Talk: Main Page

Archive 1

SRD and the Update

I'm confused. I understand you're trying to put up some of the SRD, but there's a really fantastic SRD done in full cross linked HTML at http://www.d20srd.org/index.htm, can we just remove all the 3.5 stuff on the front page, and link to that site instead? Giving us more room for setting material and 4th Edition ideas? [6-3-2008]

I was under the impression that Wikia didn't put any sort of limit on the sizes of its wikis. So you could easily include all of the SRD and still have room for 4th edition stuff. In fact you could (and should) also include 2nd edition, 1st edition and OD&D stuff. All of this stuff is Dungeons and Dragons and if you can attract wiki-editors who are into this old stuff, they could be given a section of their own to get on with.

Games like OSRIC (which is to 1st edition AD&D what the SRD is to 3rd edition D&D) have created Open Game Content for retro-gamers. As far as I know, nobody has yet taken that OSRIC OGC and turned it into a hyperlinked resource similer to the Hypertext d20 SRD. There are two OGC systems that do a similar thing for OD&D. Labyrinth Lord and Basic Fantasy Role Playing.

So if the owners of those systems are happy to work with you, this wiki could become a valuable reference source that allows people to understand the rules of retro versions of D&D.

On the other hand, you could also be wikifying more 3rd edition content. There are a number of 3e netbooks, that create OGC that expands on the SRD. All of that could be harvested to create something that goes far beyond what the Hypertext d20 SRD website does. You would need to be careful about any products containing PI (and include a copy of the OGL), but this is something you could do, if you wanted to.David Shepheard 00:24, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Official worlds

Just browsing through and noticed that the list of offical D&D worlds doesn't include Kingdoms of Kalamar. Solers 07:11, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for adding it! --Radaghast 23:45, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Inclusion

How much should we include? just pure Dungeons and Dragons? Or should we also include direct offshoots such as Dragonlance or Forgotten Realms? We need to have a plan before we can really do anything big.--Vercalos 07:14, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

And is it just me, or is much of this stuff taken directly from www.d20srd.org?--Vercalos 03:16, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

It looks like a lot of it is. The content is under a free licence, so that's not too big a problem. We can make an exception to the GFDL-only rule for this wikia to include the Open Gaming License. But pages do need to be carefully marked (there is a notice at the top of them, so that's a start) and we need to be sure that we are complying iwth all the terms of the licence. And, of course, there is no point in this wiki just being a mirror of another site - we need lots of good original content too! But that will come with time :) -- sannse (talk) 08:19, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

We might need that exception; the OGL 1.0a is not a copyleft, but my guess is that section 8 ("... You must clearly indicate which portions of the work that you are distributing are Open Game Content.") could be incompatible with the GFDL.

Meanwhile, even though I have almost no knowledge about Dungeons and Dragons, I was hoping that this wiki could become a companion resource with Wikihack, a wiki about the NetHack computer game. Several things in NetHack (the six attributes of strength, dexterity, ...; the armor class system; the alignments of Lawful, Neutral, and Chaotic; the gelatinous cube; ...) come from D&D, and the Main Page says that this is the wiki for "original pictures and descriptions on the races, creatures, spells and more". --Kernigh 04:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I think Nethack rather like Dragonlance or Norrath... It's a world based off of Dungeons and Dragons... So we might include a NetHack subsection... but there is at least some content that isn't Dungeons and Dragons related in NetHack, that I've noticed....--Vercalos 04:10, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

That sounds a good solution - having a Nethack section that can link into the main articles where that fits, but still keeping the main articles showing the "official" world. Where there are differences, then you can just put in another article "Nethack weapons" or a pseudo-namespace like "Nethack: Weapons" -- sannse (talk) 09:15, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Mmmk.. I just wish I had something to contribute, you know? Aside from formatting stuff..--Vercalos 06:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

:) just jump in and add whatever you know or can learn from reading around. The more you add, the more likely that others will join in and add more! -- sannse (talk) 14:12, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Encouraging content

As a visitor to this site, I have a couple of suggestions that may help you achieve your mission. Firstly, do complete adding wikified d20 SRD here: it will help people write original content: for example I could write "Prestige Class: Dodge Fighter. Prereqs: Fighter level 7, Dexterity 17..." The more I can link to to reference my work the better.

Also, if you want to encourage specific types of content, set up a skeleton structure for them and add links to the main page. For example, you could make an organised gallery for original artwork, or a structure for adding different types of new prestige class, original NPCs, maps, campaign settings or whatever you're looking for. Good luck! 210.55.250.226 22:32, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

D&D Wiki

Are you guys trying to get material to be like D&D Wiki? Or what is this site exactly....? --166.70.232.84 03:23, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure.. I'm just a moderator that came on after the founder virtually abandoned it. I've tried to add some info, paraphrasing and all that, but I just don't have the time or the knowledge necessary to get this place going. The best I can do is repair vandalism and block vandals.--Vercalos 07:23, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

What if you guys talked about maybe working together, like this site as a news and SRD, and maybe a place to hold campeigns(i'll be making a loggin soon) i'd be willing to work on the campeign part, and they could do homebrew stuff?? I haven't talked to them yet though. --72.84.80.42 07:27, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Don't forget that the material of D&D Wiki is available to be reused here, as long as everyone who wrote material over there, gets a credit over here. If this wiki and D&D Wiki were going to have a 75 percent overlap, there is no reason why both wikis couldn't borrow each other's material to boost their page counts and become more valuable. Once the common pool of material is mostly established, both wikis could branch out into the non-similar areas that the other wiki doesn't want to cover. (For example if one wiki stuck to canon, the other could include both canon and homebrew. Something like that would give both wikis different appeal to different readers. And there would be a point in a reader wanting to bookmark both sites, so that they could compare both types of information.) David Shepheard 00:33, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

4E

What's our plan? Do we rearrange the front page to have 2 sections --- 3.5 SRD and 4E SRD? Feels like we aught to break everything out as well: 4E Adventures, 4E WotC boks, etc.

Save vs. death ray 15:45, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikia Gaming IRC channel

Hullo! I am Kirkburn, your friendly local Wikia Gaming Helper!

You may be interested to know there is a Wikia gaming IRC channel, #wikia-gaming on chat.freenode.net, where you can hop on, ask for help from users of other gaming wikis, or offer your own experiences. If you are not familiar with IRC clients, you can access it from http://irc.wikia.com/gaming.

Different people may be on sporadically, but we organize weekly chats at a fixed time so we can get the most number of people online at the same time to ask and answer questions, or just to hang out. The admins of some of Wikia's biggest gaming wikis (e.g. WoW, Halo) often attend them. You can find the time for the next chat by following this link.

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask me! Kirkburn (talk) 17:13, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Kingdoms of Kalamar. Solers 07:11, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for adding it! --Radaghast 23:45, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Inclusion

How much should we include? just pure Dungeons and Dragons? Or should we also include direct offshoots such as Dragonlance or Forgotten Realms? We need to have a plan before we can really do anything big.--Vercalos 07:14, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

And is it just me, or is much of this stuff taken directly from www.d20srd.org?--Vercalos 03:16, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

It looks like a lot of it is. The content is under a free licence, so that's not too big a problem. We can make an exception to the GFDL-only rule for this wikia to include the Open Gaming License. But pages do need to be carefully marked (there is a notice at the top of them, so that's a start) and we need to be sure that we are complying iwth all the terms of the licence. And, of course, there is no point in this wiki just being a mirror of another site - we need lots of good original content too! But that will come with time :) -- sannse (talk) 08:19, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

We might need that exception; the OGL 1.0a is not a copyleft, but my guess is that section 8 ("... You must clearly indicate which portions of the work that you are distributing are Open Game Content.") could be incompatible with the GFDL.

Meanwhile, even though I have almost no knowledge about Dungeons and Dragons, I was hoping that this wiki could become a companion resource with Wikihack, a wiki about the NetHack computer game. Several things in NetHack (the six attributes of strength, dexterity, ...; the armor class system; the alignments of Lawful, Neutral, and Chaotic; the gelatinous cube; ...) come from D&D, and the Main Page says that this is the wiki for "original pictures and descriptions on the races, creatures, spells and more". --Kernigh 04:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I think Nethack rather like Dragonlance or Norrath... It's a world based off of Dungeons and Dragons... So we might include a NetHack subsection... but there is at least some content that isn't Dungeons and Dragons related in NetHack, that I've noticed....--Vercalos 04:10, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

That sounds a good solution - having a Nethack section that can link into the main articles where that fits, but still keeping the main articles showing the "official" world. Where there are differences, then you can just put in another article "Nethack weapons" or a pseudo-namespace like "Nethack: Weapons" -- sannse (talk) 09:15, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Mmmk.. I just wish I had something to contribute, you know? Aside from formatting stuff..--Vercalos 06:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

:) just jump in and add whatever you know or can learn from reading around. The more you add, the more likely that others will join in and add more! -- sannse (talk) 14:12, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Encouraging content

As a visitor to this site, I have a couple of suggestions that may help you achieve your mission. Firstly, do complete adding wikified d20 SRD here: it will help people write original content: for example I could write "Prestige Class: Dodge Fighter. Prereqs: Fighter level 7, Dexterity 17..." The more I can link to to reference my work the better.

Also, if you want to encourage specific types of content, set up a skeleton structure for them and add links to the main page. For example, you could make an organised gallery for original artwork, or a structure for adding different types of new prestige class, original NPCs, maps, campaign settings or whatever you're looking for. Good luck! 210.55.250.226 22:32, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

D&D Wiki

Are you guys trying to get material to be like D&D Wiki? Or what is this site exactly....? --166.70.232.84 03:23, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure.. I'm just a moderator that came on after the founder virtually abandoned it. I've tried to add some info, paraphrasing and all that, but I just don't have the time or the knowledge necessary to get this place going. The best I can do is repair vandalism and block vandals.--Vercalos 07:23, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

What if you guys talked about maybe working together, like this site as a news and SRD, and maybe a place to hold campeigns(i'll be making a loggin soon) i'd be willing to work on the campeign part, and they could do homebrew stuff?? I haven't talked to them yet though. --72.84.80.42 07:27, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

4E

What's our plan? Do we rearrange the front page to have 2 sections --- 3.5 SRD and 4E SRD? Feels like we aught to break everything out as well: 4E Adventures, 4E WotC boks, etc.

Save vs. death ray 15:45, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikia Gaming IRC channel

Hullo! I am Kirkburn, your friendly local Wikia Gaming Helper!

You may be interested to know there is a Wikia gaming IRC channel, #wikia-gaming on chat.freenode.net, where you can hop on, ask for help from users of other gaming wikis, or offer your own experiences. If you are not familiar with IRC clients, you can access it from http://irc.wikia.com/gaming.

Different people may be on sporadically, but we organize weekly chats at a fixed time so we can get the most number of people online at the same time to ask and answer questions, or just to hang out. The admins of some of Wikia's biggest gaming wikis (e.g. WoW, Halo) often attend them. You can find the time for the next chat by following this link.

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask me! Kirkburn (talk) 17:13, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

What should be included here?

I would like to take up the Inclusion-thread from above and divide it into questions to get a clearer picture what really belongs into this wiki. Is this ok here or should it better go to Questions & Answers? Thanks for discussing! Daranios 20:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Only official (= published) material, or homebrew as well?

As D&D Wiki is an already established site specifically for homebrew material (if I got that right), I would vote for official material only. This could also be a clear dividing line between the two wikis. Daranios 20:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I would vote to include anything published for any D&D game, including non Wizards/TSR stuff, and d20 stuff for D&D. Why not?  :) I would not include anything for non-D&D games, although we could consider including some stuff for intentional knock-offs like Hackmaster? I would definitely not include homebrew stuff, as I think there are other wikis to cover that sort of thing. BOZ 16:22, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

There are plenty of places on the web for players and dungeon masters to put their home-brew stuff in, but I don't see that as a reason to forbid posting unpublished material. As BOZ put in a comment above, "why not?"! --Radaghast 17:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Published material only I say. Hackmaster would be somewhat ok, but not everyone's Netbook. Maybe an article on netbooks in general though. Webwarlock 17:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

If people want to be strict with published materials, we can link to ebay and let people buy the originals. A wiki limited to published material would also be infringing on copyright. We can have articles about some high profile NPC's that are in the Greyhawk, Dragonlance, or Mystara worlds, especially for quick reference, but expansions of the core materials that show how that NPC would interact with characters of various levels would be important. Chadlupkes 01:51, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with the statement, that a wiki about published material only would be of little use and an infringement of copyright. Of course one has to be careful, but as an encyclopaedic reference, this wiki would be useful without replacing the original material. An example that works is the Forgotten Realms Wiki. As said above, there already is a place where to place homebrew material, the D&D Wiki. If I got that wrong, please let me know. If not, why have two wikis that do the same? Daranios 15:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

No two wikis will have the same information unless the same people do the work on both. dandwiki is popular because they encourage expansions of the game material. I understand the difference between an encyclopedia and a homebrew extravaganza. We also need to keep in mind the difference between TSR and the gaming community. I would be as interested in articles about the NPC's in Dragonlance with information coming from all of the various books and modules as I would be in learning how to start a new "Dancer" class of character. Let's see where it goes. The worst thing we can do is to debate things until the Xorns come home. Chadlupkes 16:06, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Unforturnately, Chadlupkes is right - 4E license is even more strict in this sense than OGL. Just re-telling what's in the official rulebooks is not only boring, it is also illegal. Chris Pramas (head of Green Ronin) had to even cancel one of the announced products recently (action cards, if I'm not mistaken) because of that. --Radaghast 18:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I was hoping the result of this discussion might go into a guideline to know what I have to expect here and to get the answer to the question: Are you guys trying to get material to be like D&D Wiki? Or what is this site exactly....?

Would such a guideline be too much regulation?

Anyway, more thoughts/arguments why I am for "articles based on published material only":

- Here it's not (mainly) about rules, it's about encyclopaedic summary of information. I guess the dividing line between summary and copyright infringement is small, but it can be done (that's the basis of wikipedia, right?).

- Homebrew and published material should not be mixed at all, or very clearly distinguished. Anything else would be a source of confusion and disagreement for people basing part of their game on information here.

- Sometimes homebrew material maybe better than published one, but the latter has at least undergone a redactional process - and it is part of a defined codex of material instead of "anything goes" (which may not be the worst, but:)

- If I was looking for a new "dancer" class I would go to D&D Wiki, if wanted to know what the heck a Rilmani is, I would look here.Daranios 19:28, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

The question is what will make this WIKI unique and draw people to it. As of now I’m focused on 4.0 and its development as a mature role-playing game. This includes 3rd party support along with the new WOTC books. Under the GSL you can no longer copy material like what was done under the SRD, but new material can be created for both home brew and small press purposes. There is also a set of fan site rules coming that should address some of the issues for this site.

Does DnD:About look like the guidelines you want to see? --Radaghast 18:36, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it looks good. I though that was the guiding principel to the site. Quode 20:07, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Allow for pocket over-views with links, some sample material etc. Allow for the creation of campaign material that may allow a draw to develop.Quode 18:45, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, wow, DnD:About is just what I was looking for all along, but I overlooked it. Is it possible to place a link to DnD:About or DnD:Policies and guidelines in general on the main page, maybe next to DnD:Mission Statement? It seems to me to be vital piece of information for any author here.

Not wanting to make a revolution or something, but are the guidelines there definitve or still under discussion? Daranios 19:30, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Only Dungeons & Dragons, or D20 as well?

I would be happy with solely content about D&D, as D20 includes such a variety of themes (e. g. Star Wars). Daranios 20:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This is definitely a D&D Wikia, not d20 Wikia, since d20 is indeed also about Star Wars, BESM, Call of Cthulhu and whatnot. On the other hand, there's plenty of fantasy stuff out there that style-wise fits quite well with hardcore D&D: Arcana Evolved, Iron Heroes, Legends & Lairs, Blue Rose, Swashbuckling Adventures, Grim Tales, Dragon Lords of Melnibone, Conan RPG, Sword & Sorcery, etc... Anything that is not called D&D only because it changed one too many rules or for legal reasons, is mighty welcome here. --Radaghast 17:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree that this wikia should be strictly D&D material. If people want to time-warp into a galaxy far, far away, we can show them where to find useful information elsewhere. Chadlupkes 01:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Only Wizards of the Coast and TSR?

I would prefer to stick to stuff from Wizards and TSR. If material from other publishers is included, a header or something like that to distinguish it might be helpful. Daranios 20:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I actively disagree. Hundreds of sourcebooks by Malhavoc Press, Green Ronin Publishing, Necromancer Games, Avalanche Press, Bastion Press, Fantasy Flight Games, Goodman Games, Privateer Press, Troll Lord Games and other publishers are just as good as WotC stuff, and quite often even more creative (at least it was the case with 3.5, I'm not sure how things will work out for the new license they have for 4.0). --Radaghast 17:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

This is a users wiki, not a Wizards/TSR wiki. If people want to add material that would apply to adventures that characters can have beyond the TSR worlds, I would say that's fine. We can distinguish them on the pages as not sourced from TSR writers, but we should allow it to be included here. Chadlupkes 01:55, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Only "Core" D&D, or campaign settings as well?

It seems good to me to include material from the various campaign settings as well, as they are a central element of D&D. Again it might be nice to distinguish articles with a header or something designating the setting it refers to. Daranios 20:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, this is a good point (both of them, actually). Right now most articles about setting-specific stuff belong to the corresponding categories. --Radaghast 17:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. Categories and header graphics are important. Chadlupkes 01:55, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

What about existing wikis?

I know about Forgotten Realms Wiki (very large, also includes Al-Qadim), Eberron and Spelljammer Wiki on Wikia. I think it doesn't make sense to try to duplicate their material here. I would find it ideal if one could find their articles with the search engine here as well, though, as they definitely belong to D&D. Maybe it is possible to integrate the All pages pages from those wikis here. I have no idea how this could be done, though. Daranios 20:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I can import as many articles from other websites as needed, but it seems to be better to just link to them since they are evolving and being maintained elsewhere. For example, we can have a Forgotten Realms article that lists the main features of the setting but links to the FRWikia for the details. --Radaghast 17:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I would hold the same true for the Greyhawk Wiki as well. Webwarlock 17:50, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Create a list, and we'll use them as jump-off points if people want more specific information on those worlds. I believe this wiki should be where we explain the core rules, races, spells, etc. that are not world specific, and also give a place for us to add information about worlds that don't have their own place. Chadlupkes 02:00, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Another point I want to add here: from my experience on this and other wiki-sites I can say that it pays off to import foreign content if we are planning to extend it. For example, we can import some Wikipedia article that is Ok there but too short for this place, and add more details while we work on it. If the original is evolving and the local copy ain't (like it would turn out for FR Wiki content), we should link instead. --Radaghast 18:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for namechecking Spelljammer Wiki. It is still fairly small, but it is nice to see that it has been noticed by other wiki-editors. One thing about linking (rather than creating your own articles) is that the objectives of your wiki may or may not be the same as the objectives of another wiki. For example on Spelljammer Wiki, I am pushing for the wiki to be a canon encyclopedia with the emphasis on providing citations to specific sections in the books that the information comes from. If you wanted to go beyond that (and perhaps wikify some of the great fanon material from Beyond the Moons) you would need to do it elsewhere.

One thing you might want to consider, is creating a 'portal' for each campaign setting, that includes links to the wikis you have mentioned, but also includes links to the 'official site' (or if there is no official site - the leading fan site). You could also include a full list of products within that campaign setting (as that is stuff that you could import and not need to update). Over at Spelljammer Wiki, most of the product articles include details on how to buy the commerical PDFs (these are not affiliate links and are only there to help people find pages where they can obtain products). You might want to consider how you might want to present a full list of D&D products (of every edition and every campaign setting).

If you do create 'portals' for each campaign setting, tools to search other wikis could be included on those pages. You might need to ask the Wikia staff for help, but could probably get them to allow you to create interactive forms that allowed people to search other wikis or other non-wiki websites. An uber search page, that allows people to search Greyhawk Wiki, Canonfire!, the official Greyhawk Mailing list (from WotC), the Canonfire Forum and the WotC forum for Greyhawk would be very useful as a 'homepage' for fans of that setting.

Even if the Wikia staff can't (or won't) help you with search forms you could add URLs like this: [1] to allow people to click on a link to search a 'rival' wiki with a subdomain. A few minutes of hacking the URL will let you replicate that with other campaign setting wikis. (Sadly the wikis with directories, instead of subdomains are less easy to do.)

Good luck! David Shepheard 01:06, 25 November 2008 (UTC)