources topically rather than alphabetically. I'm not wedded to that change. I also lowercased the subtexts; ditto. Oh, yeah, and I renamed Character Optimizations to something a newbie could understand. (I thought it meant something totally different when I first saw it.) --[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] 10:35, 16 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Well, if we're going to have it mirror the way the SRD is organized:<br />
<br />
:::{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="column"<br />
|-<br />
|<br />
; <big>For Players</big><br />
* [[DnD Classes|Classes]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Base, Prestige, Racial Paragon, and NPC</div><br />
* [[DnD Equipment|Equipment]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Weapons, armor, food & drink, vehicles, magic items, etc...</div><br />
* [[DnD Feats|Feats and Flaws]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">General, Epic, Divine, Racial, etc...</div><br />
* [[DnD Races|Races]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Dragons, giants, aberrations, oh my!</div><br />
* [[DnD Spells/Powers|Spells/Powers]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">0&ndash;9th and Epic</div><br />
|<br />
; <big>For DMs</big><br />
* [[DnD Campaign Settings|Campaign Settings]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Worlds and options</div><br />
* [[DnD Creatures|Creatures]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Monsters and templates</div><br />
* [[DnD Deities|Deities]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Phenomenal cosmic power!</div><br />
* [[DnD NPCs|NPCs]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Good Guys, Bad Guys, and Ugly Guys</div><br />
* [[DnD Quests|Quests]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Where do you want to go today?</div><br />
|<br />
; <big>General</big><br />
<br />
* [[DnD Guidelines|Guidelines]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Helpful guidelines for creating wiki content</div><br />
* [[DnD Discussion|Discussion]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">General discussions on various topics</div><br />
* [[DnD Optimized Character Builds|Optimized Character Designs]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Anything you can do, I can do better</div><br />
* [[DnD Rules|Rules]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Supplemental and Variant Rules.</div><br />
* [[To-Do List]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">Pick up the drycleaning. Walk my taxes. File the dog.</div><br />
|}<br />
<br />
:::&mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 15:25, 16 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::: Fine by me. Ah, I just figured out what you're [[SRD:System_Reference_Document|comparing with]]. --[[User:Cuthalion|Cúthalion]] 20:19, 16 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::: I like Sledged's suggestions. My only complaint is regarding the naming of "Variant Rules." The name implies that any rules in the category have an analog that they have revised or reworked in some way. In many cases, the material here is actually additional or supplemental rules rather than just variant ones. Could we name the section something more inviting to rules additions? A great example of what I mean is [[Evil Weather (DnD Other)]]. This is not a variant of any existing rules, per se; rather, in is an addition and supplement to the existing rules that provides rules for situations and possibilities currently not adjudicated by the SRD rule set. I propose a title like "Supplementary Rules" to address this (admittedly linguistic and semantic) problem. --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 02:29, 17 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::: How about now? &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:42, 17 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::I think that "Rules" should cover all rule articles. Subtitle that "New and Variant Rules". Under that you can have new rules, variant rules, commentary on rules, etc. With the current split, I see confusion about which category a rules article belongs under. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 11:52, 18 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I like the suggestion: <br />
<br />
::::::::* [[DnD Rules|Rules]]<div style="font-size: smaller; margin-left: 2em;">New, Supplemental, and Variant Rules</div><br />
<br />
::::::::--[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:38, 20 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Also, I would like to see the "For Players" being first, then the "For DM's" and last (far right) being "General". I see content being more important than the general material, what do you think? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:27, 26 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::It looks good with the general on the right. &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 15:40, 27 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::What do you guys think of a TODO link being present in the "general" category? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:35, 27 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::: I think it's fine there, but I hate how it's cap-locked. Is there any reason why it does not read "To-Do List"? In any case, it is good to have somewhere, and it would fit best either there (in the menu) or perhaps in the discussion section (i.e. as a user-created, dynamic list of jobs to be done around the wiki). &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 15:14, 28 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::"''Do the dog.''" It's funny (in context with the "''Walk the taxes''"), but maybe not the best choice for the main Dungeons and Dragons page. Other than that I think it is ready to be made then implemented. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:41, 28 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::::Agreed. We should either change it to "prepare the dog" or ex it entirely. &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 01:09, 1 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::::Alright, now it's just time to make the pages... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:07, 3 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::::::And move everything from [[DnD Other]] to more appropriate pages (and/or assign them to more applicable categories). &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:43, 8 March 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::::::Sledged, would you mind dealing with [[DnD Guidelines|Guidelines]] as you have the most knowledge in this area? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 12:02, 23 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::::::::Done. All guidelines (or my best estimation of what are guidelines) are now [[DnD Guidelines|Guidelines]]. &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 14:29, 25 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::::::::Thank you ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:03, 25 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::::::::::New landing page is on &mdash; I hope it is better. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:41, 8 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
Question: How do we want the layout of [[DnD Rules]] to look? Also, which rules will be labeled as variant and which will be labeled as supplemental? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:15, 11 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I don't think it will really matter. Let's just call them all PAGENAME (DnD Rule). It should be obvious which are new and which are variants, I think... &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 16:04, 12 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Hm... See, I was thinking it might be nice to separate DnD Rules into two separate columns; one for variant rules and the other for supplement rules. However, all the categories would need to be changed etc. Also, I agree that (DnD Rule) should be the identifier. What do you think? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:49, 12 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::When implementing the new page, can you add a category for Web resources somewhere? There's lots of good tools out there on the web related to D&D.--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 07:32, 21 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Let's have it be PAGENAME (DnD Rule), and then use categories: <nowiki>[[Category:Variant Rule]]</nowiki> and <nowiki>[[Category:Supplemental Rule]]</nowiki>. And, as Doug mentioned, we should have <nowiki>[[Category:Web Resource]]</nowiki>. Using the categories we can split the list in two like you (and I) prefer, but still can have all the page names followed by simply (DnD Rule). &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]]<br />
<br />
:::::Okay, if we are going to include Web Recourses in [[DnD Rules]] than should we have three columns, one for Supplement Rules, another for Variant Rules, and a final one for Web Resources? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:31, 27 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Actually, the place for Web Resources is probably under Guidelines, since it would largely help in "creating [and balancing] wiki content." I would think that Rules should probably just have the two columns... what does everyone else think? &mdash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 19:30, 27 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::I agree now. Makes sense. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:36, 27 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Baby ==<br />
<br />
You thought that the SRD project was big? Welcome Joy Elizabeth. 7 lbs, 7 oz (encumbrance 15 lbs, as this includes lots of other baby equipment). 21.5" long. "Class is Baby 1." Her first level feat is "Fatigue Adults" and she's chosen the spell ''eagle's spleandor.'' {{Unsigned|Dmilewski|22:20, 26 February 2007 (MST)}}<br />
<br />
: Congrats and welcome to parenthood! What class&mdash;er... that is, how much did she weigh and how long was she? &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 21:44, 26 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Congratulations to you and your wife, I am glad all went well. I hope you look forward to your wiki-break, and I hope you like being a father. Congratulations. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:00, 26 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Wait until I post the baby class for April Fools. With two months of paternity leave saved up, I'll be relaxing. (Supporting a wife and baby is far easier than supporting 350 users and computers. You might say "supporting babies is hard", but it's no harder than supporting yet another system with no documentation. :P--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 08:13, 27 February 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Web Resources ==<br />
<br />
Where should we put links for Web Resources? Any suggestions? There's some cool stuff out that that we should link to. And are we ever going to the DnD Landing Page???--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 18:22, 20 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Did you post this? For some reason it does not sound like you, hm... Anyway, we are "currently working" on the new D&D landing page - see above. If you want to help &mdash; ''please do''! Also, what kind of "Web Resources" are you talking about? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:08, 20 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Yeah, it's me. I was thinking of things like: PCGen, Map Generators, Encounter Generators, Random Dungeon generators, character sheets, ENWorld, etc. There's lots and lots of good d20 material out there. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 07:30, 21 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Hm... Possibly reference them below the last result in [[DnD Other]]? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:39, 21 March 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
==Traps?==<br />
<br />
Just found this site through the roleplaying tips newsletter. Looks interesting, but we need more content I think. I made a contribution to the deities section with Sarem. Where might I put an entry on some simple traps? I can't see a good place to put them. {{unsigned|194.75.238.137|2007-04-26 05:51:43}}<br />
<br />
:For now put them under equipment. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 07:27, 26 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I just made spaces for them on D&D Wiki. See [[User Mundane Traps]], [[User Magical Traps]], and [[User Epic Traps]] all accessible via [[DnD Equipment]]. Hope this helps. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:09, 26 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Ok. Equipment looked the most appropriate, but is under 'for players', so doesn't quite fit. But it'll do for now. Thanks. I should get an account... o_0 {{unsigned|194.75.238.138|03:20, 27 April 2007 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
::::Sure, I'd recommend it. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 21:47, 29 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Anyway, I agree, traps are not for players. Also, many things in [[DnD Equipment|Equipment]] is not meant for players to buy, but to get from the DM &mdash; like artifacts. So, what do you think about the idea of making [[DnD Equipment|Equipment]] under both "For Players" and "For DM's"? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:03, 30 April 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::I fear that would cause confusion; it is possible that some might think there are two equipment pages, one with items for players and the other with items for dms. I think it works under "For Players;" there is always going to be some overlap between many of the categories. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 02:04, 1 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Also, hopefully, any DM who uses this site will not just use and look at content from the "For DM's". I think it will work as DM's normally care more than players and therefor should browse the site more, looking for what they want. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 20:32, 1 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::: Agreed. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 00:15, 2 May 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== monk fighting styles ==<br />
<br />
I have a collection of monk fighting styles ([http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=718455 WotC Forum thread]) that I want to move here. Am I right that there is no template for that, yet? Can somebody guide me through the steps for making such a template? --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 12:11, 11 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:No template or preload for it yet. Before you try to add them, get permission from the author(s) first. We try to have a strict policy on that. While you're waiting for responses from the authors, the OCG from the UA is currently being transcribed onto the wiki [[Unearthed Arcana (DnD OGC Transcript)|here]]. If you add the text for the fighting styles, I'll figure out the mark-up, template, and preload. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 12:26, 11 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Okay, let me ask for permission...<br />
::<makes mouth shaped puppets with both hands><br />
::Left hand: Hey mkill, can I add your monk fighting styles to D&D Wiki?<br />
::Right hand: Mhh, okay, before they get pruned...<br />
::Left hand: Thanks, man!<br />
::<starts typing again><br />
::SCNR :P --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 12:39, 11 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Ok, I created [[Heavenly Sword (DnD Monk Fighting Style)]] as an example. More to come and thank you for the offer to make a template! --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 12:52, 11 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Didn't need a template, but I did put together a <span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:DnD Monk Fighting Style Preload|action=edit}} preload]</span> for it. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 08:27, 12 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Great. I just checked, the monk fighting styles were introduced in Unearthed Arcana (p.52) under OGL, so we could put the original SRD ones here, too. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 09:10, 12 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Categories for spells by level ==<br />
<br />
I felt it would be good to have spells collected in categories by level, so I created more categories following the model of the existing [[:Category:0-level]]. But then I realised this can't quite be the solution. First of all, it is not clear what is meant by 0-level, after all, besides spell levels, there is also psionic power levels, character levels, dungeon levels etc. etc. But even a category like [[:Category:1st level spell]] has the problem that different spells can be different level for different character classes (which I think is a D&D game design flaw but that's the way it is).<br />
<br />
So, to make it short, the only solution I see is to create small categories like [[:Category:1st level wizard spell]]. Is that okay with everyone here? I'm not sure about the category philosophy of this wiki. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 07:47, 13 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I've wrestled with that question. In short, you've got a mess. If you really want to categorize, I suggest [[:Category:Sorcerer/Wizard Spell 1]], [[:Category:Cleric Spell 2]], etc. This way, you use something closer to WotC notation and the spells get grouped by their caster type. Note that there are a few rare spells that are wizard, but not sorcerer. The categories themselves should get categorized to their specific class spell category.--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 07:59, 13 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::I am the one that started some of those categories and also saw the problem, so I stopped. I would have to agree with Dmilewski on the category names. Also, overall, I think it would be a good idea to categorize them, even if the categories may seem a little silly. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 10:35, 13 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::I started to organize the spells by spell level. I've started with the SRD and finished letter A.<br />
:::Format for a Sor/Wiz 1 spell: [[:Category:Level 1 Spell]] and [[:Category:Sorcerer/Wizard 1]]. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 03:35, 23 July 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Thanks. Good slogging. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 06:57, 23 July 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Feat categories Music / Song and Magic / Magical ==<br />
<br />
Discussion moved: [[Talk:DnD Feats#Feat categories Music / Song and Magic / Magical]].<br />
<br />
== Dungeon and Dragon magizines ==<br />
<br />
did you guys hear that WotC decided to stop making them? --[[User:Shadethedemon|Shadethedemon]] 21:45, 17 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Yep. It's sad to see friends go. It will be good to see new friends show up. I've thought about this. Only those who bought Dragon or Dungeon got those magazine. Now, when you get their service, you get access to everything published by the service. When errata shows up or a problem needs to get fixed in an article, the source file can be changed. The longer the site remains open, the more content it contains, and the more the site has to offer. I find those compelling ideas. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 05:24, 18 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::It might be really cool to post a quick synopsis about content that is found solely in these mags, or in resources which utilize them (like Draconomicon, Dragon Compendium Vol. 1, etc.), in much the same manner as I was describing summarizing Wizards D&D publications on their own pages on [[Talk:Master List Project (DnD Other)]]... -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 03:50, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Cheesy Goodness ==<br />
<br />
Ok, I assume this is the best place to put this up. If it isn't feel free to place it accordingly.<br />
<br />
My Gundam RPG game has been put under a temporary hiatus do to us transfering over to another server and finishing up the old version. So, to pass the time, the admin and myself decided to throw a big D&D tourney.<br />
<br />
The catch is that you have to build the Cheesiest character concept you can think of and duke it out with other players. Plus, you have to deal with some people with a sick, twisted imagination. Nothing will be what it seems.<br />
<br />
All the character creation rules as well as how the tournament rankings are located [http://server5.vistapages.com/~thevcom/msgwar/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=31877&sid=7bc19991e3456f71e6c6f8b55218428f#31877| right here]<br />
<br />
If you wish to join, let me know right here. At the moment, registration is down on my forums and this would be the best way to let me know. -- [[User:Flession|Flession]] 07:59, 28 June 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Templates with (Creature) in the title ==<br />
<br />
I just noticed that most (all?) of the Templates from the SRD have titles like [[SRD:Half-Fiend (Creature)]], when it should be [[SRD:Half-Fiend (Template)]]. I mean, what's the use of those bracket explanations when they're wrong. Does anybody mind if I change this? --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 06:06, 18 July 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:I completely endorse the change (not that my endorsement means much). I had noted that before and forgot to make a mention of it. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 07:07, 18 July 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::Good catch. Thanks. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 08:22, 18 July 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Help wanted: Sorting all spells by class and level ==<br />
<br />
Some may have already noticed, I created new categories in the Format <nowiki>[[Category:<Class> <Level>]]</nowiki> to make finding the right spell easier. I have also finished recategorizing [[SRD:Spells|all spells in the SRD]] .<br />
<br />
Now I need your help: We need to sort out all user-created spells, and while we are at it, all psionic powers too. This is just too much for one user, so it would be great if you participate.<br />
<br />
Simply open [[:Category:Spell]], choose a letter you like and start recategorizing all spells there. It's pretty easy, just check whether there are already categories with the class name, and add a space and the spell level to it. For example, A level 1 Bard spell should be categorized as <nowiki>[[Category:Bard 1]]</nowiki>. Sorcerers and Wizards would use <nowiki>[[Category:Sorcerer/Wizard 1]]</nowiki>.<br />
<br />
If you managed to complete letter, leave a note here.<br />
<br />
Thank you! --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 06:25, 2 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:The place to say this is in the [[To-Do List]], not here. This is for discussions on D&D and this site, not a place for getting help. Sorry. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 06:58, 2 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::It's a talk page. I used it for D&D-related talk. Calm down, please. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 07:46, 2 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::No problem, I just wanted to make sure that you knew about our [[To-Do List]] (I imagined you did, and I am sure you do (even before I said that I bet you knew about it...)) ''':P'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 08:14, 2 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::Well, I found it after I was here for a week, good that somebody now made it possible to go there from the main page. --[[User:Mkill|Mkill]] 06:43, 12 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::You mean [[Dungeons and Dragons]], right? Also, I am pretty sure that that link has been on [[Dungeons and Dragons]] as long as you have been here, however I may have to check history on that one... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 13:58, 12 August 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== Links ==<br />
<br />
I propose [[Links (DnD Other)]] be promoted up to the DnD Home page. Any comments? --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 10:12, 17 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:Hm... Were you thinking of adding as part of "General" or as a DM resource? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:30, 17 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::General. There's lots of good stuff out there that we could advertise better. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 18:36, 17 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::I guess... I am not really for advertising other sites from D&D Wiki, but whatever. It will help people find what they are looking for. Add it to general. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:46, 17 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::There are lots of sites that do things that D&D Wiki doesn't do. For example, we don't do 1st Edition, but there are folks who've rewritten it to GNU OpenDoc. We also don't do character generators, but we want folks to know where to find them. That, and there's all these resources that I don't know about, and I want other people to find them for me. I only stumbled on the 1E rewrite by accident!--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 07:13, 21 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::I see. I guess it is not that bad of an idea, it does have some use (the only thing I am worried about is people wanting us to advertise their creations in a non-wiki style (for example a PDF) but I guess we can just refuse them...). --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:10, 23 September 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
==Treasure==<br />
<br />
Perhaps it would be usefull to have a section for treasure on this page. There are many good home brew ideas out there. Pluss I have a list of links to wikipedia that discribes the varios gems in the DMG. It is very usefull to be able to discribe the gem beond its gold value. For example: What the hell is Rhodochrosite? well look how pretty it is... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodochrosite {{Unsigned|Mander|11:18, 8 October 2007 (MDT)}}<br />
<br />
:Ooh, shiny! Me want! --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 12:26, 8 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::You write it. We'll argue about where it goes. Just do it! --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 18:53, 8 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::Hm... Thinking ahead... [[DnD Equipment]] may actually be the very place for treasure... ideas? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:03, 9 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::sounds good to me --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 01:42, 23 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
:::::actualy now that I look at it more closly, that is exactly where it should be. There is no doubt. --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 01:46, 23 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
::::::Now it just needs to be made... ''':)'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 22:45, 24 October 2007 (MDT)<br />
<br />
== A Question: Sunder ==<br />
<br />
:''Discussion moved to [[Discussion:Can you critical on a sunder attack?]] as this is an improper place for a question <small>&ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 01:50, 11 October 2007 (MDT)</small>''<br />
<br />
== Invocations ==<br />
<br />
:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:DnD Spells/Powers#Invocations]] as it referred to spells/powers specificially. <small>--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:10, 30 October 2007 (MDT)</small>''<br />
<br />
== Groups ==<br />
<br />
I think it would be helpful for local and online groups to be able to form on the wikipages, so that members can find groups in their region who are also interested in D&D and related hobbies. I submit the [[Wiki Fiction Roleplayers Guild (DnD Other)|WFR]] RPG, Gaming, and Creative Writing Guild as an example. I personally invite all D&Dwiki.com members to join, as I have seen immense amounts of talent here. Secondly, because of my own initiatives to make the group stronger and more prominent, I would like to enable both online and physical presence in strong wikis like this and in Elftown.com. Currently, the WFR is hosted in the 'Other' section. This kind of makes me have an icky taste in the back of my mouth, however. The WFR Guild hosts some of the brightest, most creative and best networked international amateur members on the web, and I would like to extend this capacity to those wonderful and talented people here as well.<br />
<br />
The WFR, when considered a part of this potential new section, will be hosting groups locally in both Baton Rouge, LA, USA, and in the Mid-Michigan, USA, areas, as well as being a fully online presence, based out of Elftown, and given status here as an official Guild of D&D Wiki.<br />
Please, thank you, and feel welcome in my Guild, friends. We will consider it your Guild too.<br />
I personally focus on D&D as a gaming medium, but the WFR welcomes any creative talent in the fiction genre(s). -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 16:57, 4 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:First off, what are you recommending? Do you want D&D Wiki to make a separate section for [[Wiki Fiction Roleplayers Guild (DnD Other)|WFR]]? Not trying to be rude, but why? Also, why do you feel that [[DnD Other]] is not the place for the [[Wiki Fiction Roleplayers Guild (DnD Other)|WFR]]? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:18, 11 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Well, my original section title for the WFR was (DnD Group), which was changed to fit into the other category. This doesn't bother me too badly, but it might be nice to give people a place to post information about groups, so that they can begin networking with others who might also be in their area. Groups are important to gaming, so I figured it would be a good idea. Either way, the WFR's information is posted, and will most likely stay that way, so it is no biggie. I just wonder if it may inspire others to begin posting information about their own local groups and networks. I know the RPGA helps with this a little bit, but even that can be a bit tedious sometimes. DnD Other is fine for now, but is others begin stating an interest in joining or creating groups, could it potentially be reconsidered? Otherwise, I am openly welcoming any contributing member of D&D Wiki to join, regardless. Sorry to be a bother on this topic, but since details will finish being ironed out soon, I assure you that I will not be this big of a pusher in the future. -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 19:59, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Character pages ==<br />
<br />
Why do we not have a section for people to post their characters to the wiki? Is there not already a template for this? Should I make one? -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 03:54, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:If you talking about the d20 stats and descriptions for characters, [[DnD NPCs]] is the place for them. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 09:31, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::This is helpful. I can see that it has some form of template. How could I doctor this to include [[:Category:Inath Variant Rule|Inath]] stats, and are there limitations on posting such content about a character as history, personality, etc.? -- [[user:xidoraven|xido]] 14:23, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::: I don't know enough about the [[:Category:Inath Variant Rule|Inath]] stats to say "yes" or "no." What are the bigger differences between them and the core rules? —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 11:52, 12 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::: [[:Category:Inath Variant Rule|Inath]] adds a few elements, such as Ego and Spirit Rolls, new Craft Skills, Knowledge (Inath - Energy Paths), Talents, Affinities, and a differing system for naming level/caste. I am sure I could doctor up a selection of edits to make a template for this need, but I am also wondering if even a non-[[:Category:Inath Variant Rule|Inath]] character is allowed to have such things on their info page as history, personality, connections, etc. I did not immediately see this information on any of the NPC pages (which is nice to know that we have those), but I only skimmed quickly while I was doing a few other things as well. I appreciate the input and help. -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 20:03, 14 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::: Well, as far as history, personality, connections, etc, that stuff wouldn't go in the [[Template:Stat Block 2|stat block template]] unless there's game rule info that goes with them (i.e. bonuses, penalties, weaknesses, etc...). General character descriptions like that appear under the stat block. (See [[Namfoodle (DnD NPC)|Namfoodle]] for an example.) WotC designed the stat block so that game info pertaining to encounters and combat is readily available to make game play move faster and to keep DMs from overlooking certain abilities that might be relevant to the encounter. —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 13:02, 15 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::: That is extremely helpful. I will try to put together a synopsis of additions that would need to be added to any given Inath Character, and I asked about the personality/history/etc, because I have a few Inath NPCs that have extensive histories and info about them to add.<br />
<br />
:::::: I appreciate the help, ya'll. -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 00:09, 16 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Gaming Environment on D&D Wiki ==<br />
<br />
Also, the [[Wiki Fiction Roleplayers Guild (DnD Other)|WFR]] requires a minimum amount of information, even for a free-form, non-statistic-driven gaming environment. Could their be something like this for the wiki alone?<br />
<br />
Am I totally off kilter here? -- [[User:Xidoraven|xido]] 03:54, 6 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
== New Section: Maps? ==<br />
[[Image:Cяow Castle.jpg|thumb|Cяow Castle]]<br />
<br />
Here is an idea. Perhaps a section in Homebrew for maps. I have pages and pages of great maps that I will never be able to use again. They need a little clean up to make them readable and understandable without explanation, but I would LOVE to share them. I would scan them and load them as image files.--[[User:Mander|Mander]] 19:15, 30 November 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I think it's a great idea. Having maps is often very useful. What sorts of maps are you interested in adding? I ask to try to determine if a map section is necessary and (if so) where it should be placed. If the maps are coming in with not much supporting information, we could just make a random maps vault. On the other hand, dungeons maps can easily fit into the "adventures" section and overland maps into "campaign settings." What does everyone else think? A general map category or inclusion/sub-categorization within adventures and CSs? &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 17:36, 1 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Why not put them in Environments? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 10:23, 3 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::The maps that I was going to use are right out of my DM notebook. I was planing on cleaning them up a bit so they are easyer to understand, giving them a map key, and then scaning them into an image file. I would probably add a little text to give it a descrition, background, and context. If some one has a better idea on how to do this that would be great.<br />
<br />
:::I have all sorts of good maps: ruins, caves, mines, sewer hideouts, forest ambushes, shrines, crypts, taverns, towers... all sorts of goodies. --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 19:48, 3 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Maps are always a good thing to have. Even without descriptions of areas, having a map layout handy is nice when you have an unexpected encounter and you need a setting for it. As far as where to put them, if they are a fully described map with encounters and such, I think they should be under "adventures". If they are just a map, perhaps we should add a "map vault" (or whatever). I'm not sure that overland maps would be in "campaign settings". I think the "campaign settings" is more appropriate for descriptions of worlds and/or regions with emphasis on the specifics of the inhabitants and geographic/demographic traits of the area. If it is just a map of an overland area, it would fit more into "adventures" or just "random maps" in my opinion. --[[User:Skwyd|Skwyd]] 10:47, 4 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::Also, when some one is adding their campain setting, they could always include links to the maps that are relevant. This is another reason why maps wouldnt need to be in "campaign settings." For example, if you have a very magical treasure, that is vital to your campain, it would be listed in the treasure section, and you would provide a link during your campaign description.--[[User:Mander|Mander]] 12:33, 4 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::Actualy, I think I would rather just see a section called Maps, under "For DMs" on the Homebrew section.--[[User:Mander|Mander]] 13:13, 4 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::You can see my example off to the right. --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 13:32, 4 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::: I think I also agree that a general "Map Vault" tab is the best option. Just to clarify, I was suggesting that overland maps could be placed in a subcategory with the CS just for the aforementioned purposes of linking to by developing CSes. For the time being, go ahead and continue to upload the maps to media.dandwiki. Once we decide the best course of action we can easily stick them onto the DnD Splash Page. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 21:41, 4 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::Honestly, how useful do you guys think a section just for maps would be? Wouldn't it be more helpful to just write a little quest that uses the map and add the map to that page? That would basically provide a background for the map, the map itself, and something for the DM to use right away all-in-one. I mean, what I am getting at, is that do you guys think that Maps need their own area or can just be integrated into [[DnD Quests|Quests]]? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:36, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::: I don't think that is the best course of action. Quests really need more though out background, including plot information and NPCs. Really, a quest that is merely a dungeon-dive without any background, plot, character development, etc. is pretty weak and is usually not tremendously fun to play through (including quests whose entire depth is "kill x number of y enemy", etc. If we wanted that we would play WoW). I think there is a lot of benefit to having just random maps that people can use for various purposes (and it could be fun to bring the wiki together in that way, as people link the maps to all sorts of different purposes). Besides, sometimes I like to just design maps/locations and see what people will do with them. And, in the end, I'd rather not see the quests section glutted with the sort of shallow adventures that arise from a "little quest." The best quests, as I mentioned, have somewhat detailed plots (or at least persuasive backgrounds). So, I'd prefer a sort of Map Vault (though, of course, people should be encouraged to still add maps to the quests section and also to freely link to the maps, including building quests around them if they prefer). What does everyone else think? &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 19:40, 5 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::I think a map vault would be good. This can include generic maps such as bridges, taverns, basements, towers, etc. This is a good, basic resource. Right now, the wiki is weak on adventure content. We have lots of campaign settings, but few, if any, actual adventures. This would be a step to ramping up that infrastructure.--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 05:54, 6 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::I often day dream about finding a databank of D&D maps that I could use for whatever I wanted. Sorta like the NPC section, I just look through it and then come across something realy sweet. I add the context to make it fit. Do you ever wish you had a lay out for a tavern that wasnt the same old tavern you always draw? Ever wish you could just whip out a simple tower strong hold? Or maybe you arnt sure what you are looking for, but just need some ideas? Just like the NPC section, and the Treasure section, I see the Map section as a depot of random ideas that can be fit into a campain as needed.<br />
::::::::::::PS, this conversation has been indented 12 times! its getting out of hand. Soon it will be one word wide. --[[User:Mander|Mander]] 15:08, 6 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::First off, 13 indents is the number after which it goes back to one (so if someone replies to this comment...). Anyway, a "Maps" section has been added, tell me if that was what you guys had in mind. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 17:05, 6 December 2007 (MST)<br />
<br />
''&rarr;Reverted Indentation to One Colon''<br />
<br />
:Okay, I've totally revised the maps section and have added '''all''' the maps currently in the Media Repository/DnD Wiki to the page(s). Let me know what you guys think. How does it look? EDIT: Whoops, forgot to sign the other day. Here it is: &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 17:54, 10 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
== New Addition to Template:Author ==<br />
<br />
{{author<br />
|author_name=Sledged<br />
|display_name=Joel<br />
|date_created=Next Sunday A.D.<br />
|status=meh...<br />
|editing=Do your worst<br />
}}<br />
<br />
It seems like a good idea to clarify whether the author cares if their homebrew stuff is "edited mercilessly". I propose that we add something like this:<br />
<br />
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="toccolours" style=""<br />
|+ Created By<br />
|-<br />
! colspan="2" class="user" | [[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] ([[User talk:Aarnott|talk]])<br />
|-<br />
! Editing:<br />
| Ask me first please!<br />
|-<br />
! Status:<br />
| In Progress...<br />
|}<br />
<br />
In order to avoid disputes on talk pages (See [[Talk:Pirate (DnD Class)]]). I think a default value that should always show up should be "Not specified" -- or something to that effect. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 12:59, 3 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I agree. Perhaps it would be good to add a template to the preloads that asks users to ask them first before editing? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 13:14, 3 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::[http://en.dcdatabaseproject.com/Shazam Shazam]!!! —[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] ([[User talk:Sledged|talk]]) 13:23, 3 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Since we now have a area that deals with editing rights should we have it default to something that promotes editing to help make all the content on D&D Wiki better or should we keep it how it is&mdash;defaulting to nothing? I am for making it default to something that promotes editing just so new users will feel more inclined to edit ''':P'''. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 19:26, 4 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Yes. Perhaps "Feel free to edit constructivly"? --[[User:Sam Kay|Sam Kay]] 09:31, 7 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I would also put a link to a new page that talks about editing etiquette. I think that would be helpful and user-friendly. --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 09:56, 7 January 2008 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I agree. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 13:29, 7 January 2008 (MST)</div>EldritchNumenhttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=MSRD_Talk:Starships&diff=198678MSRD Talk:Starships2008-01-10T02:49:16Z<p>EldritchNumen: added {{unsigned}}</p>
<hr />
<div>== Just so you know==<br />
The gravitic redirector would cause tremendous tidal forces, and time dilation on the ship. If its big enough to pull the ship, its big enough to pull it apart. And don't get me started on the radiation. {{unsigned|T G Geko|19:26, 9 January 2008}}<br />
<br />
:Yes, there are major scientific issues with the "future technology" in d20 Modern. That is why d20 Future is written as Galactic Fantasy rather than Hard Sci-fi: it makes no attempt to truly explain the future technology beyond mere descriptive generalizations. If it adhered to hard Sci-Fi, there would '''be''' no d20 Future. &ndash;[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 19:48, 9 January 2008 (MST)</div>EldritchNumen