Talk:5e Class Preload

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Header Depth[edit]

Is it possible to retain the header order whilst retaining the anchors?

Many class features in the PHB are large enough that they have their own sub-headers. Marasmusine (talk) 08:34, 4 June 2016 (MDT)

How are they different from rulesets? I want to change this because there are some pages that are almost impossible to navigate because of all the headers. Only if you keep in the back of your head what header depth you are reading, can you really navigate Runeseeker (5e Class). You don't want to have to have something that you need to concentrate on to read a page, since then you cannot really fully concentrate on the pose. I find that the example Night Blood (5e Class) is already a huge improvement for navigation reasons. Can we not just put these type of things into rulesets? What if we put a new line under these sections and allowed them into the class features interchangeably? --Green Dragon (talk) 09:30, 4 June 2016 (MDT)
I wonder if it would make sense to make a template for the spellcasting section since the wording is similiar but different for arcane and divine spells. --Green Dragon (talk) 11:34, 4 June 2016 (MDT)
Yes, I can navigate Runeseeker. The headers are precisely as they are in the PHB.
Night Blood doesn't have any complex class features (in fact it's missing information on spellcasting), we should look at something else as an example.
So let's look at spellcasting. The PHB classes all handle spellcasting differently (there's no distinction between "arcane" and "divine"), nevertheless I'm not sure how a template would work to resolve the headers issue. Going back to Runeseeker, how would Spellcasting look in the new preload? You would have your anchor header "Spellcasting", which is the lowest-possible header. How do you now show the sub-sections? Use the same level header, or not have headers at all? Marasmusine (talk) 02:50, 5 June 2016 (MDT)
Sorry, I should have explained that I was referencing classes which know all spells, and those which prepare them. What matrix do you find is workable? I am just talking about a template for the spellcasting since it is hard to understand how to change the wording for spellbooks and inherent spellcasting.
The PHB uses some different formatting. The main headers are underlined and large. Even though the class features start to use small caps and large caps title case; we don't do it like this (no small caps letter case). The sub sections in the PHB are a larger sized header. Another problem is that people do not use a TOC that is a screen long. The preload as I have editied it now, would be the major changes, not a whole new one as a template or something. Take a look at the Runeseeker (5e Class) now to see exactly what I am talking about, since it seems to me like you are confused on some of the header's depths. --Green Dragon (talk) 06:24, 5 June 2016 (MDT)
Look at the Fighting Style section of Runeseeker. Archery, Dueling etc should be sub-sections of that: Could you please also edit that to show what it would look like in the new preload? At the moment it looks like your solutions is to use ; headers for some class features and h4 headers for others. Marasmusine (talk) 06:31, 5 June 2016 (MDT)
If the TOC is a problem we can use Template:TOC limit to limit its depth. Marasmusine (talk) 06:37, 5 June 2016 (MDT)
I'm looking at the original revision of Runeseeker, and its headers weren't correct anyway. It was using h3 headers for class features and h4 headers for sub-features.
The preload _was_ h4 headers for class features (with the intent that ; headers be used for sub-features), which looks like this. Marasmusine (talk) 06:46, 5 June 2016 (MDT)
I changed it with the Fighting Style (I missed that one). I also tried it with indents here. Limiting the TOC is good, and I agree that its a lot of work to change the classes. I just want to make a bigger difference between the class features and the sub sections, and these in relation to the rest of the page. Do you think that this better like this, or how about just changing the class features headers to be h5 headers and the sub sections as h4 headers? What style do you prefer? The Zombie (5e Class)? --Green Dragon (talk) 06:53, 5 June 2016 (MDT)
The indents are interesting, but I'm worried that it's more code for new users to be confused about/mess up.
My preference is for ==== headers for class features and ; for sub-headers (which is what you've ended up doing with Fighting Style and Spellcasting anyway), which is how the majority of class pages are currently formatted. These subheaders do not appear in the TOC.
Runeseeker threw me off because it was using headers one step too large! No wonder the TOC looked too long. Marasmusine (talk) 07:19, 5 June 2016 (MDT)
Side node, last I checked, {{TOC limit}} doesn't work on this wiki because it doesn't have the necessary CSS. —Proton[talk] 18:36, 5 June 2016 (MDT)
Let me ask Blue Dragon about that too. D&D Wiki had some security updates recently, and there are other problems like User Race Groups is not working right. You may have noticed that Mediawiki:Common.css stopped displaying the d20.epic table headers right too (but I should have fixed all those problems though). The edit sections of the headers moved again, but I think that this is fine since it reinforces the notion of wiki even if it is a little more annoying.
Just updating all the pages to the headers could be all we need to do instead of changing everything, but we need this extension to work right. --Green Dragon (talk) 08:45, 6 June 2016 (MDT)
Can I confirm, are we sticking with ==== and ; headers? Marasmusine (talk) 08:50, 6 June 2016 (MDT)
That works fine for me. Of course we will also implement the {{TOC limit}} once it works again. --Green Dragon (talk) 08:53, 6 June 2016 (MDT)
What should we do about spellcasting though? Should it all be put at the end, or how can users most easily get the right information for the classes? --Green Dragon (talk) 09:01, 6 June 2016 (MDT)
In terms of formatting, it doesn't need anything more than the ==== and ; headers, so it can go in order with the other features. Spell lists should be separate though, and presented at the end of the class (after multiclassing, my only rationale is that this is the order of things in the PHB). Marasmusine (talk) 09:16, 6 June 2016 (MDT)

Regarding "archetype" vs "paragon", the official term for this seems to be merely "class option" (see DMG p. 288). Marasmusine (talk) 08:50, 6 June 2016 (MDT)

Okay, I will change that. --Green Dragon (talk) 08:53, 6 June 2016 (MDT)

Stub template[edit]

I think this preload would be improved if it included {{stub|Incomplete}} at the top, just as the 5e Race Preload currently does. Classes are often posted in unfinished states or works-in-progress without including such a template. I'd say this occurs with a higher percentage in 5e classes than it does in 5e races, even. - Guy (talk) 13:25, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. You are right of course. --Green Dragon (talk) 15:44, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
a </nowiki> is missing and I am not sure where it should go. thanks for any helping fixing. (and thanks for expanding the stub). BigShotFancyMan (talk) 08:01, 25 September 2018 (MDT)

Archetypes -> subclasses[edit]

Ideally the two or three instances of "archetype(s)" in this protected page can be changed to "subclass(es)." - Guy (talk) 05:52, 5 December 2017 (MST)

Thanks. --Green Dragon (talk) 09:10, 5 December 2017 (MST)

Question[edit]

What is the purpose of the third item in the "Quick Build" subsection, specifically "Third, choose <!-elaborate on equipment choices->"? Classes in the PHB don't discuss equipment choices in a class' quick build description (isn't that what equipment packages are for?), and nobody on this wiki seems to include it in their homebrew classes either. Quincy (talk) 13:53, 5 December 2017 (MST)

It's purpose is to flesh out the recommended build that is then detailed in that section. I guess you can remove it from new classes if you want to. --Green Dragon (talk) 23:13, 10 December 2017 (MST)

Standard subclass verbiage[edit]

There is a slight standard for verbiage when a class begins its subclass progression.

  • Barbarian-At 3rd level, you choose a path that shapes the nature of your rage. Choose the Path of the Berserker or the Path of the Totem Warrior, both detailed at the end of the class description. Your choice grants you features at 3rd level and again at 6th, 10th, and 14th levels.
  • Cleric-Choose one domain related to your deity, such as Life. Each domain is detailed at the end of the class description, and each one provides examples of gods associated with it. Your choice grants you domain spells and other features when you choose it at 1st level. It also grants you additional ways to use Channel Divinity when you gain that feature at 2nd level, and additional benefits at 6th, 8th, and 17th levels.

I'd like to add the following below the class features example:
==== <!-Subclass Feature-> ====
<!-At <!-insert level-> level, you chose a <!-insert name of subclass feature i.e. path, archetype, discipline, etc.->. Choose between <!-list the subclass options->, <!-all/both-> detailed at the end of the class description. Your choice grants you features at <!-insert the level when subclass features begin-> and again at <!-list all the levels the class gains subclass features->.->
I am not sure if this would be formatted correctly for the preload or if others think there is a better way to construct this. BigShotFancyMan (talk) 06:59, 6 July 2018 (MDT)

Your wording should work, its a good idea and will improve the content of the preload, even though it still doesn't work for everything possible. --Green Dragon (talk) 08:50, 6 July 2018 (MDT)
Home of user-generated,
homebrew pages!