https://www.dandwiki.com/w/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=LoneLobo&feedformat=atomD&D Wiki - User contributions [en]2024-03-28T09:26:44ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.35.8https://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User:LoneLobo&diff=61192User:LoneLobo2007-01-11T04:43:56Z<p>LoneLobo: </p>
<hr />
<div>LoneLobo</div>LoneLobohttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:Endhaven_(3.5e_Campaign_Setting)&diff=56095Talk:Endhaven (3.5e Campaign Setting)2006-12-22T16:52:42Z<p>LoneLobo: /* Using the Wikiworld Campaign Setting */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Wow. ==<br />
<br />
Wow, I hope this goes somewhere! I like the idea, and when/if I make a world I will put it here. Once again, good idea.<br />
<br />
--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:24, 9 April 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Getting in Touch ==<br />
I had someone drop me a line here, and they asked me to get ahold of them on myspace. I do not have an account there, nor will I be getting one. But, I have now added my wiki contact info to the wikiworlds so that folks CAN get ahold of me. <br />
<br />
I have greatly expanded the rules on planes. This has been fun. <br />
--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 12:01, 11 April 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
==Using the Wikiworld Campaign Setting==<br />
<br />
I'd like to know how many people are actively using this campaign setting in campaigns or adventures they're running currently AND/OR are planning on running soon. Does anyone have a rough estimate, or perhaps just respond to this post if you are running a game using this campaign setting. See, I've got an idea that will help this project, but it will require collaborative efforts of many Dungeon Masters. I'll go into more detail if people show interest. <br />
--[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 08:04, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I don't use this... sorry. However, I am sure that many anonomous users are.. Why exactly do you want to know? Also, I would run your idea by [[User:Dmilewski |Dmilewski]], an admin who used to run the wikiworld (BTW, I alerted him to this page..). Thanks. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 08:55, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Definitely best to talk to me. I really don't know if anyone is using Wikiworld at all. (I have a kid coming along, so I've not even been able to start the Wikiworld development campaign.) I'm mostly developing Wikiworld as a long-term project to create a world that uses what's on the wiki itself. <br />
<br />
::If you want to contribute, by all means, pitch you idea. Give me the index version of your idea (3-6 sentences), and we'll go from there. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 09:14, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::My idea isn't really fully developed at this point; I was going to base further development of it based on how Wikiworld is currently being used, but, if it isn't really being used, I'm not sure how that will affect things. Basically, just, when I first began reading about Wikiworld, I first thought that it would be a great long-term goal to ''not only'' allow the campaign setting to be altered by Wiki editors (in the traditional spirit of Wiki), but also suggest that Dungeon Masters who are using the campaign setting to reflect on the Wiki any significant changes to the world that may have been caused by players in the game(s) they are running in the campaign setting (in a similar style to how the storyline of the CCG ''Legend of the Five Rings'' is constantly affected by the outcome of the game's tournaments). So, if this was to be the case, (in addition to DMs using various planes in the setting for games, and creating new ones) I thought it would be a great idea to set up an adventure/campaign in Wikiworld that would be a collaborative effort between many DMs running games simultaneously. For example, what I had in mind would start out something like this: A spellcaster trying to travel between planes messes up '''big time''' and ends up getting sent to the wrong plane, and it's a plane that has never been discovered before. He starts recruiting people to help explore this new frontier, and start building settlements there. Sooner or later, each of the major political groups in Wikiworld hear about this new plane and they all want control, and each starts covertly making advances. The campaign would include lots of political unrest, leading to diplomatic missions and politically motivated quests, and eventually the Player Characters may have to choose sides. At the same time, lots of world-changing decisions would have to be made, which could have long-standing effects on Wikiworld. And all the while, on this new plane, settlements would have to be built slowly at first, only with the resources that the PCs have (and what they can convince NPCs from various other planes to contribute) -- common issues that would come up would include building Landing Points, Gateways, and marking paths for convenient interplanar travel, plus all of the usual difficulties involved with building new settlements in mostly unexplored regions. I'm sure the Feral Nation would start planning some raids too, as soon as these settlements started prospering. But anyway, sorry I didn't exactly stick to 3-6 sentences, but, I got out the words I needed to get out. --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 13:20, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Coordinating a single game is tough enough. Multiples? My head hurts. <br />
<br />
::::In my imagination, Wikiworld is a ''no canon'' world. That is to say, nothing about this world is set in stone, any adventures written in it can conflict with other adventures, and DM's are free to interpret the setting to fit their own needs. To that end, you are certainly welcome to develop a series of adventures based on your idea. They would represent one interpretation of the setting. <br />
<br />
::::If you need a McGuffin, I suggest an Adamantine Mine. You can use Broadford. I was discussing something like this with my wife. Basically, it's a frontier town that discovers adamantine. Most adamantine mines are exhausted or have poor yeilds. There's a whole lot of desire for adamantine. The Jura City dwarves want the mining rights and are willing to garrison thousands to control those rights. Likewise, the Traders want it, too. The local druids know that adamantine mining is environmentally terrible, and want nothing of it. The Feral Nation has no adamantine, and would want it. Other factions of the Border League may invade to take it. (The League does invade itself periodically.) All the while, you have a booming population, infrastructure that needs building, and power politics spinning out of control. <br />
<br />
::::The danger of this is that a new war of Law and Chaos could break out, and EVERYONE is afraid of a new war. That, in an of itself, is worth a campaign. <br />
<br />
::::I say go ahead and develop away. Let's see what comes of it. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 15:03, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I could develop it with no trouble. Just, a lot of the fun of the idea was that around the world, a few, or several, or many DMs could be running their own game sessions, with this same storyline, and then updating to the Wiki changes to the world that occur during their game sessions. <br />
<br />
:::::The reason why this is ideal is really for the long-term. For example, if you and I and a dozen other DMs are all DMing this story, and after a few months (in-game-time) it becomes apparent that there's going to inevitably be another war of Law and Chaos, the outcome would end up being determined by how the most players align themselves, throughout all of the different game groups that are going on, overall, and the Wiki is used to regulate, and for the DMs to collaborate. <br />
<br />
:::::Also, (and this is the reason why I don't think I'd want to use Broadford) if it is a newly discovered, unexplored, plane, each game group could be exploring and settling different parts of it. If you're DMing a game, you could have it that the PCs find an adamantine mine, and settle there; and at the same time, if I'm DMing a game, I could have it that the PCs find a silver mine, and settle there. Then, collaboratively on the Wiki, we could figure out how far spaced apart the two places are, and maybe even provide stats so the settlement can be visited in other game groups. <br />
<br />
:::::So yeah, I mean, I can design and run the campaign, but if I'm the only one running a group with it, it becomes just another campaign set in Wikiworld, not a massive collaborative effort, which was my original intention. --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 16:23, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I see your point. I also see the scale of the challenge. Have you ever run a LARP? I mean write it, run it, produce it. They are a great deal of work. I think that you could pull this idea off, but it would take work, dedication, and a much more mature game world than we have right now. We also need to account for game time, where one day can take a month of real time to resolve for one group, while another group rests for a month. What happens when two groups do the same thing in one week? How do you resolve plot contradictions? Who coordinates the DMs? How do you pace time? There's a big human logistical problem to be solved. It's quite a daunting one. That's the detail where the devil lives. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 17:21, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::It would be a large-scale project to start out with, but once it's set in its ways, it wouldn't be too difficult as long as all of the participating DMs were pulling their own weight with the necessary collaborative efforts. I have run LARPs in the past, but only on very small scales; I'm actually in the process of producing a very large-scale LARP right now, but with the amount of work I'm trying to put into it, and the amount of time I have available to work on it, it'll be years before it's finished. But anyway, I agree that pulling off this project would take a lot of work and dedication, and I think we've already got that covered. Turning Wikiworld into a much more mature game world, though, will take the most work, but it is easily enough done if we get several more people (preferably perhaps the same people who would be planning on running campaigns in collaboration with this project) to expand the world. I don't think time would be an issue, though; every party can move at their own pace; As long as each DM is updating the wiki with any significant changes that occur during their game sessions, it'll be easy for other DMs to adapt to the dynamic setting. Just, whenever a DM is running a game session in the setting, they should check the Wiki beforehand for updates. It could even be changeable at a real-time interval. Of course some groups would be faster-paced than others, but I think it would even out to a happy medium. Plot contradictions and two groups doing the same thing in one week would both have to be handled on a case-by-case basis. Most minor issues could just be ignored, and major issues would be discussed in the Wiki until a logical conclusion could be come to, and perhaps it would even end up spawning new storylines (ex. Your group of PCs and my group of PCs both defeat in combat the same specific one of the Liches on the Council of Skulls. On the talk page for the Wiki, we decide to solve the solution by allowing the rumors of the other party's success reach each other's parties, which leads both of the parties to realize that one of the foes was actually an imposter -- or both of them were and the real Lich councilor is in hiding somewhere. Which leaves it open for either/both parties to investigate the situation further, or ignore it and move on.). I don't think any one person would have to coordinate all of the DMs, as long as we have descriptive instructional Wiki pages on how DMs should handle certain things in the setting, and as long as all of the DMs are cooperating and collaborating appropriately (although conflicts are bound to arise, in which case it seems most appropriate for a D&D Wiki admin to regulate the conflict). --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 19:56, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I do see actual games as a driving force behind this world. I would adore it if folks expanded and developed the world as they expanded and developed their games. I want to run a tabletop for just that reason. Games drive development. That level of continual interdevelopment I can only hope to see. If this project does this, then I consider it a runaway success. Much of what you describe could be done in a journaling style. Posters post what their groups are doing into adventure journals, and the writers could decide what should be changed or expanded based on those journals. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 20:15, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::That's exactly what I had envisioned for this setting. I just don't know how we should get it started. We'll need at least a few different DMs running games to start out with, and I think it'll eventually snowball in popularity. Some of the main things that we'll need to figure out to start with are the statistics involved with building some of the things that are integral to settlements (including things integral to settlements in potentially dangerous areas, and structures to make planeshifting to this new plane easy). If you think it's worth it, I'll start working on the project, and in a day or two I'll post what I've got so far (it is the holiday season, though, so it may take some time). --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 20:39, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::I would be willing to DM a game inside the Wikiworld if this happens.. However, the PC's would start out as level 1 so they might not be able to change much in the entire world. Anyway, if you get this up and running with the Journals idea, I am in. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:06, 22 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Well, all of the PCs in all of the parties would start out at level 1, so it would obviously be a long time before there were any '''major''' advancements for the world, but, once we figure out all of the statistics for parties to build up settlements, and recruit NPCs to inhabit them, things like that would have long-standing effects on the world (other game groups building settlements slowly from the ground up will add to the options that DMs have for further plot advancement in their own sessions). --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 02:15, 22 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::Once again, I think this is an amazing idea, all we need now are more DMs... Possibly start a thread on Wizards? What would you recommend? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 09:40, 22 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::::Something like that. I was hoping more people here on the D&D Wiki would have chimed in to show interest, but your statistics seem to show that you've got plenty of viewers, but none of them are registering and contributing. Oh well, we'll change that sooner or later, with any luck. But anyway, I'll start working on the actual project like I had said and I'll hopefully have something to show for it in the next couple of days. And in the meanwhile, we'll all just have to come up with ways to attract more DMs. --[[User:130.245.212.103|130.245.212.103]] 09:51, 22 December 2006 (MST) '''Oops, I wasn't logged in. ''' --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 09:52, 22 December 2006 (MST)</div>LoneLobohttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:Endhaven_(3.5e_Campaign_Setting)&diff=56023Talk:Endhaven (3.5e Campaign Setting)2006-12-22T09:15:12Z<p>LoneLobo: /* Using the Wikiworld Campaign Setting */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Wow. ==<br />
<br />
Wow, I hope this goes somewhere! I like the idea, and when/if I make a world I will put it here. Once again, good idea.<br />
<br />
--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:24, 9 April 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Getting in Touch ==<br />
I had someone drop me a line here, and they asked me to get ahold of them on myspace. I do not have an account there, nor will I be getting one. But, I have now added my wiki contact info to the wikiworlds so that folks CAN get ahold of me. <br />
<br />
I have greatly expanded the rules on planes. This has been fun. <br />
--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 12:01, 11 April 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
==Using the Wikiworld Campaign Setting==<br />
<br />
I'd like to know how many people are actively using this campaign setting in campaigns or adventures they're running currently AND/OR are planning on running soon. Does anyone have a rough estimate, or perhaps just respond to this post if you are running a game using this campaign setting. See, I've got an idea that will help this project, but it will require collaborative efforts of many Dungeon Masters. I'll go into more detail if people show interest. <br />
--[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 08:04, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I don't use this... sorry. However, I am sure that many anonomous users are.. Why exactly do you want to know? Also, I would run your idea by [[User:Dmilewski |Dmilewski]], an admin who used to run the wikiworld (BTW, I alerted him to this page..). Thanks. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 08:55, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Definitely best to talk to me. I really don't know if anyone is using Wikiworld at all. (I have a kid coming along, so I've not even been able to start the Wikiworld development campaign.) I'm mostly developing Wikiworld as a long-term project to create a world that uses what's on the wiki itself. <br />
<br />
::If you want to contribute, by all means, pitch you idea. Give me the index version of your idea (3-6 sentences), and we'll go from there. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 09:14, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::My idea isn't really fully developed at this point; I was going to base further development of it based on how Wikiworld is currently being used, but, if it isn't really being used, I'm not sure how that will affect things. Basically, just, when I first began reading about Wikiworld, I first thought that it would be a great long-term goal to ''not only'' allow the campaign setting to be altered by Wiki editors (in the traditional spirit of Wiki), but also suggest that Dungeon Masters who are using the campaign setting to reflect on the Wiki any significant changes to the world that may have been caused by players in the game(s) they are running in the campaign setting (in a similar style to how the storyline of the CCG ''Legend of the Five Rings'' is constantly affected by the outcome of the game's tournaments). So, if this was to be the case, (in addition to DMs using various planes in the setting for games, and creating new ones) I thought it would be a great idea to set up an adventure/campaign in Wikiworld that would be a collaborative effort between many DMs running games simultaneously. For example, what I had in mind would start out something like this: A spellcaster trying to travel between planes messes up '''big time''' and ends up getting sent to the wrong plane, and it's a plane that has never been discovered before. He starts recruiting people to help explore this new frontier, and start building settlements there. Sooner or later, each of the major political groups in Wikiworld hear about this new plane and they all want control, and each starts covertly making advances. The campaign would include lots of political unrest, leading to diplomatic missions and politically motivated quests, and eventually the Player Characters may have to choose sides. At the same time, lots of world-changing decisions would have to be made, which could have long-standing effects on Wikiworld. And all the while, on this new plane, settlements would have to be built slowly at first, only with the resources that the PCs have (and what they can convince NPCs from various other planes to contribute) -- common issues that would come up would include building Landing Points, Gateways, and marking paths for convenient interplanar travel, plus all of the usual difficulties involved with building new settlements in mostly unexplored regions. I'm sure the Feral Nation would start planning some raids too, as soon as these settlements started prospering. But anyway, sorry I didn't exactly stick to 3-6 sentences, but, I got out the words I needed to get out. --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 13:20, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Coordinating a single game is tough enough. Multiples? My head hurts. <br />
<br />
::::In my imagination, Wikiworld is a ''no canon'' world. That is to say, nothing about this world is set in stone, any adventures written in it can conflict with other adventures, and DM's are free to interpret the setting to fit their own needs. To that end, you are certainly welcome to develop a series of adventures based on your idea. They would represent one interpretation of the setting. <br />
<br />
::::If you need a McGuffin, I suggest an Adamantine Mine. You can use Broadford. I was discussing something like this with my wife. Basically, it's a frontier town that discovers adamantine. Most adamantine mines are exhausted or have poor yeilds. There's a whole lot of desire for adamantine. The Jura City dwarves want the mining rights and are willing to garrison thousands to control those rights. Likewise, the Traders want it, too. The local druids know that adamantine mining is environmentally terrible, and want nothing of it. The Feral Nation has no adamantine, and would want it. Other factions of the Border League may invade to take it. (The League does invade itself periodically.) All the while, you have a booming population, infrastructure that needs building, and power politics spinning out of control. <br />
<br />
::::The danger of this is that a new war of Law and Chaos could break out, and EVERYONE is afraid of a new war. That, in an of itself, is worth a campaign. <br />
<br />
::::I say go ahead and develop away. Let's see what comes of it. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 15:03, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I could develop it with no trouble. Just, a lot of the fun of the idea was that around the world, a few, or several, or many DMs could be running their own game sessions, with this same storyline, and then updating to the Wiki changes to the world that occur during their game sessions. <br />
<br />
:::::The reason why this is ideal is really for the long-term. For example, if you and I and a dozen other DMs are all DMing this story, and after a few months (in-game-time) it becomes apparent that there's going to inevitably be another war of Law and Chaos, the outcome would end up being determined by how the most players align themselves, throughout all of the different game groups that are going on, overall, and the Wiki is used to regulate, and for the DMs to collaborate. <br />
<br />
:::::Also, (and this is the reason why I don't think I'd want to use Broadford) if it is a newly discovered, unexplored, plane, each game group could be exploring and settling different parts of it. If you're DMing a game, you could have it that the PCs find an adamantine mine, and settle there; and at the same time, if I'm DMing a game, I could have it that the PCs find a silver mine, and settle there. Then, collaboratively on the Wiki, we could figure out how far spaced apart the two places are, and maybe even provide stats so the settlement can be visited in other game groups. <br />
<br />
:::::So yeah, I mean, I can design and run the campaign, but if I'm the only one running a group with it, it becomes just another campaign set in Wikiworld, not a massive collaborative effort, which was my original intention. --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 16:23, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I see your point. I also see the scale of the challenge. Have you ever run a LARP? I mean write it, run it, produce it. They are a great deal of work. I think that you could pull this idea off, but it would take work, dedication, and a much more mature game world than we have right now. We also need to account for game time, where one day can take a month of real time to resolve for one group, while another group rests for a month. What happens when two groups do the same thing in one week? How do you resolve plot contradictions? Who coordinates the DMs? How do you pace time? There's a big human logistical problem to be solved. It's quite a daunting one. That's the detail where the devil lives. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 17:21, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::It would be a large-scale project to start out with, but once it's set in its ways, it wouldn't be too difficult as long as all of the participating DMs were pulling their own weight with the necessary collaborative efforts. I have run LARPs in the past, but only on very small scales; I'm actually in the process of producing a very large-scale LARP right now, but with the amount of work I'm trying to put into it, and the amount of time I have available to work on it, it'll be years before it's finished. But anyway, I agree that pulling off this project would take a lot of work and dedication, and I think we've already got that covered. Turning Wikiworld into a much more mature game world, though, will take the most work, but it is easily enough done if we get several more people (preferably perhaps the same people who would be planning on running campaigns in collaboration with this project) to expand the world. I don't think time would be an issue, though; every party can move at their own pace; As long as each DM is updating the wiki with any significant changes that occur during their game sessions, it'll be easy for other DMs to adapt to the dynamic setting. Just, whenever a DM is running a game session in the setting, they should check the Wiki beforehand for updates. It could even be changeable at a real-time interval. Of course some groups would be faster-paced than others, but I think it would even out to a happy medium. Plot contradictions and two groups doing the same thing in one week would both have to be handled on a case-by-case basis. Most minor issues could just be ignored, and major issues would be discussed in the Wiki until a logical conclusion could be come to, and perhaps it would even end up spawning new storylines (ex. Your group of PCs and my group of PCs both defeat in combat the same specific one of the Liches on the Council of Skulls. On the talk page for the Wiki, we decide to solve the solution by allowing the rumors of the other party's success reach each other's parties, which leads both of the parties to realize that one of the foes was actually an imposter -- or both of them were and the real Lich councilor is in hiding somewhere. Which leaves it open for either/both parties to investigate the situation further, or ignore it and move on.). I don't think any one person would have to coordinate all of the DMs, as long as we have descriptive instructional Wiki pages on how DMs should handle certain things in the setting, and as long as all of the DMs are cooperating and collaborating appropriately (although conflicts are bound to arise, in which case it seems most appropriate for a D&D Wiki admin to regulate the conflict). --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 19:56, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I do see actual games as a driving force behind this world. I would adore it if folks expanded and developed the world as they expanded and developed their games. I want to run a tabletop for just that reason. Games drive development. That level of continual interdevelopment I can only hope to see. If this project does this, then I consider it a runaway success. Much of what you describe could be done in a journaling style. Posters post what their groups are doing into adventure journals, and the writers could decide what should be changed or expanded based on those journals. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 20:15, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::That's exactly what I had envisioned for this setting. I just don't know how we should get it started. We'll need at least a few different DMs running games to start out with, and I think it'll eventually snowball in popularity. Some of the main things that we'll need to figure out to start with are the statistics involved with building some of the things that are integral to settlements (including things integral to settlements in potentially dangerous areas, and structures to make planeshifting to this new plane easy). If you think it's worth it, I'll start working on the project, and in a day or two I'll post what I've got so far (it is the holiday season, though, so it may take some time). --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 20:39, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::I would be willing to DM a game inside the Wikiworld if this happens.. However, the PC's would start out as level 1 so they might not be able to change much in the entire world. Anyway, if you get this up and running with the Journals idea, I am in. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 00:06, 22 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::Well, all of the PCs in all of the parties would start out at level 1, so it would obviously be a long time before there were any '''major''' advancements for the world, but, once we figure out all of the statistics for parties to build up settlements, and recruit NPCs to inhabit them, things like that would have long-standing effects on the world (other game groups building settlements slowly from the ground up will add to the options that DMs have for further plot advancement in their own sessions). --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 02:15, 22 December 2006 (MST)</div>LoneLobohttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:Endhaven_(3.5e_Campaign_Setting)&diff=55991Talk:Endhaven (3.5e Campaign Setting)2006-12-22T03:39:04Z<p>LoneLobo: /* Using the Wikiworld Campaign Setting */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Wow. ==<br />
<br />
Wow, I hope this goes somewhere! I like the idea, and when/if I make a world I will put it here. Once again, good idea.<br />
<br />
--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:24, 9 April 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Getting in Touch ==<br />
I had someone drop me a line here, and they asked me to get ahold of them on myspace. I do not have an account there, nor will I be getting one. But, I have now added my wiki contact info to the wikiworlds so that folks CAN get ahold of me. <br />
<br />
I have greatly expanded the rules on planes. This has been fun. <br />
--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 12:01, 11 April 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
==Using the Wikiworld Campaign Setting==<br />
<br />
I'd like to know how many people are actively using this campaign setting in campaigns or adventures they're running currently AND/OR are planning on running soon. Does anyone have a rough estimate, or perhaps just respond to this post if you are running a game using this campaign setting. See, I've got an idea that will help this project, but it will require collaborative efforts of many Dungeon Masters. I'll go into more detail if people show interest. <br />
--[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 08:04, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I don't use this... sorry. However, I am sure that many anonomous users are.. Why exactly do you want to know? Also, I would run your idea by [[User:Dmilewski |Dmilewski]], an admin who used to run the wikiworld (BTW, I alerted him to this page..). Thanks. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 08:55, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Definitely best to talk to me. I really don't know if anyone is using Wikiworld at all. (I have a kid coming along, so I've not even been able to start the Wikiworld development campaign.) I'm mostly developing Wikiworld as a long-term project to create a world that uses what's on the wiki itself. <br />
<br />
::If you want to contribute, by all means, pitch you idea. Give me the index version of your idea (3-6 sentences), and we'll go from there. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 09:14, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::My idea isn't really fully developed at this point; I was going to base further development of it based on how Wikiworld is currently being used, but, if it isn't really being used, I'm not sure how that will affect things. Basically, just, when I first began reading about Wikiworld, I first thought that it would be a great long-term goal to ''not only'' allow the campaign setting to be altered by Wiki editors (in the traditional spirit of Wiki), but also suggest that Dungeon Masters who are using the campaign setting to reflect on the Wiki any significant changes to the world that may have been caused by players in the game(s) they are running in the campaign setting (in a similar style to how the storyline of the CCG ''Legend of the Five Rings'' is constantly affected by the outcome of the game's tournaments). So, if this was to be the case, (in addition to DMs using various planes in the setting for games, and creating new ones) I thought it would be a great idea to set up an adventure/campaign in Wikiworld that would be a collaborative effort between many DMs running games simultaneously. For example, what I had in mind would start out something like this: A spellcaster trying to travel between planes messes up '''big time''' and ends up getting sent to the wrong plane, and it's a plane that has never been discovered before. He starts recruiting people to help explore this new frontier, and start building settlements there. Sooner or later, each of the major political groups in Wikiworld hear about this new plane and they all want control, and each starts covertly making advances. The campaign would include lots of political unrest, leading to diplomatic missions and politically motivated quests, and eventually the Player Characters may have to choose sides. At the same time, lots of world-changing decisions would have to be made, which could have long-standing effects on Wikiworld. And all the while, on this new plane, settlements would have to be built slowly at first, only with the resources that the PCs have (and what they can convince NPCs from various other planes to contribute) -- common issues that would come up would include building Landing Points, Gateways, and marking paths for convenient interplanar travel, plus all of the usual difficulties involved with building new settlements in mostly unexplored regions. I'm sure the Feral Nation would start planning some raids too, as soon as these settlements started prospering. But anyway, sorry I didn't exactly stick to 3-6 sentences, but, I got out the words I needed to get out. --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 13:20, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Coordinating a single game is tough enough. Multiples? My head hurts. <br />
<br />
::::In my imagination, Wikiworld is a ''no canon'' world. That is to say, nothing about this world is set in stone, any adventures written in it can conflict with other adventures, and DM's are free to interpret the setting to fit their own needs. To that end, you are certainly welcome to develop a series of adventures based on your idea. They would represent one interpretation of the setting. <br />
<br />
::::If you need a McGuffin, I suggest an Adamantine Mine. You can use Broadford. I was discussing something like this with my wife. Basically, it's a frontier town that discovers adamantine. Most adamantine mines are exhausted or have poor yeilds. There's a whole lot of desire for adamantine. The Jura City dwarves want the mining rights and are willing to garrison thousands to control those rights. Likewise, the Traders want it, too. The local druids know that adamantine mining is environmentally terrible, and want nothing of it. The Feral Nation has no adamantine, and would want it. Other factions of the Border League may invade to take it. (The League does invade itself periodically.) All the while, you have a booming population, infrastructure that needs building, and power politics spinning out of control. <br />
<br />
::::The danger of this is that a new war of Law and Chaos could break out, and EVERYONE is afraid of a new war. That, in an of itself, is worth a campaign. <br />
<br />
::::I say go ahead and develop away. Let's see what comes of it. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 15:03, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I could develop it with no trouble. Just, a lot of the fun of the idea was that around the world, a few, or several, or many DMs could be running their own game sessions, with this same storyline, and then updating to the Wiki changes to the world that occur during their game sessions. <br />
<br />
:::::The reason why this is ideal is really for the long-term. For example, if you and I and a dozen other DMs are all DMing this story, and after a few months (in-game-time) it becomes apparent that there's going to inevitably be another war of Law and Chaos, the outcome would end up being determined by how the most players align themselves, throughout all of the different game groups that are going on, overall, and the Wiki is used to regulate, and for the DMs to collaborate. <br />
<br />
:::::Also, (and this is the reason why I don't think I'd want to use Broadford) if it is a newly discovered, unexplored, plane, each game group could be exploring and settling different parts of it. If you're DMing a game, you could have it that the PCs find an adamantine mine, and settle there; and at the same time, if I'm DMing a game, I could have it that the PCs find a silver mine, and settle there. Then, collaboratively on the Wiki, we could figure out how far spaced apart the two places are, and maybe even provide stats so the settlement can be visited in other game groups. <br />
<br />
:::::So yeah, I mean, I can design and run the campaign, but if I'm the only one running a group with it, it becomes just another campaign set in Wikiworld, not a massive collaborative effort, which was my original intention. --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 16:23, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I see your point. I also see the scale of the challenge. Have you ever run a LARP? I mean write it, run it, produce it. They are a great deal of work. I think that you could pull this idea off, but it would take work, dedication, and a much more mature game world than we have right now. We also need to account for game time, where one day can take a month of real time to resolve for one group, while another group rests for a month. What happens when two groups do the same thing in one week? How do you resolve plot contradictions? Who coordinates the DMs? How do you pace time? There's a big human logistical problem to be solved. It's quite a daunting one. That's the detail where the devil lives. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 17:21, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::It would be a large-scale project to start out with, but once it's set in its ways, it wouldn't be too difficult as long as all of the participating DMs were pulling their own weight with the necessary collaborative efforts. I have run LARPs in the past, but only on very small scales; I'm actually in the process of producing a very large-scale LARP right now, but with the amount of work I'm trying to put into it, and the amount of time I have available to work on it, it'll be years before it's finished. But anyway, I agree that pulling off this project would take a lot of work and dedication, and I think we've already got that covered. Turning Wikiworld into a much more mature game world, though, will take the most work, but it is easily enough done if we get several more people (preferably perhaps the same people who would be planning on running campaigns in collaboration with this project) to expand the world. I don't think time would be an issue, though; every party can move at their own pace; As long as each DM is updating the wiki with any significant changes that occur during their game sessions, it'll be easy for other DMs to adapt to the dynamic setting. Just, whenever a DM is running a game session in the setting, they should check the Wiki beforehand for updates. It could even be changeable at a real-time interval. Of course some groups would be faster-paced than others, but I think it would even out to a happy medium. Plot contradictions and two groups doing the same thing in one week would both have to be handled on a case-by-case basis. Most minor issues could just be ignored, and major issues would be discussed in the Wiki until a logical conclusion could be come to, and perhaps it would even end up spawning new storylines (ex. Your group of PCs and my group of PCs both defeat in combat the same specific one of the Liches on the Council of Skulls. On the talk page for the Wiki, we decide to solve the solution by allowing the rumors of the other party's success reach each other's parties, which leads both of the parties to realize that one of the foes was actually an imposter -- or both of them were and the real Lich councilor is in hiding somewhere. Which leaves it open for either/both parties to investigate the situation further, or ignore it and move on.). I don't think any one person would have to coordinate all of the DMs, as long as we have descriptive instructional Wiki pages on how DMs should handle certain things in the setting, and as long as all of the DMs are cooperating and collaborating appropriately (although conflicts are bound to arise, in which case it seems most appropriate for a D&D Wiki admin to regulate the conflict). --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 19:56, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I do see actual games as a driving force behind this world. I would adore it if folks expanded and developed the world as they expanded and developed their games. I want to run a tabletop for just that reason. Games drive development. That level of continual interdevelopment I can only hope to see. If this project does this, then I consider it a runaway success. Much of what you describe could be done in a journaling style. Posters post what their groups are doing into adventure journals, and the writers could decide what should be changed or expanded based on those journals. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 20:15, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::::That's exactly what I had envisioned for this setting. I just don't know how we should get it started. We'll need at least a few different DMs running games to start out with, and I think it'll eventually snowball in popularity. Some of the main things that we'll need to figure out to start with are the statistics involved with building some of the things that are integral to settlements (including things integral to settlements in potentially dangerous areas, and structures to make planeshifting to this new plane easy). If you think it's worth it, I'll start working on the project, and in a day or two I'll post what I've got so far (it is the holiday season, though, so it may take some time). --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 20:39, 21 December 2006 (MST)</div>LoneLobohttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:Endhaven_(3.5e_Campaign_Setting)&diff=55989Talk:Endhaven (3.5e Campaign Setting)2006-12-22T02:56:16Z<p>LoneLobo: /* Using the Wikiworld Campaign Setting */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Wow. ==<br />
<br />
Wow, I hope this goes somewhere! I like the idea, and when/if I make a world I will put it here. Once again, good idea.<br />
<br />
--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:24, 9 April 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Getting in Touch ==<br />
I had someone drop me a line here, and they asked me to get ahold of them on myspace. I do not have an account there, nor will I be getting one. But, I have now added my wiki contact info to the wikiworlds so that folks CAN get ahold of me. <br />
<br />
I have greatly expanded the rules on planes. This has been fun. <br />
--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 12:01, 11 April 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
==Using the Wikiworld Campaign Setting==<br />
<br />
I'd like to know how many people are actively using this campaign setting in campaigns or adventures they're running currently AND/OR are planning on running soon. Does anyone have a rough estimate, or perhaps just respond to this post if you are running a game using this campaign setting. See, I've got an idea that will help this project, but it will require collaborative efforts of many Dungeon Masters. I'll go into more detail if people show interest. <br />
--[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 08:04, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I don't use this... sorry. However, I am sure that many anonomous users are.. Why exactly do you want to know? Also, I would run your idea by [[User:Dmilewski |Dmilewski]], an admin who used to run the wikiworld (BTW, I alerted him to this page..). Thanks. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 08:55, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Definitely best to talk to me. I really don't know if anyone is using Wikiworld at all. (I have a kid coming along, so I've not even been able to start the Wikiworld development campaign.) I'm mostly developing Wikiworld as a long-term project to create a world that uses what's on the wiki itself. <br />
<br />
::If you want to contribute, by all means, pitch you idea. Give me the index version of your idea (3-6 sentences), and we'll go from there. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 09:14, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::My idea isn't really fully developed at this point; I was going to base further development of it based on how Wikiworld is currently being used, but, if it isn't really being used, I'm not sure how that will affect things. Basically, just, when I first began reading about Wikiworld, I first thought that it would be a great long-term goal to ''not only'' allow the campaign setting to be altered by Wiki editors (in the traditional spirit of Wiki), but also suggest that Dungeon Masters who are using the campaign setting to reflect on the Wiki any significant changes to the world that may have been caused by players in the game(s) they are running in the campaign setting (in a similar style to how the storyline of the CCG ''Legend of the Five Rings'' is constantly affected by the outcome of the game's tournaments). So, if this was to be the case, (in addition to DMs using various planes in the setting for games, and creating new ones) I thought it would be a great idea to set up an adventure/campaign in Wikiworld that would be a collaborative effort between many DMs running games simultaneously. For example, what I had in mind would start out something like this: A spellcaster trying to travel between planes messes up '''big time''' and ends up getting sent to the wrong plane, and it's a plane that has never been discovered before. He starts recruiting people to help explore this new frontier, and start building settlements there. Sooner or later, each of the major political groups in Wikiworld hear about this new plane and they all want control, and each starts covertly making advances. The campaign would include lots of political unrest, leading to diplomatic missions and politically motivated quests, and eventually the Player Characters may have to choose sides. At the same time, lots of world-changing decisions would have to be made, which could have long-standing effects on Wikiworld. And all the while, on this new plane, settlements would have to be built slowly at first, only with the resources that the PCs have (and what they can convince NPCs from various other planes to contribute) -- common issues that would come up would include building Landing Points, Gateways, and marking paths for convenient interplanar travel, plus all of the usual difficulties involved with building new settlements in mostly unexplored regions. I'm sure the Feral Nation would start planning some raids too, as soon as these settlements started prospering. But anyway, sorry I didn't exactly stick to 3-6 sentences, but, I got out the words I needed to get out. --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 13:20, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Coordinating a single game is tough enough. Multiples? My head hurts. <br />
<br />
::::In my imagination, Wikiworld is a ''no canon'' world. That is to say, nothing about this world is set in stone, any adventures written in it can conflict with other adventures, and DM's are free to interpret the setting to fit their own needs. To that end, you are certainly welcome to develop a series of adventures based on your idea. They would represent one interpretation of the setting. <br />
<br />
::::If you need a McGuffin, I suggest an Adamantine Mine. You can use Broadford. I was discussing something like this with my wife. Basically, it's a frontier town that discovers adamantine. Most adamantine mines are exhausted or have poor yeilds. There's a whole lot of desire for adamantine. The Jura City dwarves want the mining rights and are willing to garrison thousands to control those rights. Likewise, the Traders want it, too. The local druids know that adamantine mining is environmentally terrible, and want nothing of it. The Feral Nation has no adamantine, and would want it. Other factions of the Border League may invade to take it. (The League does invade itself periodically.) All the while, you have a booming population, infrastructure that needs building, and power politics spinning out of control. <br />
<br />
::::The danger of this is that a new war of Law and Chaos could break out, and EVERYONE is afraid of a new war. That, in an of itself, is worth a campaign. <br />
<br />
::::I say go ahead and develop away. Let's see what comes of it. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 15:03, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I could develop it with no trouble. Just, a lot of the fun of the idea was that around the world, a few, or several, or many DMs could be running their own game sessions, with this same storyline, and then updating to the Wiki changes to the world that occur during their game sessions. <br />
<br />
:::::The reason why this is ideal is really for the long-term. For example, if you and I and a dozen other DMs are all DMing this story, and after a few months (in-game-time) it becomes apparent that there's going to inevitably be another war of Law and Chaos, the outcome would end up being determined by how the most players align themselves, throughout all of the different game groups that are going on, overall, and the Wiki is used to regulate, and for the DMs to collaborate. <br />
<br />
:::::Also, (and this is the reason why I don't think I'd want to use Broadford) if it is a newly discovered, unexplored, plane, each game group could be exploring and settling different parts of it. If you're DMing a game, you could have it that the PCs find an adamantine mine, and settle there; and at the same time, if I'm DMing a game, I could have it that the PCs find a silver mine, and settle there. Then, collaboratively on the Wiki, we could figure out how far spaced apart the two places are, and maybe even provide stats so the settlement can be visited in other game groups. <br />
<br />
:::::So yeah, I mean, I can design and run the campaign, but if I'm the only one running a group with it, it becomes just another campaign set in Wikiworld, not a massive collaborative effort, which was my original intention. --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 16:23, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::::I see your point. I also see the scale of the challenge. Have you ever run a LARP? I mean write it, run it, produce it. They are a great deal of work. I think that you could pull this idea off, but it would take work, dedication, and a much more mature game world than we have right now. We also need to account for game time, where one day can take a month of real time to resolve for one group, while another group rests for a month. What happens when two groups do the same thing in one week? How do you resolve plot contradictions? Who coordinates the DMs? How do you pace time? There's a big human logistical problem to be solved. It's quite a daunting one. That's the detail where the devil lives. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 17:21, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::::It would be a large-scale project to start out with, but once it's set in its ways, it wouldn't be too difficult as long as all of the participating DMs were pulling their own weight with the necessary collaborative efforts. I have run LARPs in the past, but only on very small scales; I'm actually in the process of producing a very large-scale LARP right now, but with the amount of work I'm trying to put into it, and the amount of time I have available to work on it, it'll be years before it's finished. But anyway, I agree that pulling off this project would take a lot of work and dedication, and I think we've already got that covered. Turning Wikiworld into a much more mature game world, though, will take the most work, but it is easily enough done if we get several more people (preferably perhaps the same people who would be planning on running campaigns in collaboration with this project) to expand the world. I don't think time would be an issue, though; every party can move at their own pace; As long as each DM is updating the wiki with any significant changes that occur during their game sessions, it'll be easy for other DMs to adapt to the dynamic setting. Just, whenever a DM is running a game session in the setting, they should check the Wiki beforehand for updates. It could even be changeable at a real-time interval. Of course some groups would be faster-paced than others, but I think it would even out to a happy medium. Plot contradictions and two groups doing the same thing in one week would both have to be handled on a case-by-case basis. Most minor issues could just be ignored, and major issues would be discussed in the Wiki until a logical conclusion could be come to, and perhaps it would even end up spawning new storylines (ex. Your group of PCs and my group of PCs both defeat in combat the same specific one of the Liches on the Council of Skulls. On the talk page for the Wiki, we decide to solve the solution by allowing the rumors of the other party's success reach each other's parties, which leads both of the parties to realize that one of the foes was actually an imposter -- or both of them were and the real Lich councilor is in hiding somewhere. Which leaves it open for either/both parties to investigate the situation further, or ignore it and move on.). I don't think any one person would have to coordinate all of the DMs, as long as we have descriptive instructional Wiki pages on how DMs should handle certain things in the setting, and as long as all of the DMs are cooperating and collaborating appropriately (although conflicts are bound to arise, in which case it seems most appropriate for a D&D Wiki admin to regulate the conflict). --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 19:56, 21 December 2006 (MST)</div>LoneLobohttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:Endhaven_(3.5e_Campaign_Setting)&diff=55981Talk:Endhaven (3.5e Campaign Setting)2006-12-21T23:23:08Z<p>LoneLobo: /* Using the Wikiworld Campaign Setting */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Wow. ==<br />
<br />
Wow, I hope this goes somewhere! I like the idea, and when/if I make a world I will put it here. Once again, good idea.<br />
<br />
--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:24, 9 April 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Getting in Touch ==<br />
I had someone drop me a line here, and they asked me to get ahold of them on myspace. I do not have an account there, nor will I be getting one. But, I have now added my wiki contact info to the wikiworlds so that folks CAN get ahold of me. <br />
<br />
I have greatly expanded the rules on planes. This has been fun. <br />
--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 12:01, 11 April 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
==Using the Wikiworld Campaign Setting==<br />
<br />
I'd like to know how many people are actively using this campaign setting in campaigns or adventures they're running currently AND/OR are planning on running soon. Does anyone have a rough estimate, or perhaps just respond to this post if you are running a game using this campaign setting. See, I've got an idea that will help this project, but it will require collaborative efforts of many Dungeon Masters. I'll go into more detail if people show interest. <br />
--[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 08:04, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I don't use this... sorry. However, I am sure that many anonomous users are.. Why exactly do you want to know? Also, I would run your idea by [[User:Dmilewski |Dmilewski]], an admin who used to run the wikiworld (BTW, I alerted him to this page..). Thanks. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 08:55, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Definitely best to talk to me. I really don't know if anyone is using Wikiworld at all. (I have a kid coming along, so I've not even been able to start the Wikiworld development campaign.) I'm mostly developing Wikiworld as a long-term project to create a world that uses what's on the wiki itself. <br />
<br />
::If you want to contribute, by all means, pitch you idea. Give me the index version of your idea (3-6 sentences), and we'll go from there. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 09:14, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::My idea isn't really fully developed at this point; I was going to base further development of it based on how Wikiworld is currently being used, but, if it isn't really being used, I'm not sure how that will affect things. Basically, just, when I first began reading about Wikiworld, I first thought that it would be a great long-term goal to ''not only'' allow the campaign setting to be altered by Wiki editors (in the traditional spirit of Wiki), but also suggest that Dungeon Masters who are using the campaign setting to reflect on the Wiki any significant changes to the world that may have been caused by players in the game(s) they are running in the campaign setting (in a similar style to how the storyline of the CCG ''Legend of the Five Rings'' is constantly affected by the outcome of the game's tournaments). So, if this was to be the case, (in addition to DMs using various planes in the setting for games, and creating new ones) I thought it would be a great idea to set up an adventure/campaign in Wikiworld that would be a collaborative effort between many DMs running games simultaneously. For example, what I had in mind would start out something like this: A spellcaster trying to travel between planes messes up '''big time''' and ends up getting sent to the wrong plane, and it's a plane that has never been discovered before. He starts recruiting people to help explore this new frontier, and start building settlements there. Sooner or later, each of the major political groups in Wikiworld hear about this new plane and they all want control, and each starts covertly making advances. The campaign would include lots of political unrest, leading to diplomatic missions and politically motivated quests, and eventually the Player Characters may have to choose sides. At the same time, lots of world-changing decisions would have to be made, which could have long-standing effects on Wikiworld. And all the while, on this new plane, settlements would have to be built slowly at first, only with the resources that the PCs have (and what they can convince NPCs from various other planes to contribute) -- common issues that would come up would include building Landing Points, Gateways, and marking paths for convenient interplanar travel, plus all of the usual difficulties involved with building new settlements in mostly unexplored regions. I'm sure the Feral Nation would start planning some raids too, as soon as these settlements started prospering. But anyway, sorry I didn't exactly stick to 3-6 sentences, but, I got out the words I needed to get out. --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 13:20, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::::Coordinating a single game is tough enough. Multiples? My head hurts. <br />
<br />
::::In my imagination, Wikiworld is a ''no canon'' world. That is to say, nothing about this world is set in stone, any adventures written in it can conflict with other adventures, and DM's are free to interpret the setting to fit their own needs. To that end, you are certainly welcome to develop a series of adventures based on your idea. They would represent one interpretation of the setting. <br />
<br />
::::If you need a McGuffin, I suggest an Adamantine Mine. You can use Broadford. I was discussing something like this with my wife. Basically, it's a frontier town that discovers adamantine. Most adamantine mines are exhausted or have poor yeilds. There's a whole lot of desire for adamantine. The Jura City dwarves want the mining rights and are willing to garrison thousands to control those rights. Likewise, the Traders want it, too. The local druids know that adamantine mining is environmentally terrible, and want nothing of it. The Feral Nation has no adamantine, and would want it. Other factions of the Border League may invade to take it. (The League does invade itself periodically.) All the while, you have a booming population, infrastructure that needs building, and power politics spinning out of control. <br />
<br />
::::The danger of this is that a new war of Law and Chaos could break out, and EVERYONE is afraid of a new war. That, in an of itself, is worth a campaign. <br />
<br />
::::I say go ahead and develop away. Let's see what comes of it. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 15:03, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::::I could develop it with no trouble. Just, a lot of the fun of the idea was that around the world, a few, or several, or many DMs could be running their own game sessions, with this same storyline, and then updating to the Wiki changes to the world that occur during their game sessions. <br />
<br />
:::::The reason why this is ideal is really for the long-term. For example, if you and I and a dozen other DMs are all DMing this story, and after a few months (in-game-time) it becomes apparent that there's going to inevitably be another war of Law and Chaos, the outcome would end up being determined by how the most players align themselves, throughout all of the different game groups that are going on, overall, and the Wiki is used to regulate, and for the DMs to collaborate. <br />
<br />
:::::Also, (and this is the reason why I don't think I'd want to use Broadford) if it is a newly discovered, unexplored, plane, each game group could be exploring and settling different parts of it. If you're DMing a game, you could have it that the PCs find an adamantine mine, and settle there; and at the same time, if I'm DMing a game, I could have it that the PCs find a silver mine, and settle there. Then, collaboratively on the Wiki, we could figure out how far spaced apart the two places are, and maybe even provide stats so the settlement can be visited in other game groups. <br />
<br />
:::::So yeah, I mean, I can design and run the campaign, but if I'm the only one running a group with it, it becomes just another campaign set in Wikiworld, not a massive collaborative effort, which was my original intention. --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 16:23, 21 December 2006 (MST)</div>LoneLobohttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:Endhaven_(3.5e_Campaign_Setting)&diff=55956Talk:Endhaven (3.5e Campaign Setting)2006-12-21T20:20:55Z<p>LoneLobo: /* Using the Wikiworld Campaign Setting */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Wow. ==<br />
<br />
Wow, I hope this goes somewhere! I like the idea, and when/if I make a world I will put it here. Once again, good idea.<br />
<br />
--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:24, 9 April 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Getting in Touch ==<br />
I had someone drop me a line here, and they asked me to get ahold of them on myspace. I do not have an account there, nor will I be getting one. But, I have now added my wiki contact info to the wikiworlds so that folks CAN get ahold of me. <br />
<br />
I have greatly expanded the rules on planes. This has been fun. <br />
--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 12:01, 11 April 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
==Using the Wikiworld Campaign Setting==<br />
<br />
I'd like to know how many people are actively using this campaign setting in campaigns or adventures they're running currently AND/OR are planning on running soon. Does anyone have a rough estimate, or perhaps just respond to this post if you are running a game using this campaign setting. See, I've got an idea that will help this project, but it will require collaborative efforts of many Dungeon Masters. I'll go into more detail if people show interest. <br />
--[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 08:04, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I don't use this... sorry. However, I am sure that many anonomous users are.. Why exactly do you want to know? Also, I would run your idea by [[User:Dmilewski |Dmilewski]], an admin who used to run the wikiworld (BTW, I alerted him to this page..). Thanks. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 08:55, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::Definitely best to talk to me. I really don't know if anyone is using Wikiworld at all. (I have a kid coming along, so I've not even been able to start the Wikiworld development campaign.) I'm mostly developing Wikiworld as a long-term project to create a world that uses what's on the wiki itself. <br />
<br />
::If you want to contribute, by all means, pitch you idea. Give me the index version of your idea (3-6 sentences), and we'll go from there. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 09:14, 21 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::My idea isn't really fully developed at this point; I was going to base further development of it based on how Wikiworld is currently being used, but, if it isn't really being used, I'm not sure how that will affect things. Basically, just, when I first began reading about Wikiworld, I first thought that it would be a great long-term goal to ''not only'' allow the campaign setting to be altered by Wiki editors (in the traditional spirit of Wiki), but also suggest that Dungeon Masters who are using the campaign setting to reflect on the Wiki any significant changes to the world that may have been caused by players in the game(s) they are running in the campaign setting (in a similar style to how the storyline of the CCG ''Legend of the Five Rings'' is constantly affected by the outcome of the game's tournaments). So, if this was to be the case, (in addition to DMs using various planes in the setting for games, and creating new ones) I thought it would be a great idea to set up an adventure/campaign in Wikiworld that would be a collaborative effort between many DMs running games simultaneously. For example, what I had in mind would start out something like this: A spellcaster trying to travel between planes messes up '''big time''' and ends up getting sent to the wrong plane, and it's a plane that has never been discovered before. He starts recruiting people to help explore this new frontier, and start building settlements there. Sooner or later, each of the major political groups in Wikiworld hear about this new plane and they all want control, and each starts covertly making advances. The campaign would include lots of political unrest, leading to diplomatic missions and politically motivated quests, and eventually the Player Characters may have to choose sides. At the same time, lots of world-changing decisions would have to be made, which could have long-standing effects on Wikiworld. And all the while, on this new plane, settlements would have to be built slowly at first, only with the resources that the PCs have (and what they can convince NPCs from various other planes to contribute) -- common issues that would come up would include building Landing Points, Gateways, and marking paths for convenient interplanar travel, plus all of the usual difficulties involved with building new settlements in mostly unexplored regions. I'm sure the Feral Nation would start planning some raids too, as soon as these settlements started prospering. But anyway, sorry I didn't exactly stick to 3-6 sentences, but, I got out the words I needed to get out. --[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 13:20, 21 December 2006 (MST)</div>LoneLobohttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:Endhaven_(3.5e_Campaign_Setting)&diff=55891Talk:Endhaven (3.5e Campaign Setting)2006-12-21T15:04:31Z<p>LoneLobo: </p>
<hr />
<div>== Wow. ==<br />
<br />
Wow, I hope this goes somewhere! I like the idea, and when/if I make a world I will put it here. Once again, good idea.<br />
<br />
--[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 18:24, 9 April 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Getting in Touch ==<br />
I had someone drop me a line here, and they asked me to get ahold of them on myspace. I do not have an account there, nor will I be getting one. But, I have now added my wiki contact info to the wikiworlds so that folks CAN get ahold of me. <br />
<br />
I have greatly expanded the rules on planes. This has been fun. <br />
--[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 12:01, 11 April 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
<br />
==Using the Wikiworld Campaign Setting==<br />
I'd like to know how many people are actively using this campaign setting in campaigns or adventures they're running currently AND/OR are planning on running soon. Does anyone have a rough estimate, or perhaps just respond to this post if you are running a game using this campaign setting. See, I've got an idea that will help this project, but it will require collaborative efforts of many Dungeon Masters. I'll go into more detail if people show interest. <br />
--[[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 08:04, 21 December 2006 (MST)</div>LoneLobohttps://www.dandwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Green_Dragon&diff=55822User talk:Green Dragon2006-12-21T07:29:07Z<p>LoneLobo: </p>
<hr />
<div>{{Messages of Interest|messages=<br />
<br />
{{MoI-Row<br />
|page=Talk:Chaonde Eris (D20 Modern NPC)<br />
|notifier=Sledged<br />
|date_time=19:44, 19 December 2006 (MST)<br />
}}<br />
<br />
}}<br />
<br />
{{Archives<br />
|label1= Archive 1 (Discussions 1 &ndash; 30)<br />
|label2= Archive 2 (Discussions 31 &ndash; 60)<br />
|label3= Archive 3 (Discussions 61 &ndash; 90)<br />
}}<br />
<br />
== New Message of Interest Template ==<br />
<br />
What do you think of the new template? If you remove the nested Template:MoI-Row the table gets hidden like so:<br />
{{Messages of Interest|messages=<br />
<br />
}}<br />
So it only shows up if there are messages. &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 11:29, 15 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:It is amazing. Great idea, and I have already implemented it at a couple of locations. Thanks for this idea. Also, please see [[Template talk:Messages of Interest#How to use]] for something I said about it... Anyway, great idea, much better than the current system. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 02:25, 16 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Wikimedia Donations ==<br />
<br />
I see Wikimedia is doing their year end donation drive. How would you feel in regards to something on the front page directing users to their donation site? --[[User:Xenophon|Xenophon]] 06:33, 18 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Hm... I don't really know... I'm not affiliated/related to the site, etc. I don't really see why I should... Maybe D&D Wiki's own [[D&D Wiki:Site support|fundrasing campaign]] (jk - Also that is the page that Blue Dragon has edited the most (I think he wants a free server from Donations that would help Tundra (the current server) running D&D Wiki ''':)''' ))... What would you recommend? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 16:07, 18 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I understand that we are a smaller user base and definitely don't have the pool of resources to draw from that Wikimedia does. It does seem reasonable that if anyone has just a bit of money to donate they should allocate that money to the more needy source. Wikimedia provides the core of this site. Any way you look at it we all owe something back. I'm not saying we should all pour money into or else we're stealing. That's the beauty of the GPL is that anyone, even those lacking ANY funds, can use it. It might just be my opinion, but I feel that by virtue of you using MediaWiki associates you in a way with Wikimedia. In writing this another thought came to mind in regards to having our own drive locally. We can solicit donations, pay for some server costs and then pass up something as D&D Wiki to Wikimedia. I feel that contributing as a group speaks more about us than if the same amount was contributed individually. MediaWiki is what the web was meant to be. It gives the voice to the people, creating a cable public access station as if it had the resources of the entire world. I apologize for the length of this. This is really a culmination of my thoughts, finally consolidated. I really am much more cynical than I seem idealist. I find this whole thing fascinating and exciting but at the same time I worry for its future, not just monetarily. Yes, I am being an evangelist but it is for something once in my life I totally understand and feel some real passion about... Besides D&D. --[[User:Xenophon|Xenophon]] 15:42, 19 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::I agree with you. I like the idea of having out own drive, then donating half to MediaWiki. Thanks for the idea, and I will get Blue Dragon to work on it soon. Thanks so much for this idea, and possibly Blue Dragon can get another server for this site, and this site can say "Thank you" to MediaWiki... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:47, 19 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== Feedback + FR Wiki ==<br />
<br />
I recently came across this wiki by accident but I wanted to say it is excellent, if underpopulated, and I think its relative lack of promotion or awareness is to blame. I am an editor at [http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com Forgotten Realms wiki] and although our wikis do not necessarily cross paths (FR-wiki is a glorified reference to FR source material), there are opportunities to interact, so I thought I would link to D&D Wiki articles where they exist, instead of other places, and even contribute here where necessary. [[User:Fw190a8|Fw190a8]] 19:58, 18 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:A couple things. First off, my wiki is not underpopulated (compare [http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Special:Statistics this] to [http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Statistics this])... Anyway, not trying to get off to a bad start (I have just had a problem with a different "merger" a while back). So, what exactly are you proposing? So we understand each others wikis better, I have started with a comparison. First off, I like that your<small>(?)</small> Wiki has been around for a while, I will say quite a bit longer than mine (Yours founded on 11 October 2005, mine on February 4th 2006). Also, the edits to your wiki are still coming, even though it is not very popular (only 3,657 page views since October 11 2005, whereas mine has 616,691 page views since February 4th 2006). Also, you have quite the user-base, whereas since D&D Wiki is so new it is lacking that (D&D Wiki has under 200 users, you have a very large amount (e.g. Green Dragon is already taken)). I would say our wikis are about the same (not content wise, but statistically speaking...). So, again, what exactly would you like to happen? --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 23:49, 18 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:: ''':)''' We may have a small user-base, but we are proud, noble, dedicated folk... ''':)''' --[[User:EldritchNumen|EldritchNumen]] 04:05, 19 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:::Agreed. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:55, 19 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== New Archives Template ==<br />
<br />
What do you think of the new [[Template:Archives|archives template]] using the [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:LoopFunctions loop functions extension] [[User:Blue Dragon|Blue Dragon]] installed? There's a demo of it in my [[User talk:Sledged|talk page]].<br />
<br />
The first paramter ''n'' specifies how many archive pages there are. The rest of the parameters (''label1'', ''label2'', ''label3'', etc...) specify the link text. &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 13:40, 19 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:I think I might be getting carried away... &mdash;[[User:Sledged|Sledged]] 13:41, 19 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
::I like it... Would you mind implementing it where archives are? I am asking you because I have yet to take the time to fully understand it... --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 14:52, 19 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
== New SRD Landing Page is Up==<br />
<br />
I plopped the new SRD landing page in this morning. Thanks a zillion. The new page looks great. --[[User:Dmilewski|Dmilewski]] 07:46, 20 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
:Agreed, it is much better than the old SRD page. Good job, and thanks for doing that. --[[User:Green Dragon|Green Dragon]] 15:40, 20 December 2006 (MST)<br />
<br />
----<br />
'''Green Dragon wrote:'''<br><br />
''Hello LoneLobo, 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 ([[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 00:29, 21 December 2006 (MST)); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Also, if you want to help D&D Wiki but just don't know how 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, how well you know the Wiki Format, and how well you know D&D. 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! --Green Dragon 23:31, 20 December 2006 (MST)''<br />
----<br />
<br />
Green Dragon, Thank you for your warm welcome. The D&D Wiki is a great resource, you should definintely be proud of the accomplishment. I only found the site yesterday, and I still haven't been able to look through most of the great content. I know the Wiki format fairly well, but on other Wikis, I've never created articles from scratch, though I have editted many. D&D has been my passion for nearly ten years, and in the past few years I've mostly DM'd campaigns, with the exception of RPGA events, although I have been working on becoming GM certified with the RPGA. I hope I'll be able to contribute positively to the D&D Wiki, though it seems a lot of information has already been covered. I'm really interested in your Wikiworld Campaign Setting project, and as soon as I finish reading all of the source material, I think I've got a pretty decent idea to help the project along; though I'd like to get an idea for how many people are already actively using the project's campaign setting in games they're running. Again, thank you for your welcome. [[User:LoneLobo|LoneLobo]] 00:29, 21 December 2006 (MST)</div>LoneLobo