User talk:Green Dragon/Archive 28

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Its contents should be preserved in their current form. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 28 |

Article/Page Delete[edit]

I am new to wiki contributions. When I posted my 1st article/page, I got an error message and thought it did not post, so I reposted an now there are duplicate pages. I want to make sure that it is deleted correctly. Under D&D -> 4e Homebrew -> Diseases there are 2 entries titled "The Gray Slug" and I want to delete the top entry. --Archon86 (talk) 08:49, 19 June 2014 (MDT)

Featured Article Nomination[edit]

Thought I'd drop a note here since I wasn't getting any comments on the page itself. Nominating the Prestidigitator (3.5e Prestige Class) to become a featured article. --Calidore Chase (talk) 06:46, 21 June 2013 (MDT)

Thank you very much I plan to use the site and discuss stuff as well. It just may be sporadic due to my schedule but again many thanks. the Silverfox


I'm a newbie, obviously, and am wondering can I submit images?

Hi Swampy, I'll answer for the sake of expedition. Go to Special:Upload and follow the instructions. Don't upload anything with a copyright license :) Marasmusine (talk) 14:56, 21 August 2013 (MDT)

What does this mean[edit]

like lets say my hit dice is 3d4 what does that mean is it i have to roll 3 4 sided dice Or what?

That's right, take a look at SRD:Basics. Marasmusine (talk) 00:28, 23 August 2013 (MDT)


Hi GD, I'm wondering, do we really need to have the 3.0e SRD here? What we have at the moment is incomplete and poorly, inconsistently transcribed. No-one seems to have any interest in completing it, and I'd bet that 99.99% of visitors will be using 3.5e anyway. If we remove it, it would also clear up a little bit of space on the main page. What do you think? Marasmusine (talk) 02:01, 24 August 2013 (MDT)

It was a WIP. You are right, it is very incomplete. Instead, though, I will just remove it from the Main Page etc (maybe it will be completed sometime). --Green Dragon (talk) 05:16, 24 August 2013 (MDT)
Cool, that's fine. 06:29, 24 August 2013 (MDT)

3.5e class Preloads[edit]

Sorry for adding more sections to your talk page. I was wondering if you'd share your thoughts regarding 3.5e class preloads and if the issue templates should remain there. Thanks, --SgtLion (talk) 04:10, 24 August 2013 (MDT)

Please let mw know when you finished fixing these problems so we can treat administrator rights equally. --Green Dragon (talk) 05:17, 24 August 2013 (MDT)

Multi classing magus[edit]

Hello how does it Work if i chose to multiclass to a spell caster WHO dont use the Mana system?

I assume this is for 5e. You have to start new, since they are new rulesets. --Green Dragon (talk) 06:32, 7 June 2016 (MDT)

About my old Campaign setting[edit]

Hi there, I've been gone from this site for several years. Back when I was a regular user, I started to write down my campaign setting called Vaerya. I recently came back to the site only to discover that the main page for Vaerya is gone, but some of the pages that were inside are still around. I was wondering if there's any way for Vaerya to be restored to what it was before I left, so I can continue to work on it without redoing all that work. If there is a better place to ask this question, my bad. Please let me know.

--Dragon (talk) 15:25, 15 September 2013 (MDT)

Those pages were deleted 4 years ago :) Fortunately they are restorable. I don't think GD will mind if I start undeleting them. You'll find it at Vaerya (DnD Campaign Setting). Marasmusine (talk) 00:44, 16 September 2013 (MDT)
Thanks a bunch! Now I can get right back in there where I started. --GoldDragon (talk) 15:03, 16 September 2013 (MDT)

Authoritative Advice[edit]

Hello, Green Dragon. Could you take a look at this race and tell me what Level Adjustment you think it should have? --Sir Dinadan (talk) 11:20, 20 September 2013 (MDT)

I think that {{needsbalance}} is referring to the situation that one does not get any racial HD by taking the race. Maybe you could bring the LA down to +6 or +7 and add some racial HD to make it superior in every way. Otherwise, feel free to remove the template since it is more referring to its accuracy to its description anyway. --Green Dragon (talk) 12:18, 20 September 2013 (MDT)

4e Race Design[edit]

I am trying to make race with a nice ammount of skills on them. But i try to make it so the user doesn't rely on them but dose use them for effective defense. If you could help me or assist me that would be wonderful. Mai Kao

{[Unsigned|Lenteshi|09:41, 14 October 2013 (MDT)}}

I would restart. Find a race that appeals to you and that is similar in mechanics to what you are looking for and link to it on my page. I can help you further after you have done this. In addition maybe the 4e Race Add Instructions will give you some guidance. --Green Dragon (talk) 01:46, 14 October 2013 (MDT)

Copyright for Tolkien world creation[edit]

I am just getting interested again in AD&D. I have 3rd edition rules, so I guess they should interface ok with 3.5. I am interested in creating a world based directly on the source material from Tolkien's works. It will be 3rd Age previous to 'The Hobbit' novel.

What is the rules for copyright if I do this, especially if it gets published with a fee?

Many thanks, Chris Tuxford

You won't be able to publish it with a fee unless you pay the Tolkien Estate a huge sum of money for use of the IP, and you woudn't be able to publish it on this wiki since it uses copyleft licenses.
If you still want to work on a D&D Tolkien setting I suggest improving J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings (3.5e Campaign Setting) rather than starting yet another one. Marasmusine (talk) 01:05, 29 October 2013 (MDT)

I posted in Discussion on ECL[edit]

I posted here, a rather long bit on discussion for ECL, that does not fit 100% with the posted terminology definition and what it means and why it exists.

The original post however would totally make PRCs that grant ECLs a punishment for characters instead of a benefit and based there being a penalty base for ECLs, who would ever want to have one or take on a PRC that granst them.

There is another descrepency that is promoted in blogs and posts on ECL, stating that an ECL raises teh XP requirements to reach the next level and this also in untrue. What woudl be the point of starting a level 1 character with an ECL that gives them some level 4 abilities, but they have to get level 5 XP to reach level 2? Just start with a level 4 character or a regular character and you will have all the benefits of level 5 instead of just the "ECL" penalized version?

I did not want to overstep any authority and rewrite the page. --Honorlord (talk) 13:03, 8 November 2013 (MST) -- 13:02, 8 November 2013 (MST)

ECL effects the XP calculation, since this is your character level. I have answered on that talk page too. --Green Dragon (talk) 06:41, 7 June 2016 (MDT)

Class Concept[edit]

Objectum Apello (3.5e Class). Thoughts, suggestions?

I like this idea! I gave my advice on the talk page. --Green Dragon (talk) 06:46, 7 June 2016 (MDT)


Hi there, Peter! I was wondering if you could tell me what Astral Driftmetal is, as it doesn't seem to have its own page. 14:26, 12 December 2013 (MST)Stygianelectro

No. Feel free to add a page about it, of course. --Green Dragon (talk) 03:50, 13 December 2013 (MST)

Trouble Registering[edit]

GD, an IP made this new comment in a really old talk archive, I have copied it below. Marasmusine (talk) 03:54, 26 December 2013 (MST)

I feel the antispammer is not only effective at keeping spammers off, it seems to make it quite a hassle for me to register. I have tried to register 3 times, each time waiting between 1,000 and 2,000 seconds for the puzzle part of the registering, only to find out that no matter my best efforts, apparently I have not yet figured out in what exact order in the registering process I am supposed to do the two words test, the puzzle test, and the fill in information. The reason I am under that Impression because each time I tried, it said can't register because of "missing confirmation code", regardless of me actually doing both the two words and the puzzle button and filling it in. It would be helpful to me if I knew the exact order I was supposed to fill out the register, or it would be helpful if I could be exempted. Either way, I have no desire to be seen as a complainer, I just want you to know that for me (and of course I have no idea about any others), and maybe it is because I am on a shared computer, I am being stopped by the registering process, as the human and antispamming confirmations seem to ignore and laugh at me. 21:03, 25 December 2013 (MST)

Thank you for the feedback, it is important that this system is usable. Can you let us know what browser and operating system you are using and on what hardware? Waiting thousands of seconds indicates that something might be wrong—the times taken from successful challenges currently range from 6 to 340 seconds. Looking through the logs, it looks like you may have tried submitting before your machine had solved the puzzle. Following are your logs (there is nothing sensitive in them):
Wed, 25 Dec 2013 18:51:52 -0700	PoW [746ff3f6f614b2f6f1cd28db8d339c54572019cc] failed due to bad puzzle [lF83Iu2r4m] [(please wait...)]
Wed, 25 Dec 2013 19:30:09 -0700	PoW [975b040806a8f47294b715878bd88fc156f89895] failed due to missing challenge
Wed, 25 Dec 2013 19:53:12 -0700	PoW [f07cd7e6da2e1d308e92ed5145007e5a945cb038] failed due to missing challenge
Wed, 25 Dec 2013 19:53:27 -0700	PoW [f07cd7e6da2e1d308e92ed5145007e5a945cb038] failed due to missing challenge
Wed, 25 Dec 2013 20:25:58 -0700	PoW [79f203d5a3d4d44c3c9cb941ef884b8a5fd3e189] failed due to missing challenge
Wed, 25 Dec 2013 20:26:44 -0700	PoW [79f203d5a3d4d44c3c9cb941ef884b8a5fd3e189] failed due to missing challenge
The logs show that your only submitted answer was "(please wait...)". The process should be the following:
  1. enter the values for the ReCAPTCHA test
  2. press "Begin Puzzle Search"
  3. wait until the text box contains some numbers and no longer contains "(please wait...)"
  1. fill out the form and press "Create your account".
If this continues to be a problem, please let me know and I'll temporarily add an exemption to your IP address. Thanks, — Blue Dragon (talk) 08:33, 26 December 2013 (MST)
The funny thing is I tried once more, and in that exact order, and it still did not accept me. I have temporarily allowed all scripts on that page for at least the last four tries. Anything else I should try? 09:05, 26 December 2013 (MST)
It looks like it finally went through?
Thu, 26 Dec 2013 17:18:46 -0700 PoW [b1a5cbdd4588fc7cc3bed490400d9bfe9f03233e] passed [Y9cGo9G7wl] [109251] [339.25]
What did you do differently for it to work? It would be good for anyone experiencing the same issue to know. The puzzles do require scripts to be enabled. Thanks, — Blue Dragon (talk) 08:37, 27 December 2013 (MST)

i would like to add two prestiege classes to DnD wiki.[edit]

Hello Green Dragon,

Over the last year or so a friend of mine has introduced me to dnd wiki. thank you very much for running this site. it has helped not only me and my friend run and play our respective games, but ive also mentioned it to some of the other gamers that ive gamed with. ive also shown the site to them on my laptop. anyways, sorry for the diversion. i would like to add two prestiege classes. one is called the mentalist. i based this one off of the show the mentalist. i made the mentalist class to help get out of tight situations. the mentalist class may look like a support class, but it can be used by a meat shield like a fighter or ranger. the other prestiege class is called skill monkey. skill monkey helps you explore your skills better, but when skill monkey is forced into combat, its more of a support class then anything. i havent used either class with a barbarian or wizard yet. but it is possible to use either prestiege class with either of the base classes. feel free to email me back at ill email the details of both prestiege classes.

have a great day Green Dragon,


Just go ahead and make them. The formatting not that hard. if you can't figure something out, feel free to ask me on my comments page. it under homebrew. --Salasay Δ 20:15, 5 January 2014 (MST)

Transcribing Pathfinder content[edit]

For a while (at least, before my become a very busy dude), my group moved over to Pathfinder rules, and I very much enjoy it, so I've got a fair interest in transcribing it to dandwiki. It'd be a real useful way to access the content, moreso than the paizo site as it currently is. I looked at and it seems practically all of it is OGC 1.0a 'cept the lore and trademarked stuff.

I noticed there's already a couple articles like Pathfinder Race: Dwarf, but I bring this to you for three big questions. Mainly, does this seem like a good idea to you? Obviously I'm pretty biased, but Pathfinder's like a beautiful 3.6e. Putting this up would be useful to me, even if few others.

Secondly, and pretty similarly, does my interpretation of the license check out, is it suitable to put up on dandwiki in a big way? The license page linked applies to the core rulebook and the other paizo supplement books, so it's the whole kit 'n kaboodle.

Thirdly, should it all check out, I propose a simple namespacing system similar to the SRD - Simply putting all pathfinder articles in a "Pathfinder: ..." namespace, putting things like (Pathfinder Spell) when article names conflict (Such as in SRD:Fly and SRD:Fly (3.5e Spell)). Of course a lot of pathfinder terms are very similar to SRD terms, so there'd be a large increase in disambiguation pages for standard classes and feats.

Thanks kindly, it's a big thingy, but it'd be nice to do big helpful contributing instead of just a meany destroy man. --SgtLion (talk) 13:50, 8 January 2014 (MST)

I think that this is a great idea. I would start using Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook as the main page, with a suitable namespace for all the pages. I agree that it is a great idea to have pathfinder on D&D Wiki, and while working on this project keep in mind the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Conversion Guide and Category:Pathfinder. The license is fine to transcribe, and there are articles too which would be great to place within the pathfinder ruleset– for example Coin Golem (3.5e Creature). Thus, an organizing structure for the content would be great (not just for the rulebook). --Green Dragon (talk) 04:06, 9 January 2014 (MST)
I believe the accepted abbreviation for the Pathfinder SRD is PFSRD, if that helps. --Ganre (talk) 09:44, 10 January 2014 (MST)
Sounds a reasonable enough abbreviation. I'll transcribe a few entries, use Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook as a central hub of links to them, put 'em all in Category:Pathfinder, and hopefully have an idea as to how to structure it all properly~ --SgtLion (talk) 11:45, 10 January 2014 (MST)
I can help with some of the transcription if you would like. I have the PFPhB, so i could help there. Do we want to use the same formatting standards as 3.5e, or should we have some minor differences to help with telling the difference between 3.5e and PF without looking at namespace, kind of like 4.0 vs 3.5. If I remember correctly, the graphs in PF are blueish green instead of tan. Also, do you want to treat it like a separate game (e.g. D&D, D20 Modern, Pathfinder) or as a "3.75e" (2.5e, 3.5e, PF, 4e). Personally, I propose the former. --Salasay Δ 13:34, 12 January 2014 (MST)
Yay, exciting, goodcool people who are able and willing~. Different formatting scheme would probably be good, not that I currently have any idea how to set that up. And agreed, it should be treated as a separate system, as that's technically what it is. --SgtLion (talk) 15:42, 12 January 2014 (MST)
Blue Dragon could probably help with the formatting change for pathfinder. We should check what the formatting is in the books and try to copy it. I think it would require programing in a new table system for PF, but I have no clue. If its goin to be its own system, it needs its own menu tab thing on the left side of the page. --Salasay Δ 19:48, 12 January 2014 (MST)
For the formatting you just have to change MediaWiki:Common.css by adding a table, etc. See also Help:Table. When it is more complete it can be given its own area. If you need an "official" PFSRD namespace, then contact Blue Dragon and he can add it (so it can be found with searches, etc). --Green Dragon (talk) 11:31, 13 January 2014 (MST)
I was wrong. The tables are no fill and have no lines vertical lines at all. The horizontal lines are brown, and the bottom line and the line under the table headers are thicker.--Salasay Δ 13:43, 18 January 2014 (MST)
I am looking at some Pathfinder books and I cannot seem to find the tables that you are referring to. See also File:Pathfinder Table Example 1.png and File:Pathfinder Table Example 2.png. Those tables are not too difficult to create, if that is what is needed. Let me know if those are the tables that needs to be created, or supply an image of what you are talking about. --Green Dragon (talk) 15:03, 18 January 2014 (MST)
Yeah, that what I was trying to describe. I'm just really bad at describing it. Yeah, pic 2 looks about right. --Salasay Δ 22:42, 18 January 2014 (MST)
Okay, now you have a pathfinder table. I was a little uncertain of the column spacing, especially since it seems like Paizo stretched the tables across columns. I am also not sure how to make the table designator padded, and if you know how let me know please. In addition it seems like Paizo changed the borders between the column designators and the columns, but I am not sure how to do this either.
table designator
column designator (row start) column designator (in-line row) column designator (in-line row)
column (row start) column (in-line row) column (in-line row)
column (row start) column (in-line row) column (in-line row)
  1. Any notes that the table requires
  2. More notes
Let me know if there is anything that is wrong with it. --Green Dragon (talk) 05:04, 19 January 2014 (MST)
Wowie, we got pretty tables~ Looks good, and, obviously, very appropriate. :3 --SgtLion (talk) 07:04, 19 January 2014 (MST)
Great! just going to point out that if you look at the fighter page, the bottom lines for 13, 16, and 19 are dark, but aren't supposed to be. What is causing that, you think? Also, in the book table designators look more like an ununderlined heading 3 (=== might be describing that wrong).
A note on individual class tables: the saves are formatted as "Fort Save" with out the super column. As far as padding, i have no clue how to do it but saves and "Base Attack Bonuse" are always wrapped so that each word is on a different line. Spells per day n' stuff, however, is a supercolumn but isn't underlined. Ill go mess with the preload, see what happens.
Table: The Class
column (row start) column (in-line row) column (in-line row) column (in-line row)
column (row start) column (in-line row) column (in-line row) column (in-line row)
  1. Any notes that the table requires
  2. More notes
I hope that the preload has solved this. If not, just drop me a post. --Green Dragon (talk) 06:52, 7 June 2016 (MDT)

Abandoned D&D pages[edit]

Green Dragon if a Dnd class is marked as abandoned are we free to edit it? I would assume yes but i wanted to make sure, also if yes how we mark the page as not abandoned because the page says it will be deleted if not. I'm also sorry if the question's answer is obvious im kind of new to dnd in all let alone just the wiki. thank you

If it isn't marked protected, you can make constructive edits. If it is abandoned, feel free to adopt the article and change it as you see fit. --Ganre (talk) 14:54, 27 March 2014 (MDT)

Helpers, part >2[edit]

So, I was wondering if it would be possible to get an advertisement for the Helpers Page put up on the main page. I kind-of want to get more people onto the page. In addition, I was wondering if there was a way I could view the users of the wiki by edit count. That would help in actively recruiting people for the page. Sorry for starting another thread, but the other(s) is buried in the archives.

Special:ActiveUsers shows edit count for everyone over the last 30 days, but its in alphabetical order rather than count order. Marasmusine (talk) 15:46, 27 March 2014 (MDT)

Genasi's Picture[edit]

Hello! This is a great wiki, and I know you're going for accuracy. Just wanted to let you know the appearance image used for Genasi is an npc from an mmo called Mabinogi, and not an Air Genasi. Would be great if you could change it to an appropriate image for Genasi, thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 13:27, 21 April 2014‎. Please sign your posts.

For the record, I only just noticed this, and checked out of curiosity. My Genasi is one of the only two Genasi Homebrew on the site, and quick check revealed he was correct. I've replaced the offending picture with a properly licensed one.
That said, it is a homebrew race, not an official one, as this user seems to imply. Perhaps that idea about having a "Homebrew" banner at the top of all homebrew pages isn't such a bad idea. --Jwguy (talk) 05:36, 15 May 2016 (MDT)
I concur with about 100 other people i bet. Big difference in homebrew and official. There was a decent poster even if the pint that was being made was hard to understand by some. I liked their ideas for the most part. They quit adding and fixing things because of this very fact. McAlester Gamerz Customer (talk) 12:10, 15 May 2016 (MDT)


Good catch on the machine going crazy. I don't have a clue why it changed the combat table at all, since I didn't touch that section. I noticed someone changed the identify and analyze deweomer sections and I was shifting them back to what they were. I didn't notice it messing with the tables. Tivanir (talk) 09:06, 4 June 2014 (MDT)

Think I figured it out. I don't think the cache was clearing correctly so I went in and manually cleared it. I think I am seeing things correctly now. Tivanir (talk) 09:20, 4 June 2014 (MDT)
Good to know your mistake instead of something else. I know about the error! I let Blue Dragon about this problem, as well as some "Guru Mediation" error that I am getting, but he has not gotten back to me yet. I told him there is an error with saving and refreshing pages. It is good to know that I am not the only one with this error. --Green Dragon (talk) 09:28, 4 June 2014 (MDT)
Its fine I just need to check my other recent edits and make sure that nothing else started going insane. Tivanir (talk) 09:38, 4 June 2014 (MDT)

3.5 to 4e?[edit]

Hi Green Dragon. I play 4th Edition D&D, and I noticed a real lack of items, and generally, lack of everything in the 4e Homebrew section. I was wondering if I could take some of the entries on the 3.5e Homebrew and OGL and adjust them to work in 4e. Would I have to give credit to any original author listed?

Sorry in advance for the advise ninja-ing, GD. I think that it would be fine, but tell the author in case s/he wants to be involved. I think giving credit would be optional, but linking to the original page would be a must. --Salasay Δ 20:13, 8 June 2014 (MDT)
That would be great! Ya, a link to the original page is fine since it has a history and also so users know where the idea is based off. --Green Dragon (talk) 11:21, 9 June 2014 (MDT)


Is there an official policy on illustrations here?

Yes. It is more detailed on Category:Candidates for Deletion. If this does not answer your question, let me know please. --Green Dragon (talk) 11:39, 11 June 2014 (MDT)

4e Race Standards[edit]

Discussion has been moved to Talk:4e Race Preload#4e Race Standards. --Green Dragon (talk) 10:04, 14 June 2014 (MDT)

Protected Edit Request[edit]

Not sure how close an eye you guys keep on Category:Needs Admin so I thought I'd mention this here as well. I went ahead and forked the page MSRD:Feats and made some changes to it in my userspace. I'd like to request that those changes be added back to the original article. You can find my merge request here. Zell Faze (talk) 08:56, 22 July 2014 (MDT)

Thanks! If there are any other MSRD pages which need to be updated you may either do the same as you did here, or let me know in advance and I can give you administrator rights for a limited time. --Green Dragon (talk) 14:11, 22 July 2014 (MDT)

Site Change Question[edit]

Since my last bout of activity, I've noticed a few changes. Obviously the vandalism is bad, but I wonder what change led to us no longer being able to access stuff such as individual user's edit counts? I ask because I like to give out The Tireless Contributor Barnstar and Working Man Barnstar. I was trying to go through and reup on what I've missed and give props where its due to those users, but not having that one feature severely limits said ability. Perhaps its just that only admins now have access to such (which would be understandable I suppose), but it seems to be gone entirely. Was this a mediawiki update or does it serve some higher purpose (like how I also see we can no longer see at the bottom how many page views a page has, but I saw your note about changing that to help out other areas).   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   22:51, 30 August 2014 (MDT)

Additional note: Could potentially be beneficial to add a meta page that lists all Barnstars/Awards and what they can be given for. I say this because during my time trying to reward individuals, I came across some that have only been given out once and don't have really clear prerequisites for grants: i.e. Da Vinci barnstar, FreeDoc Barnstar, etc. Mostly I'm trying to pat people on the back, but don't know which to use given context.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   22:55, 30 August 2014 (MDT)
A category for various barnstars can be found at Category:Barnstar Recognition.
Yes, vandalism is bad and please feel free to help wherever you are able to. An active and supporting userprofile is a prerequisite for adminship, for example.
The updates to MediaWiki relate to the various other things that you are referring to, and the amount of edits attributed to your account can be found in your preferences. --Green Dragon (talk) 00:39, 31 August 2014 (MDT)
Ah, well still neat to be able to see own count but that makes it impossible for regular users to reward certain barnstars (though that may be better, really).   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   17:35, 31 August 2014 (MDT)
That is not the intention. Anyone can still give barnstars to anyone else, its just organizing the reward. --Green Dragon (talk) 05:08, 9 October 2014 (MDT)

Revampled non-OGL content[edit]

Ech, just came across Shapeshift_Druid_Variant_(PHB2)_2.0_(3.5e_Class), it's openly based on, and incredibly similar to, the Druid variant from PHB II. PHB II isn't OGL though, so I ain't sure where this article lies in terms of legitimacy. I beseech your input on this matter. Also a shame it wasn't picked up on earlier, as the creator seems to have put some fair amount of work in. Thankee~ --SgtLion (talk) 14:17, 12 September 2014 (MDT)

Intellectual property laws state that the revision has to be un-similair to a successful extent. Do you think that this page is different enough, and if it is not it needs to be deleted (I don't have the PHB 2 with me right now). --Green Dragon (talk) 03:17, 13 September 2014 (MDT)
There's like, 50% more content than the original, and a majority of paragraphs are changed in both wording and mechanics. In my unprofessional opinion, I'd say it's different to some meaningful degree, so I guess I'll leave it for now. Thanks kindly --SgtLion (talk) 07:17, 13 September 2014 (MDT)
I haven't looked at the item in question, so I can't give my opinion in this specific case. Wikipedia's policy on Close Paraphrasing discusses how the text of a document might be entirely changed, but it is still copyright infringement because it is still "Substantially similar" to the source document. This "Substantial similarity" is the test that courts use to determine copyright infringement. WP:Close paraphrasing Substantial similarity Zell Faze (talk) 15:14, 16 October 2014 (MDT)

Some homebrew balance[edit]

So I recently started making homebrews and i was wondering if you would look at them and give me your opinion. Wisplings_(3.5e_Race) particularly the level adjustment question on the page. Sorcerous_Scholar_(3.5e_Class). respond on their talk pages if you could so its easier to keep track of. Mordred the dark (talk) 19:20, 11 October 2014 (MDT)

Also i made a deity with stat block 2 and the spell-like abilities went missing. Mateu,_The_Elemental_Creator_(3.5e_Deity)Mordred the dark (talk) 11:38, 12 October 2014 (MDT)
That stat block seems okay to me. --Green Dragon (talk) 07:22, 7 June 2016 (MDT)

Homebrew Reputation[edit]

So I was tooling around on Giantitp, and ran across a thread of interest. As you probably know, this wiki has a bad reputation for having terrible homebrew and an inaccurate SRD. The SRD thing is fixed, but some of the points made about Homebrew-SRD distinctions seemed kind-of valid. Would it be possible to get a banner put on the top of all of the homebrew pages, making it clear that it is, in fact, homebrew? That seems to be one of the main complaints about this site, and it seems to be an easy enough fix (Assuming bots can do something like that). We could take something like the Barnstar banner and put a nice, frothy, wooden mug-o'-ale as the picture. I feel like that would fit with the aesthetics of the wiki, and aid in improving the clarity of the site.

The second idea would be to make some kind of merit based list of homebrew that is promoted to be the main homebrew page. That way the "main" homebrew page is almost all decent homebrew. That is the second issue that people have with this site is more that because it is a wiki, the cream doesn't rise to the top like it does in a forum. If we had some form of cream-riseing mechanism in place, that might be solved. The thought I had was to have a system similar to the featured article system, where an article is nominated to join the list. However, the criteria would be more relaxed, and the decisions would be more... independent. Make it so that a list of people each have the power to pass or fail an article. To start we would go through what we have now and select what is already good, (NOTE: By good I mean readable, playable, moderately balanced, and with a minimum of flavor. Preload completion isn't required, but whether or not the preload is adequately done would be a case-by-case thing) and what isn't. This idea is by no means complete, but i think a more comprehensive and consistent rating system is necessary, as well as a way to segregate the content by said rating (As is some random IP could come in, make a class, barely fill out the preload, and give it a 5/5/5/5.) So yeah, I think an overhaul of the homebrew is in order.--Salasay Δ 19:14, 15 October 2014 (MDT)

This has been brought up before, and even resulted in a site fork (which then had its own fork). Its simply not something that is realistic. Who gets to say what is good or bad? How can you judge fluff when people have different opinions? What if some players are min/maxers and rate things that are actually balanced as weak, or vice-versa? Its just a wormhole that doesn't need to be touched. As for cream, we have a featured article system that is rarely used (check recent discussions - I've tried to spur more regular updates to the FA to prevent main page stagnation).
Basically, its impossible to expect an entire volunteer-base to create such a system, and to especially create one that everyone will like. Regardless of opinions, this site gets more daily hits than all the forks or competitors combined. If someone wanted to go and see what a strictly ranked website looks like, they can. Its out there. And it has its niche.
TL;DR: People always complain. Let them.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   21:38, 15 October 2014 (MDT)
While I've been quite proactive with removing bad content over the past 2 years, but the sites reputation precedes me. Also I note that the criticism is from 3rd edition users. With the 4e material, I've busted a gut sorting through it, and its in a fairly good state, and there's no SRD/Homebrew divide to be confused about. I'm hoping that 5e content will be good quality, if we keep on top of assessing it as it comes in. Marasmusine (talk) 01:40, 16 October 2014 (MDT)
I do admit that judging crap vs cream is subjective, but I feel like it would be an improvement if we were to just move the true crap off of the primary homebrew page. I'm not at all calling for a complete exorcism of non-prime material. In fact, I freely admit, some of my own stuff probably wouldn't cut the mustard of any half decent cleansing. I do, however, think that it would be possible to make a list of the homebrew that is not hopeless crap. By good i mean that it isn't painful to read. If its well worded but flawed in balance or concept, or if its well balanced but has awkward wording, it'd be fine. This topic I'm willing to drop with just a "we should work on cleaning it out a bit", but for the labeling on 3.5e stuff, I think that it is necessary because we have both SRD stuff and Homebrew, unlike our 4e and 5e stuff where its just the homebrew. And also, it just seems easy enough to do and it wouldn't hurt anything. --Salasay Δ 13:08, 16 October 2014 (MDT)
Brainstorming: Maybe user-created lists of pages? Like you say they don't have to be super high quality, just "here's a selected list of stuff I think works." Then its a matter of how to present them to a visitor. Marasmusine (talk) 14:27, 16 October 2014 (MDT)
I think that dividing the pages between lists without improving, reviewing, and removing templates and with them is quite sufficient. I don't think that a list could really be as up-to-date.
For the disclaimer, I feel that the page title is adequate. In addition it is only 3.5 edition anyway, and the newer editions are only homebrew so a site-wide disclaimer would be quite over-the-top. Their footers and location also designate their page type. --Green Dragon (talk) 14:30, 16 October 2014 (MDT)
To throw in my two-cents, I do feel that it would be nice to have a template at the top of the homebrew content that just makes it clear that it is homebrew content. Just earlier today someone complained that if you Google "SRD Katana" a homebrew page comes up here. We can't really do anything about Google, but their primary complaint was that for anyone unfamiliar with how the site is organised, you can't tell that that page is Homebrew and not SRD. Also I don't think there is anything wrong with subjective measurements of what is good and what is bad, beyond just being difficult to do. I don't really know the solution to separating the good homebrew content from the bad homebrew content, but the terms themselves, while subjective, are important, useful, and meaningful. Zell Faze (talk) 15:04, 16 October 2014 (MDT)
Maybe we should expand {{OGL Top}} and make {{OGL Bottom}} non hidden by default. As I said, only 3.5 edition has SRD (and D20M), so changing the MediaWiki for older editions does not make much sense. And, I don't know if Blue Dragon has much time for these ideas (which must be argued further anyway) now since he is already doing a lot for D&D Wiki including traveling to finish the new hardware updates soon, and needs to do things for that. --Green Dragon (talk) 16:19, 16 October 2014 (MDT)
If this is deemed necessary, wouldn't it be easier to simply have something on the site itself, instead of having to edit every page? I.e. just change the logo on the top left where there is a slogan. Something like "D&D Wiki - Home of Homebrew & SRD - Verify before Use. That was literally just thought up in two seconds, so I'm sure there is better wording. But that seems much easier than a page-by-page edit, and much more realistically possible.
Also keep in mind that these users showcase an extreme lack of knowledge of wikis (which have grown substantially in internet share over the years) while still maintaining that a forum is good (which have all nearly died, except for small enclaves of stubborn users). So again, its just personal opinion. No need for us to work triple hard at people who still will complain if we did everything they wanted.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   16:32, 16 October 2014 (MDT)
What about a touch of code that automatically inserts a "Homebrew" message or banner at the top of every page created? Give admins only the ability to disable it for SRD pages. It could be added to the 'Add your own XXXXX' page creation links, how to make it non-removeable by any except admins I don't know. As far as existing pages, a bot might be able to addit to every page that didn't start with 'SRD'. I'm not skilled in html or other coding so maybe what I'm suggesting isn't feasible. --Elohim (talk) 17:03, 16 October 2014 (MDT)
But yeah, I was thinking something like what Elohim said. I know there was a site-wide removal of Ownership templates, and i think it was a bot edit the first time, with isolated cases of re-edits like the Archetyper thing a while back. I was thinking something like that. We could also, if banners is just too infeasible, change the namespace (again) to "(3.5e Homebrew <-Class/PrC/Race/Template/etc.->)". That would be better than what we have now, but still not as good as banners.
I also agree with Zell. It doesn't really matter how strict the criteria is for the distinctions, as long as the absolute and utter garbage doesn't end up on said list. The main point is to get the painful stuff off of the main homebrew list. Again, I'm willing to drop this topic with just a "we should work on cleaning it out a bit" if necessary. --Salasay Δ 18:11, 16 October 2014 (MDT)
A Mediawiki extension that adds a banner to the top of every Article namespace page would actually be pretty trivial to put together. That might be a better solution than trying to do something with templates. You can't forget it or be incompetent when it is done automatically. Zell Faze (talk) 19:52, 16 October 2014 (MDT) EDIT: Just noticed that this was suggested already. As a Mediawiki extension developer, I can vouch that it would be pretty easy to put together (Also I only indented this message once because we are getting really deeply indented and I'm trying to reset it to something reasonable again.) Zell Faze (talk) 19:55, 16 October 2014 (MDT)
Your fine, I just didn't think it needed it yet. Then again, my huge manly man-ego feels better with loooong, hugely indented discussions on topics I post. If I had my way this would get to one word lines. --Salasay Δ 10:47, 17 October 2014 (MDT)
Okay, please ignore me if I'm stepping out of bounds. I am but a simple commoner after all, and one who mainly frequents the Modern section of this here wiki, at that. But, I do think that it is clear what is SRD and what is not...if you know what you're doing. Now, I think it's unfair for others to judge this here site because other people don't know how to use it. That'd be like blaming Linux programmers because I don't know how to use a Linux OS. All that aside, it couldn't hurt (well, maybe a bit (or a lot?)) clean it up somehow. That said, if there is anything I can do, let me know. I am in favor of cleaning this wiki up, and I am in favor of making changes that make it easier to see what is homebrew and SRD, and what is actually good content. But, if I may also add, I am not sure why the whole of the D&D 3.5 SRD is still here, especially after the 3e one was removed. As others might have mentioned, there is another excellent 3.5 SRD. There is not, however any other MSRD just as good. So if I might, I recommend removing the 3.5 SRD, but leaving the MSRD. This would save on HDD space, and leave no room for anyone to mix up homebrew and OGL. Maybe change that icon in the top left to say "100% Homebrew D&D" or "All D&D content is unofficial as of [date]" or something of the like? Just my really long two cents. Please, if I stepped out of line, forgive me and ignore my message.--GamerAim (talk) 21:22, 16 October 2014 (MDT)
You are not, in any way, stepping out of line. You have just as much right to comment on this wiki as I do. Even if you were an IP you would have the right to comment. --Salasay Δ 10:47, 17 October 2014 (MDT)
I see the main reason for having the SRD here is so we can link internally to it. Say I'm making a homebrew thing that applies the stunned condition, blam there's a link that lets people know exactly what I mean. I'm also constantly referring to it If it was removed, I'm not volunteering for cleaning up the tens of thousands of redlinks that would make.
The SRD pages are in "SRD space", i.e. it's right there in the title before the colon. How feasible is it to migrate mainspace pages to a "Homebrew" space? (Rather than the above suggestion of renaming every page to "Name (Xe Homebrew Class/Race/etc)". For example: Homebrew: Parry Focus (3.5e Feat).
Finally, I suspect that no matter how many disclaimers, title changes and awooga warnings we display, there will people who will confuse homebrew for official material for which we will get complaints. Marasmusine (talk) 10:30, 17 October 2014 (MDT)
Its also convenient to have an attached SRD so that while I'm making a class I can look up other stuff on the same website. I know that I use this site as my main SRD source when making a character, and as Marasmusine said it lets us link internally. --Salasay Δ 10:47, 17 October 2014 (MDT)
Gorammit Marasmusine! You ninjad me!
Homebrew space would be nice. In fact that would work awesome if we could do it, because then we could just make any Homebrew space stuff display the banner (although we could do that with mainspace too, but i think theres non homebrew non SRD stuff there), and then with the banner and the namespace anyone who complains about the lack of adequate labeling is obviously too stupid to find their posterior with Skill Focus(Search) and both hands. But in all seriousness, the main complaint is not that people do it, its that we don't do enough to prevent it. If someone falls off of a bridge and there's no railings, its the bridge owners fault. If someone manages to fall off of a bridge and there are railings, its his own damn fault. --Salasay Δ 11:04, 17 October 2014 (MDT)
I am in favor of the force fields. Also, good point about the SRD. But on changing the homebrew content to a different namespace, would that not cause the same problem for those linking to other homebrew content? Adrenaline Rush becomes Adrenaline Rush, right? Then bam! Everything is broken! I could be wrong, though?--GamerAim (talk) 13:14, 17 October 2014 (MDT)
Although I can follow the logic posted here as to why a Homebrew namespace would be good, we must remember that these people complaining are the same ones who don't notice the SRD namespace or any of that. So really, this wouldn't fix their problem with it.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   13:18, 17 October 2014 (MDT)
Having an explicit homebrew distinction such as a banner or namespace change on homebrew pages is different than having explicit SRD distinctions. Its not that people don't notice the SRD namespace. Its that the Homebrew pages don't have anything to notice. <Begin:Anecdote.Overly(LongAndGraphic).Index(Two)> If I put up a sign on my property that says "Trespassers will be made to leave", people won't come onto my property because they know I will make them leave. What if the town I live in, Shootapicatopolis, writes a law that says "Trespassers on private property will be made to leave unless the owner has a sign saying they will not". Joe from New York comes to Shootapicatopolis and, ignorant of that law, trespasses on my property because he didn't see a sign. Now Joe gets politely scolded, and just because he didn't know the local law </End:Anecdote.Index(Two)>. Basically, we can't expect outsiders to know that if it doesn't have an SRD namespace, its homebrew. A more serious anecdote would be peanuts. What if they put something on everything without peanuts in it that said "contains no peanuts", and no label on, say, Kung Pow Chicken. The best option is to have two labels for everything "Peanuts (homebrew)" or "No Peanuts (SRD)".
I seem to be in an anecdoty mood today --Salasay Δ 14:52, 17 October 2014 (MDT)
So does this mean that changing the namespace won't completely destroy every link in the namespace, making the whole of everything created findable only through categories? Because while I doubt this will happen, I'd like to know in advance that all my work will be thrown out the window I'll have to re-link a few things. I'm not in charge, but this really is a concern for me.--GamerAim (talk) 19:37, 17 October 2014 (MDT)
There is probably a way for admins to use a bot to prevent link kablooeyage. I think what would be more likely is the "Name (Xe Homebrew Class/Race/etc)", just because that change has been done before (DnD Stuff to 3.5e Stuff). But yeah, don't worry about it. Admins will make sure Linkpocalypse does not occur. --Salasay Δ 20:41, 17 October 2014 (MDT)
I think that the "Main" namespace is quite sufficient. Changing things around drastically with the namespaces would also make the Main namespace no longer used, and page creation would suffer drastically.
In this regard most people 1) know what a wiki is 2) can easily learn D&D Wiki's aim and 3) easily adapt to D&D Wiki's structure.
That said, we can add something to the sidebar like "Home of user-generated, homebrew, pages!" under the banner. I don't really like the idea of an obtrusive alert letting people know what they are reading (since as I said above the average internet user knows what a wiki is).
I think that there is also some merit in expanding the OGL banner to let people know that what they are viewing is likely not homebrew material.
We can put this up to a vote if we want to, however some options will be ruled out of the vote based on 1) user accessibility and 2) non-progressive structural changes (to name that which are coming to my head now). --Green Dragon (talk) 03:11, 18 October 2014 (MDT)
What is this super active conversation outta nowhere? I'm certainly on board with GD here. Adding a homebrew namespace would make an already annoyingly cluttered article naming convention a bunch worse, and page-specific notices would be quickly irritating and a burden to manage.
Giving people extra hints that this has homebrew stuff and getting people to easily learn when they're specifically browsing SRD things I think would both be be helpful. I don't think there's any panacea here that wouldn't end up a complicated mess. I don't know if we even have formal voting procedures for things like this, but I figured I'd get my view in the case it didn't come to that. --SgtLion (talk) 15:12, 29 October 2014 (MDT)
Yeah, now that i think about it namespace change would be hard. So my proposal is to put banners on top of homebrew pages or if that is deemed too intrusive the "Name (Xe Homebrew Class/Race/etc)" option. I don't think the banner would be too intrusive, but some might disagree with me. --Salasay Δ 19:37, 29 October 2014 (MDT)
Since it seems that there is a lot of opinions here, someone please make a voting page on Talk:Meta Pages with all the options that we have been talking about, as well as "no change".
Note: If you add a voting option make sure that you have verified the method of making the changes (if any). I cannot do anything in effect except for MediaWiki:Sidebar. If you want help from Blue Dragon (for example) then make sure to ask him about it so that it can be voted on as an option. --Green Dragon (talk) 10:25, 3 November 2014 (MST)
I've thrown together a suggestion for the lil' votey section, located at Talk:Meta Pages#Homebrew Reputation. If we're all okay with how it's set out, then I guess I'll move it to its own page and give it a week for voting. If anyone wants to add their own motions or change my summary of the matter then now's an ideal time. I don't know if we had official templates or whatnot, but I ain't hangin' around forever for some official hokey pokey to make one o' these.
I've put down as headers what I've read as the main ideas, but I'm not 100% sure I or anyone could implement them, so I'll be revising my coding and talking to Blue Dragon in the meantime before the vote goes live. --SgtLion (talk) 14:51, 5 November 2014 (MST)
This project seems to have stagnated a little bit. I've created an idea for a banner, and if i remember correctly there is a way to add a section of code to all pages of a certain type. If not, we could adapt the banner to be part of the info-boxen by changing the info-box template. I think there are ways to do this, and we should work on getting the viability either confirmed and voted on, or disproved and we can implement another indication. --Salasay Δ 13:23, 16 December 2014 (MST)
I think from the sound of it, it's a plausible move, I've little doubt that Blue Dragon Magic can do it. Though I think the like for the idea is lacking among admins, for sure. Certainly I think something needs to be done to more overhaul users' discontent with the interspersement of homebrew, but I just dunno. Maybe a teeny coloured one-line info box on all pages with like Category:User or something, would be good. But I wouldn't support anything bigger. --SgtLion (talk) 15:23, 28 January 2015 (MST)

5e table column padding[edit]

The tables present in the fifth edition D&D Basic Rules (and printed books) shows a substantial gap between columns, totaling to (I reckon) about 1 em. I saw that you tweaked the left/right padding in the cells a few times. I wondered if there was a particular restriction that makes an 0.5-em padding on both sides a bad idea. In the meantime, since there are no actual cell borders, some tables look pretty rough, especially when the headers are wider than the body cells, making the top line appear as a run-on (c.f. Death Domain (5e Archetype) (except in that case I manually added more padding)). —Proton[talk] 16:17, 1 December 2014 (MST)

I'll see if it is possible to make the borders work better. If I recall right, borders are hard because it does all the gaps over again so the borders are like 250% of having no changes applied to them. I wonder if the run-on problem also is part of this concern. Hopefully it can easily resolved.
I don't know if borders make much sense because they are not in the books. Where are you seeing them? --Green Dragon (talk) 18:08, 14 December 2014 (MST)
Ah, I did not mean that the tables should have borders, just that the lack of borders in general meant that the spacing was more important for separating columns. —Proton[talk] 22:36, 14 December 2014 (MST)
So, I noticed this still hasn't been addressed. In MediaWiki:Common.css, the styling for table.\000035e th, table.\000035e td just needs to set padding-left: 0.5em; and padding-left: 0.5em; and it would be completely resolved. It's a really simple but substantial improvement. —Proton[talk] 03:05, 4 May 2016 (MDT)
Okay, I think that is better. I used 1em since that makes pages like Artificer (5e Class) readable. --Green Dragon (talk) 07:14, 5 May 2016 (MDT)
Home of user-generated,
homebrew pages!