Dungeons and Dragons Wiki

Talk:Surgo/Archive 1

Back to page | < User talk:Surgo

9,973pages on
this wiki
Add New Page
Add New Page

Welcome! Edit

Hi Surgo -- we're excited to have Dungeons and Dragons Wiki as part of the Wikia community!

Now you've got a whole website to fill up with information, pictures and videos about your favorite topic. But right now, it's just blank pages staring at you... Scary, right? Here are some ways to get started.

  • Introduce your topic on the front page. This is your opportunity to explain to your readers what your topic is all about. Write as much as you want! Your description can link off to all the important pages on your site.
  • Start some new pages -- just a sentence or two is fine to get started. Don't let the blank page stare you down! A wiki is all about adding and changing things as you go along. You can also add pictures and videos, to fill out the page and make it more interesting.

And then just keep going! People like visiting wikis when there's lots of stuff to read and look at, so keep adding stuff, and you'll attract readers and editors. There's a lot to do, but don't worry -- today's your first day, and you've got plenty of time. Every wiki starts the same way -- a little bit at a time, starting with the first few pages, until it grows into a huge, busy site.

If you've got questions, you can e-mail us through our contact form. Have fun!

-- Catherine Munro @fandom


I am Eiji-kun, the Greenest Dragon of them all. Also, hello.'s a shame about GD. Seriously, I thought I left this sort of high school drama back in cyberchat. Oh well, Long Live King Surgo. -- Eiji-kun 03:33, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Help offeredEdit

I'm a semi-newb lisp/python programmer, and though i have little to none experience in web-based programming, i might be able to help out with something. --Hijax 06:09, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

What needs to be done is the nav pages. You can take a look at the other nav pages I set up if you want a reference. Right now I'm just half-assing some DPL or basic semantic wiki queries in order to get something vaguely functional up for the site opening (in the process uncovering some lingering problems). I have no problem writing the new advanced nav pages myself, I just can't do it right now. Surgo 14:53, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

The Spider-Guy Has Arrived!Edit

Hey, its Sam Kay from the previous wiki, and I'm joining your plight due to the actions of GD. I have two questions I would like to ask...

  1. Would you like me to help setting up the 4th edition section, as I have set it up before (on the previous wiki)?
  2. I've brought along all of my inportant creations from D&D wiki via the export page thing, but the import tool on this wiki will not let me import the data. Can you set things up that will allow me to import my creations?

Thanks. --Sam Kay 12:53, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey. Yes, I would love the help setting up the 4th edition section -- I know nothing about it. And you can now use the import tool. So good to not only have you here, but someone who cares about 4e. Surgo 15:02, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Also, we're trying to set up many a semantic mediawiki property for better, more fine-grained search capabilities by users. Not sure how much you know about semantic properties but, if you know anything at all, can you see what properties should be made for various 4e pages and make them? Surgo 15:04, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the warm welcome. I'll set up 4e as fast as I can, though I'll have to read up on the semantic stuff (my knowledge on semantics is piddly) and see what I can do. --{{SUBST:User:Sam Kay/Autosig}} 19:07, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Oh, I've found some problems with the import tool. Some pages that I have uploaded have dead links that actually lead to existing pages... see Arachonomicon; the Book of Spiderkind (4e Sourcebook) for what I mean. --{{SUBST:User:Sam Kay/Autosig}} 20:37, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
If you come to our chat (, I can explain in detail how the DPL and Semantic Wiki systems work. Surgo 03:36, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
I have finnished setting up the 4e section. -- SamAutosig Sam Kay   talk    contribs    email   13:15, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Signing Up Edit

Quick question on joining. I'm already listed on the Local Users List (this is Hooper by the way), as some of the pages from the old wiki I did were brought over already (looks like mostly nav stuff). Anyways, I think that may be interfering with my ability to create an account as it already lists "me" as active. That, or I'm blocked. If its the first, any idea how to get around that so I can join? If its the second, fair enough.

It's neither, actually. User names are Wikia wide, which means if somebody signed up for the name "Hooper" on another Wikia (there are many), it's taken here too. Surgo 00:21, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey Surog Edit

Hey man, I was hoping to try and help get the nav pages for 3.5e homebrew completed. If you could stop by Ironcity and explain how all that 'Semantic Mediawiki' stuff works, that'd be awesome. Cya later man. → Rith (talk) 21:02, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I'd be happy to. Surgo 21:45, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Just to be clear... Edit

We can take our stuff from the other wiki and put it here, right? Lost Dracula 21:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes. Surgo 21:44, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

April Fools Edit

Although this wiki focuses on rigorous quality control, is there any problem with posting April Fools content? Should we perhaps have a different (more general) category called "Joke" or something like that? --Aarnott 16:12, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I think that we should allow 'april fools' content, as long as it is of quality... so it should be formatted correctly, and so on. -- SamAutosig Sam Kay   talk    contribs    email   21:21, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
You don't really need my permission for this, guys. But just in case: I give April Fools my blessing. Surgo 03:25, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Advertising Edit

I don't know if you've seen this yet Surgo, but if not it's at least a partial answer to your question. Past that I'll wait and see what I hear back from Cat. TarkisFlux 04:34, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Actually, having just finished skimming that page, it looks like you're encouraged to go link yourself off to whatever you want blog / board wise. So I think the sort of advertising you're planning on is fine. If there are any other hoops or weird bits I'll let you know. TarkisFlux 04:45, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Confirmation - there are no limits on advertising. Go nuts.TarkisFlux 21:58, September 7, 2009 (UTC)

Transferring from the "other" wiki Edit

Hello. I was a long time lurker and some-time contributor on the old wiki. After reading about the "wiki-ocalypse" as I heard it called, I am thinking about transferring my stuff over here.

I have heard you folks are going to be big on "quality control". My work is pretty casual, and at the moment is only a half-finished campaign setting. I feel that the work that has been done on it is quite good, but I work very slowly and it may not be done for some time. That seemed to be okay on the old wiki, but I was wondering what the policy over here would be on half-finished but good quality work.

Thanks and sorry to be a bother,


As long as you actually have a plan to finish it, and won't feel bad if it's marked as unfinished as you work on it, it should be okay. Just understand that it will probably be marked as unfinished, and you should come around and check up on it/us occasionally so we know you haven't left for good! Surgo 14:25, September 3, 2009 (UTC)

New Guy Edit

Hi I'm new and I've been adding some stuff but noticed that you deleted some of it, Surgo. Any particular reason you're eliminating content? It had good grammar, no spam, and was properly tagged so is it that I haven't been here long enough or is there some process you need to go through before you allow stuff to stay? Is there something in particular I need to do? Please let me know now before you delete other things I've put up.

The problem, my friend, is that a lot of it just...doesn't work. See the reasons in the delete template. Generally things that don't have good grammar and proper tagging don't make it here in the first place -- that template is reserved for stuff that doesn't work. The problems are that your monk variants aren't helpful in the least at fixing the core problems that the monk has. Your feats I haven't actually read your feats, but follow the link in the delete template -- that's where you add feats, and it's usually done on a one-feat-per-page basis (though it doesn't have to be). Your variant rules do not appear to be totally thought out for every level of the game, and are bad for the game when implemented. If you don't understand why these pages are bad, please join the chat and I'll happily explain in detail. Surgo 14:45, September 9, 2009 (UTC)
Also, I have not deleted it yet; it has merely been tagged for deletion if the problems aren't fixed. Surgo 14:46, September 9, 2009 (UTC)
I'm going to add a little more to this -- yes, we are assholes. Our standards are ridiculously high. That's because we want everything on this site to be usable. We are not ever going to beat around the bush when it comes to telling someone that something sucks or isn't usable. Sorry if it offends anyone, but that's how a good homebrew site gets made. Surgo 14:57, September 9, 2009 (UTC)
Also note that if you want help, we are more than happy to help you bring articles up to a high quality. ou just have to be a willing to let go of things that aren't working well. --Andrew Arnott (talk, email) 15:31, September 9, 2009 (UTC)
Good homebrewing cannot be done by assholes. Any intelligent human being can critique politely or at least not rudely. I am just learning about these templates and that's fine, but it's unnecessary to say "suck" or "shit" in every sentence like a 12-year old who doesn't know how to express himself. Surgo, either you're not a good balancer or you're just in a bad mood today. There are generally 3 player types: Combat oriented, Magic oriented and Skill oriented. Where you obviously know your stuff about combat, you don't seem to understand/pay attention to other aspects of the game in your responses to me (at least thusfar). You also have some sort of grudge against 4th edition that can only be described as a mix between the emotions of a "jealous ex" and "racist hick." I'm not 4th edition's biggest fan but why all the playa-hatin'? If you're just having an off-day I can understand but if you really mean it when you say "we're assholes" then this is not a site I nor any self-respecting person want to be a part of and I will gladly withdraw my comments if you at least have the decency to let me do that. --Arkangelknight (talk, email) 01:26, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
This is the second place you posted this. Never mind the nonsensical "good brewing cannot be done by assholes" fallacy (if you really can't tell that this is fallacious, I will be happy to explain it to you), I'm sorry you got all sad because nobody liked your homebrew, but the fact of the matter is that most stuff people write is crap. Most stuff I write is crap, most stuff everyone here writes is crap. And usually we recognize it's crap and don't bother to upload it. If you can't take someone telling you that something is crap, you shouldn't go post your homebrew anywhere at all -- you should write it in a diary and hide it under a pillow all emo-like. We delete crap around here. Why? So DMs and players who actually want to use the stuff can come here and find all-quality. Is it harsh? Yes. Do we think that's an acceptable price to pay for having a site full of quality that people can actually use? Yes.
I'm not sure where this fourth edition thing is coming from. I mentioned fourth edition once in all my interactions with you. (And in case you didn't notice, there's a 4e section here too.)
You'll notice that I didn't set up or keep up for deletion everything you made -- just the stuff I thought was particularly bad. Surgo 01:34, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
I'm going to recommend you add more words to your vocabulary other than "suck" and "crap", as I'm becoming increasingly suspicious that you're actually an angry 12-year old who just discovered the internet and not a teen or adult homebrewer. If you think something's crap, that's not actually a legitimate excuse for "not working" in a system. Saying, "this would provide a problem in the game because X" or "this could allow X's to do Y's, which isn't fair" would be more appropriate. Or maybe try a helpful SUGGESTION for fixing things? Or maybe if all else fails and your brain gears just don't process just say, "I don't like this, it doesn't seem right for the site" and tell someone it sucks without being insulting.
I don't have a problem with your distaste or your deletions, only your childish comments and rude insults and my comment on your opinions about 4th edition was very appropriate given your comment about 4th edition. Reread your post. You said NEVER use 4th edition because it sucks. What is someone supposed to think about your opinion of 4th edition?
Anyway, I didn't come here to get sucked into a flamewar with a childish person, I actually thought there was some nice homebrewing going on here. I suppose I was mistake. I will not add "crap" to your little world any more. --Arkangelknight (talk, email) 01:26, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
If you'll note all the messages I left on the pages when I nominated them for deletion, you'll see that I did explain exactly what was bad with them. I'm sorry you didn't notice that because you were busy being angry that I called them "crap" in the same sentence or sentences, but it was all there. Surgo 01:50, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
Like I said before "it sucks, I don't like it" doesn't count as anything other than a vague opinion aimed at insulting people for no other reason than that the commenter is angry and childish. No thank you. --Arkangelknight (talk, email) 01:29, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
I really, really dislike being misrepresented. Here is exactly what I said (what you quoted never shows up):
  • Totally broken at low levels. A Rogue having a limit to their Sneak Attack then is, in fact, a very good thing for their balance. (for the Attacks Variant. Uh, looks like I described the problem pretty well here.)
  • Pathetically weak; not worth the price of a feat. (for Great Ability. Says exactly what the problem is -- it's not worth spending a very valuable feat on.)
  • You just took a fighter, and made him even worse. Can anyone seriously say they would actually use this? (for the Fighter Variant. The page replaced a Fighter's abilities with that of a Monk. The Monk is an even worse class than the core Fighter.)
  • Does nothing to actually help the monk not suck. (For the Monk variant unarmed strike. Exactly what it says -- it doesn't help the Monk with any of his actual problems.)
  • Works horribly (a reason one should not try to do anything the 4e way). There are plenty of combat spells and abilities you would want to use out of combat. Using this results in dropping a rat or a beetle to start an "encounter" so you can use your abilities and then have them again when the next encounter rolls around. Not good for the game. (For the Uses Variant. Explains exactly why it's bad.)
"it sucks, I don't like it" never shows up. Any time you asked for clarification, I provided it. I'm not sure what you have a problem with here other than me not thinking your homebrew is awesome. Surgo 02:00, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
I was not quoting you directly. Sorry if that's the impression you got. I was noting that in general saying "it sucks" does not explain anything. "Not suck"? You ask it to not suck? That really doesn't even make any sense. I also noticed you've conveniently misplaced some of your other comments. Figures as much. Look, I'm done arguing with you. Just delete my contributions and I'll log off your little site where you like to insult your users to feel like a big boy. I don't want to deal with "assholes" as you claim not only you are but your fellow admins are. I certainly hope that's not true of everyone, but either way just leave me be. Goodnight. --Arkangelknight (talk, email) 01:29, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
I didn't selectively quote anything...I quoted every last candidate for deletion I posted on your pages. I do not believe I missed a single one. But if you want me to delete all your stuff, so be it. Surgo 02:10, September 10, 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indentation)

Surgo, I support the QC angle you've got going on, but I think this flareup is an example of things to come. This might've been handled a lot differently if there was another flag for these sorts of things other than 'candidate for deletion', which strikes me as pretty heavy handed. Can we get a 'candidate for assistance, below minimum balance level' tag at all that we could stick these sorts of things with, or failing that just rate it 'below minimum balance guidelines' and leave visitors to use appropriately? It would hopefully save you from explaining to contributors why their stuff is up for deletion and making them feel unwanted while also preserving your QC guidelines.TarkisFlux 03:11, September 10, 2009 (UTC)

You probably hit the nail on the head here. Candidate for Assistance is a pretty good idea, and I will implement it in the morning. Surgo 03:32, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
I've been edit-jumped, so apologies if this lacks the same relevance, but I'm just going to add that I agree with Tarkis, to an extent. AAK at least demonstrated some level of respect for the English language and I think you may have put him on the defensive too quickly. It took me perhaps three or four weeks to get from '10d6/round at will at level 20 is stretching the limits of balance' to '20d6/round at will at level 20 may be a little strong, but is by no means broken.' My point is only that if people are given the chance to adapt, they can with the right input and effort. It would be a shame to scare off potential contributors without at least attempting to reform them first. -- Jota 03:36, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
I'll admit I might have been a little too harsh, but I have to say -- him stooping to the level he was accusing me of (insults and all) certainly did not make me feel charitable. Surgo 03:40, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
'Template:Needs Balance' springs to mind.
Now then, I'm all up for this idea, as long as there is a 'fail-safe', if you will, for the Needs Assistance template, so that we don't have a bulging category that no one will go near full of articles that will never be fixed. I think the best way to fix this problem would be to give this theoretical template a way to 'upgrade' itself, after, say, 5 days, the Needs Assistance template has a contingent function to remove itself, and add the delete template, with the reason 'Issue's not fixed' (or something to that effect). If this is not possible, then, I'd say, create a bot that will patrol the category, and check the templates, changing them when necessary. Continuing this thought, the delete template should have a way to say 'hey, times up', such as, say, after 5 days of the delete template being put on a work, it alerts the most recently active admin to the fact, asking them to charge ahead and delete it. The issue also exists that a person could simply remove the template though (I leave this one for you guys to solve). → Rith (talk) 04:11, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
It seems to me to be mostly a problem with naming and perceptions. I perceive "Needs Assistance" to be the same thing as "Needs Deletion" -- stuff inside of it gets deleted after a week -- the difference being in the name. It's a nicer name, shouldn't be so offputting. Surgo 04:20, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
Then why not simply change the name of the delete template to 'Template:Needs Assistance' and get rid of the idiocy of having two templates, the only difference between the two of which being that one is polite, and the other isn't? → Rith (talk) 04:36, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
Given that standard policy from the Balance Points page is to delete stuff that isn't tagged or fails rogue level, I'd say that there isn't a reason outside of niceties (or avoiding confusion between balance fail and routine deletions). But seriously, all that was missing from AAK's stuff was a balance level tag (and a bit of work, because some of it wasn't even monk level, but I digress), and because of that it got tagged per policy and people got pissed. It's not like it's unexpected for people to flip out when you tag their stuff for deletion and they are likely to miss a link to that policy in their anger if it's even offered to them, whereas they might not flip out and follow the relevant link if it's got a less provocative title. I'd say that it's worth it if you want to keep an active community and if you're serious about allowing lower than SGT stuff on the wiki, otherwise someone will post something without a balance point because they're not aware of the policy and it'll get tagged and the cycle begins anew. So yeah, either two semi-redundant categories or adjust the author / status box to include a balance point entry as well so it's there by default and the level of criticism can be adjusted appropriately. TarkisFlux 06:43, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
Box full of Eijis here. If the bots are able, Eiji likes the concept of a self-updating dual template. It's snazzy and doesn't afraid of anything. Can it be so? -- Eiji Hyrule 11:32, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
I can write a bot to do it easily. It is totally possible if we do decide to go that way. --Andrew Arnott (talk, email) 13:11, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
I imagine we'd use "delete" as speedy deletion and "assistance" as non-speedy (so no botting required). Surgo 13:22, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
Okay, it's done. A new template, {{assistance}}, has been added and should be used from here on out. I'm glad something positive could come of this. Surgo 13:32, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
FYI - I added a link to the balance points page to the template, to reduce future explanations TarkisFlux 18:20, September 10, 2009 (UTC)

(Reset Indentation)

Wow, all this ruckus because of Surgo and me getting in a spat? Well, I'm sorry for the dispute but I'm glad this brought a good resolution. Firstly, thank you all for discussing this in a civil manner and having concerns about your users. As far as the templates go, I may only be a user but I think that the assistance is a good idea. A "deletion template" seems like a bad idea since anyone seeing it would only assume the post has already been deemed as deleted rather than needing work or improvement. The assistance template will work much better, but just so you are all aware it was not the deletion which caused my negative responses but the insulting language used in them such as saying everything "sucks" and the response that "we're assholes" so deal with it. This may not have meant to be an attack, but it certainly seemed like it and thus why the "flareup" occurred. On that note, I apologize for using insulting language myself. Just because I wasn't first to do so doesn't make me less of an ass for engaging in it. I'm not perfect but I try to be civil about disagreements and critiques. Normally such an argument would indeed scare away potential contributors such as myself, but I saw this discussion and changed my mind. Surgo, as far as I can tell from this discussion, your fellow admins are not assholes and they don't need to be to keep up high standards, nor do you. They're pretty nice and rational as far as I can tell and I'm sure you can be just as nice and civil when you want to be. I don't know what brought about the initial hostility towards me but you have my apologies and I hope we can put that behind us and just have fun homebrewing and balancing. Again, I'm sorry for the dispute and I would actually like to continue contributing on this wiki without the harsh language if that's okay with everyone. Arkangelknight 19:41, September 10, 2009 (UTC)

That's quite fine with me. In response to such a long and sincere post, I think I probably should explain myself a bit. Please, no one take this as an attempt of justifying my actions (it's not).
First of all, I am probably a poor choice for the head administrator of the website -- it fell to me because I had both the drive to do it and the technical knowledge. This puts me in a bit of a strange position because I have to (and want to) enforce the mission statement of the project. This is a strange position because I am not particularly capable of being kind (I use that word over nice because nice carries a meaning of "being inoffensive" -- it's as easy to be a nice asshole as it is to be a mean or caustic one, and I fall under "caustic" myself), or verbose. So I put what I find incorrect in things into phrasings that are both terse and not-so-kind. Terse is problematic because those who are unfamiliar may not necessarily understand what I'm trying to say or why I'm saying it. Not-so-kind, well, I do not believe this is a problem but some get offput by such things. (However, please understand that it is a fallacy to ignore criticism or the good works of someone who is an asshole. A good point made by Robert Mugabe is still a good point, even if the guy making it does happen to be Robert Mugabe.)
I think I lost my train of thought somewhere along here, so I guess I'll end with "hope you and anyone else enjoy the wiki". Surgo 20:01, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for telling me that, I appreciate it. Yes, it's probably not that fair for the position to just fall on you like that. I can understand you having a particular personality quirk that doesn't mesh perfectly in some areas, I'm not flawless myself. Mine is actually the opposite quirk where I may sometimes take things too seriously or confuse sarcasm with literalism. If I can't hear someone's tone of voice, it's really hard to discern the difference given the wide variety of personality types available in a small area when you use the internet. I never actually argued against your criticisms, in fact I edited some of the things based exclusively off your comments, I just felt offended at the language being used to convey those ideas. I can take helpful criticism and love suggestions and advice, I just don't like being put down or talked down to; it's really offensive. Granted, now I know you sincerely don't intend to be terse, I can have a little more patience and vice versa I hope. If you want, I'd be happy to help reword your criticisms in a way that doesn't sound terse or caustic. Or if not, just let me know how else I can help. Arkangelknight 17:36, September 11, 2009 (UTC)

NifScript Edit

Yeah, I use DragoonWraith as my handle everywhere. Been using it for about a decade now... as far as I am aware, all references to DragoonWraith on the Internet refer to me.

Anyway, awesome that you like that project. It is very cool. Unfortunately, with me in college, time to mod is limited... and I really need to finish up ARES. NifScript 1.0 is coming after that, though, and my work on ARES has taught me a lot about OBSE's serialization interface (which is exactly the hold-up on NifScript 1.0). Anyway, it's great to see another Oblivion enthusiast at GitP; FlyFightFlea is actually PId6 on GitP, too.
DragoonWraith 03:02, September 10, 2009 (UTC)

Tome Godfather Edit

You are the Tome authority here, at least from my perspective. I have added a photo I thought appropriate to the Races of War sourcebook. If you find it displeasing, let me know and I'll find another one/leave it as is, as per your request. -- Jota 02:22, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

Now applies to either/both. -- Jota 02:38, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

Moving Material Between Wikis Edit

Hello. I just signed up and am ready to start posting some of my material to the Wiki (I noticed the 4e monster section was looking a bit barren, since Sam Kay is the only one contributing to it so far :P). Before I attempt to do so, I was just wondering if this site uses all the same templates as the other Wiki (i.e. can I just copy + paste the code from there, or do I have to reformat it manually?). -- Dracomortis 21:40, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

Mostly the same format, some things have changed. For the most part you can copy pasta, with the worst offender, dpcl or whatever, screwing up the page with visible code sometimes. Every so often bots fix up old code, but not all of it yet. I'll have Surgo actually answer for this since he's the master of this stuff, but yeah, copy paste away. And welcome! -- Eiji Hyrule 01:05, September 15, 2009 (UTC)
The templates are mostly the same. The major differences are in 3.5e, as far as I'm aware there's no difference in 4e stuff. 3.5e differences get fixed automatically by a bot I run periodically. Surgo 01:18, September 15, 2009 (UTC)
Alright, thanks. I've run into a minor issue though. I added my Beetle (4e Monster) page, and everything seems to format correctly, but I cannot get it to show up on 4e All Creatures, 4e All Homebrew Creatures or any of the Creature By Level pages. It displays properly under the Creature category page though, so I don't think it's a category error, but I can't think of anything else that would cause it to not show up. -- Dracomortis 19:22, September 15, 2009 (UTC)
There are no differences in the 4e templates as of yet. To get your stuff to showe up on dpcls (such as 4e all creatures), just purge the cache of the page (click the refresh tab at the top of the page). This will fix dead links as well. Which reminds me, Surgo... I think we need to mention that on the main page. -- SamAutosig Sam Kay   talk    contribs    email   21:07, September 15, 2009 (UTC)
Those pages don't work yet. Surgo 21:07, September 15, 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Sam, the links are now showing up correctly. -- Dracomortis 21:35, September 15, 2009 (UTC)

Quests Page Edit

Hey, could somebody put up a quests page so I can transfer my quest from the old wiki?--ThirdEmperor 04:20, September 16, 2009 (UTC)

Class Templating Upgrade Edit

Hey, I'm a noob when it comes to programing but I was wondering if you could insert a template that would allow you to select what base attack and save progression you want for your and then the template would auto insert the values? As it is, I'm still trying to find where to put them.--ThirdEmperor 05:06, September 16, 2009 (UTC)

DnD footer Edit

I have updated the gaming footer that usually goes on the bottom of the Main page, to DnD centric links, you can add it by adding this code {{w:dndfooter}} to the bottom of your main page.

On a side note, I was wondering why there were 2 dnd wikis, and now I know(read your 'Merger' message). It'll be interesting to see if you can merge.

On another side note, users that have Sysop rights already have Rollback rights, so they don't need rollback added to them, its redundant. --Sxerks 00:14, September 17, 2009 (UTC)

Hey, thanks. Do you know anything about the latest code rollout and getting some settings changed? Surgo 00:28, September 17, 2009 (UTC)
I know Mediawiki 1.15.1 was the most recent. You can ask on the Help Desk forum on the main wiki, or if you know the exact setting do a Special:Contact. Staff members Uberfuzzy, Kirkburn, or KyleH will probably be the ones to respond.--Sxerks 01:25, September 17, 2009 (UTC)

This page is for raw interwiki transclusions.

If you are seeing this message outside Community Central, please edit the page to ensure it is using the "raw:" prefix as shown below.

To use this page on another Wikia page, insert the following into that page, at the place you wish the content to appear, usually the bottom:


Community Central templates on this page should be substituted or prefixed {{w:Templatename}} to parse properly on other Wikia wikis. Community Central links on this page should also be prefixed [[w:LinkedPagename]].

Customization Edit

The border color can be specified by passing an unnamed parameter, for example:


The template outputs a block-level element with the id "dndfooter". Additional styling can be done in your site and user CSS files using this id, for example:

#dndfooter {
    float: right;
    width: 20em;
    color: white;
    font-family: "Book Antiqua", Palatino, "Palatino Linotype", "Palatino LT STD", Georgia, serif;
    /* etc. */

This way lies Madness (the capitalized type) Edit

Okay, I can't take this any longer. Please people stop buffing fighters, I mean seriously, I know that spellcasters are over powered by comparison but that's just it, the WIZARDS are overpowered, the melee characters are just fine. Heck, wizards who don't have access to death spells aren't even that bad, (Hold Persons still pretty nasty though) the real problem is metamagic, I mean a 10th level wizard can deal out 10d6 damage with a fireball but a 10th level orc fighter with the greater psionic weapon and 18 strength feat can power attack full-on with a greatsword for 6d6+28 damage for an average of 48 points of damage which is slightly MORE than the 30 points dealt by a max caster level fireballs average of 30. Problem is metamagic blows this to Baator, I'm a shameless powergamer but even I couldn't stomach the idea and here's why: with the Arcane Thesis feat from the PH2 a feat the name of which I burned from my mind and the quicken and maximize metamagic feats I managed to build a character who could deal out 20d6+60 points of damage once per day at 10th level. That isn't right, but that doesn't mean we should boost fighters to the same level or things will just get worse. Instead, a better solution is this every time a person casts a spell they half to make a spellcraft check against a DC of (15+ spell level+ 1/2 caster level + 5 if its a death effect) if they fail the spell reverses on them if its a negative effect or has the opposite effect if it's a positive effect and the caster takes damage to his caster ability equal to the spells level, whats more the DC increases by 5 spell slot increase due to applying metamagic. I think this is a good way to fix things and it prevents the balance issues caused by altering all warrior type classes (AKA you would have to boost up all the monsters in order to deal with megawarriors). Please tell me what you think.--ThirdEmperor 09:58, September 18, 2009 (UTC)

...If no one else replies in the morning, I'll explain shtuff. Right now it's pretty late, so I'll let someone else. But I'll explain in the morning should no-one else do so first. (If I sound weird, it's the fatigue talking.)
Oh, and fireball is a sucktastic spell. Try Glitterdust on for size, or Polymorph, or Solid Fog, or Color Spray at low level or... You get the idea. --Ghostwheel 10:22, September 18, 2009 (UTC)
I think your "fix" is retarded. Besides, the buffing of fighter-types tends to bring them closer to rogues than clerics, wizards, or druids, so why get your panties in a twist? -- Jota 13:16, September 18, 2009 (UTC)
I think he is asking why we all think that fighters are near the bottom of the totem pole. Note that the fighter he suggested is a monk level of balance and the wizard a fighter level of balance. --Andrew Arnott (talk, email) 13:19, September 18, 2009 (UTC)
MADNESS?? This! Is! D&D!!! --Ghostwheel 19:49, September 18, 2009 (UTC)
I'm not going to get into the specific mechanics of your idea, but just talk about the issues of nerfing casters in general. In general, you're not wrong ThirdEmperor, because you could absolutely design a game that ran like that and it would be fine. It's just that DnD 3.x has some specific assumptions that cause it to fail here. The big problem is this little thing called CR and how it's supposed to work: 1 of CR X+2 = 2 of CR X. Every time you gain 2 CR, which for characters is supposed to be 2 levels, you're supposed to be something like twice as strong. I'm not even kidding.
Most monsters are designed along those lines, and they're the thing that you care about players dealing with. Casters generally do just fine on that power curve as well, because their spells generally scale to it (though not the damaging spells, those were a mostly direct carry over from 2e that had a few differences that allowed direct damage to work better and had fewer direct damage counters). This means that casters are not OP, by the definition of what their power level is supposed to be. Yeah, you can optimize them above and beyond that, but that's a different issue. Fighters on the other hand, and most of the non-caster classes in general really, gain power linearly, building on their previous powers a small step at a time rather than gaining a decent jump every couple of levels. The only reason Rogues get a pass here is because they can leverage UMD to get in on the caster's game. They are, by the definition of power that 3.x uses, underpowered.
These issues are largely invisible when you're running a game at low levels, you only start to notice this difference in power accumulation at higher levels, say 7ish for monks and the worst of the worst and 9-12ish for everyone else. There are plenty of ways that you can sorta balance things out in those patches, like serious optimization, artifact swords, and DMs who don't fully utilize their monsters, but you can't really patch the different growth rates into the high levels and against high CR foes.
So your suggestion, which probably belongs on a variant page instead of Surgo's talk page (but I digress), that we crap on casters to bring them down to non-caster level, doesn't actually fix the ability of classes to deal with high CR enemies who use their abilities to the fullest. It just means that those of us who want to play our monsters intelligently and effectively can't do that anymore, because we would murder the entire party. It would not be a fair fight. We go back to mediocre auto-attacking with our Balor instead of doing something interesting and smart, like a nigh immortal high rank demon actually would. Yay.
So yeah, you could do it, but I don't know why you would want to. You lose lots and lots of options and you can't play monsters effectively. Honestly, if you want to keep casters and fighters more in line without rewriting the monster manual you should probably just limit your games to 7th level and below. Just tell people they won't level over 7, and then write the game like tv-serial style adventures and treasure collecting; non-level rewards can be just as flavorful and interesting as the regular ones, and non-level based advancement is fine with most people if they go in expecting it. - TarkisFlux 20:07, September 18, 2009 (UTC)
Okay BIG misunderstanding there, I wasn't actually posting a variant rule there I was just trying to point something out, I am completely aware it would never work. The point is that if you keep buffing every non-caster class with extra dice of damage then even a Balor will go down in a flash, believe me in my last game I played the only non-caster in the group so I've seen the damage overload problem I speak of and it is Madness. All I was saying was that we should half-way nerf casters and half-way buff casters or were going to have to throw Balor SWARMS at our players.--ThirdEmperor 06:50, September 20, 2009 (UTC)
Or, alternatively, quintuple (or more) the health of a balor. (Le gasp! Blasphemy! But... it actually works decently for the problem you're mentioning) --Ghostwheel 06:53, September 20, 2009 (UTC)
You want to half-way nerf them and half-way buff them (casters)? I can only assume that's a typo. All I can add is that we have already acknowledged that wizards using fireball and cone of cold and the like are roughly on par with fighters. If you play your wizards like that, fine. But our advice comes on the assumption that wizards will play to their full potential, hence why fighter-types need a leg up. And I apologize for my crass evaluation of your hypothetical example; it was inappropriate of me. As far as your second comment, I don't know if swarms is right, but one balor per party member at 20th level or so should be feasible according to the SGT, and if you want only one foe you can find something with a higher CR, throw it (the balor) at a lower level party, or augment it to make it more of a challenge (as Ghostwheel noted). It's also worth noting that the balor can be the same as your wizard in terms of its performance versus its expected ability. Physically attacking, a balor is alright, but if it starts spamming blasphemy and teleporting out of reach all the time, that's a whole different game. -- Jota 14:01, September 20, 2009 (UTC)
Sorry bout the typo I meant half-way nerf casters and half-way buff non-casters, but all in all your solution is much more feasible. Oh and you might wanna check this out. Its what 4.0 would have been if it wasn't writen by idiots who thought they were making a video game. [1]-- 06:55, September 21, 2009 (UTC) PS the link might not work, I've never used one before.
Rather than making overgeneralizations about an edition it sounds like you haven't played much and parroting the things you've heard 4e-haters say, why not learn to indent? It's easy, simple, and doesn't make use of logical fallacies. --Ghostwheel 07:01, September 21, 2009 (UTC)
First off, stop being a total creep, I thought indentation was automatic, and for another thing, why do you automaticly assume I was parroting someone else? Others may have said the same thing but if so I don't know about it, whatsmore I wasn't actually saying anything against 4.0 I'm actually thinking about getting the books and joining a game. I was just mad at the people at WotC for stopping the printing of 3.5. I admit that I find 4.0 a little to oversimplified for my tastes but thats it. All I was saying was that I thought that Pathfinder was a good continuation of 3.5 and I cannot see any logical fallacies in that statement.--ThirdEmperor 22:44, September 23, 2009 (UTC)
If I may quote your last two posts...
  • "Its what 4.0 would have been if it wasn't writen by idiots who thought they were making a video game." (sic)
  • "...whatsmore I wasn't actually saying anything against 4.0..." (sic)
  • "I'm actually thinking about getting the books and joining a game."
I'm being a bit of a jerk because first you say bad things about 4e (just calling it 4.0 implies that they'll put out another edition of it, something that there has been no indication of whatsoever thus far), saying it was video game-ish (debatable), and written by idiots. (How many things written by idiots turn out good?) Then you go on to say that you weren't saying anything bad about 4e (despite the fact that you did one post before) and that you're thinking about joining a game, implying that you haven't played the edition before. And logical fallacies exasperate me in general (over-generalizations being one example of a logical fallacy). --Ghostwheel 22:54, September 23, 2009 (UTC)
First, you complain that a balor can "go down in a flash" under Same Game Test rules, apparently unaware of the fact that if you fight a balor and it gets two actions off, it instantly wins, or if it has a friend, it instantly wins after A SINGLE ACTION. So yes - the PCs honestly DO have to kill the Balor in one round, because he can take them out just as easily. That's the way 3e works. And then you bring up Pathfinder, oye. Sorry to say this to you, but 4e is designed with superior design principles than Pathfinder. The entire core of Pathfinder is built around a lie. Pathfinder buffs the spellcasters, while nerfing the warrior-types. Pathfinder claims "backwards compatibility" which is outright not true. Pathfinder is not good. Karrius 01:15, September 24, 2009 (UTC)

Wow, you guys are a bunch of raging lunatics, which is not necessarily a bad thing but in this case is, look if you check my last post you may notice that I said that I thought the people who created 4.0 were idiots NOT for making 4.0 but for canceling 3.5 (Have you ever heard of a insult before? I wasn't even saying they were stupid, just that I despise them.) whatsmore I never claimed to have played it more than once, although I have looked at the books for a while,and finally I was not making over-generalizations I was referring to the power system and its suspicious similarity to the powers in World of Warcraft (I mean, keywords? Radiant damage? Bloodied status? Those are just videogamey in general) and to the fact that they seem to have removed a lot of stuff (Multi-classing Not being locked into a progression path, which I might add is also in WoW) so that they could cram it into a online game (not a bad thing necessarily, it will help people find games). However I do retract one previous statement, Pathfinder is shit, I don't know what I was thinking but it probably had something to do with the fact that it was 5 in the morning. I apologize for any offense I might have caused by my brief mention of 4.0 but seriously your totally over-reacting. Oh, and refer to it as 4.0 so people can tell which edition I'm talking about. 07:51, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

Funny stuff Edit

Thought you'd get a kick out of this. See it before the delete! heh --Ghostwheel 19:47, September 18, 2009 (UTC)

I think we all already knew he was a two-faced cunt who doesn't understand that "nice" (or pretend nice, in these cases) and "kind" aren't the same concepts. Surgo 18:04, September 19, 2009 (UTC)

Yo Surging Surger Edit

Hey, I was just thinking about how we need to get the navigation pages up and running soon, and how you had this huge plan for Semmantic Mediawiki making navigation pages better than anything else, but, it seems that the system it works with is being emmensely irritating, and may need to be throw out the window for the time being, until it gets officially fixed, and stops lagging like a little bitch. Having said that, we really need you to come on and give us directions, so that we know what to do, how to do it, what to aim for, etc. Until then we are simply wandering around in the dark, so, if you could please tell us exactly what to do to finish this website completely and start advertising, I'd love you forever. → Rith (talk) 01:28, September 20, 2009 (UTC)

SMW was just fixed yesterday -- nav pages can be made as you will now. Surgo 12:11, September 21, 2009 (UTC)

Balance Tags Edit

So Ghostwheel has gone off and put balance tags on a lot of the 3.5 base classes, but they don't show up in the author box. Is that working as intended? The only way to check them right now is to edit the page and look there, though I assume they will also be organized by that balance point in searches now that SemanticWiki is up. Which is great for search, but less useful for trying to determine if the author hit the balance point they were aiming for as extra steps are required to check it. Just wondering how it's supposed to work I guess. - TarkisFlux 00:09, September 23, 2009 (UTC)

I've finished around ~33% of the base classes, will continue adding to the rest as I get to them; some are pretty involved, so I have to read everything and keep it in mind with most other things in the game to decide what power level it'd fill :-3 --Ghostwheel 00:51, September 23, 2009 (UTC)
Also, now that the semantic wiki is working, how do we control the category hierarchy? - TarkisFlux 01:19, September 23, 2009 (UTC)
I know it's not yet in the author box -- I keep wanting to put it there but I simply don't have the time at the moment. If someone who understands the formatting and control of the template language wants to put it in there -- please do so! Surgo 01:31, September 23, 2009 (UTC)
Holy f!@#$$ !@#$ $@Q#$!% !@#$!@#$!~ stab editing templates sucks if you don't know that Preview doesn't work at all (like I didn't last night, bad times). Since I've figured out you have to save the stupid thing and then re-edit it and preview that to see if you broke it or not, I should have that in by the end of the day, work permitting. - TarkisFlux 16:53, September 23, 2009 (UTC)
It's in there and live now. Further discussion on it's specifics here. - TarkisFlux 02:08, September 24, 2009 (UTC)
The end case of the switch should probably just be suppression of all output, because there are some articles that shouldn't have balance tags at all. That, or it needs a suppression option. Surgo 02:24, September 24, 2009 (UTC)
Not specifying a balance level by leaving off the definition or leaving it blank will suppress the entry, just like with the favor entry. - TarkisFlux 02:41, September 24, 2009 (UTC)

Filter Questions Edit

  1. How quickly should a filter appear in the Special:BrowseData area for the category that uses it? A while back you were complaining about a 24hour delay between your changes and them showing up, same thing here?
  2. Drilldown filter documentation suggests that we should not be adding filters to child categories. Is there a technical reason for it you know of that isn't mentioned there, or is it just best practice crap?

Though this is related, I thought it best to place here instead of cluttering up your to do list. If you'd prefer it there though, that's where it'll go instead of further cluttering your talk page. - TarkisFlux 19:28, September 25, 2009 (UTC)

And I'm answering my own questions.
  1. It's not delayed, it's just not shown on child categories unless it is inherited from the root category. And at that point it doesn't matter if it's in the child category or not. If the subcat stuff doesn't contain relevant properties though, the filters don't appear on the page.
  2. Technical reasons, unless you feel like coding around that too. See above.
So, with the setup discussed last night, our 3.5e and 4.0 over-cats need to contain every filter that we might want to apply to anything they contain ever. I hope that if you figure out how to suppress articles on the initial Special:BrowseData that it also suppresses filters, 'cause that's going to be a lot of stuff.
Happy side note, the string search is not dumb. You have to fight the autofill a bit, but it'll pick out strings instead of exact matches only. - TarkisFlux 19:42, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
I can change Semantic Drilldown to do what we need, just tell me what I need to do. Surgo 23:42, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
Short list, most of which you know about already -
  1. Hide member pages of the 3.5e and 4e classes on Special:BrowseData/(Ed). This assumes we want people using the various edition subcategories for their searching instead of just dealing with the big page of everything.
  2. Hide filters on the same pages as above, since we need to add every filter for all of the subcategories to the root (edition) category, and there will be a lot. This assumes we want people using the various edition subcategories for their searching instead of just dealing with the big page of everything.
  3. Potentially hide other root categories in the list on the right side of the same pages as above. Just fixing the structure and purging the junk will deal with a lot of these, but unless every root category gets sorted and we watch continuously for new ones that nav tool won't work well. Or just hide the whole stupid list, since right now it's only useful for swapping between 3e and 4e, and we can just link those directly in the primary media bar or whatever it's called.
  4. Correct subcategory displays to only show pages that also belong to the root (edition) category. IE get 3.5e out of the 4e classes, and vice versa.
- TarkisFlux 01:07, September 26, 2009 (UTC)
Not directly filter related, but semantic mediawiki related. Do you know if the "~" (Like Comparator for String properties) is turned on for our install? I'm pretty sure it isn't from my testing, and if it actually isn't on can you get it enabled? This doc page suggests it's disabled by default, and it would be quite helpful for a few nav things (specifically making the Class Ability pages show class specific powers, in order, without substantial work, but I'm sure there are others). - TarkisFlux 01:37, October 8, 2009 (UTC)
After I finish up some botting I've wanted to get done (feats especially), I'm planning on diving into all the Semantic MediaWiki settings and seeing if there's anything we need to code to extend it. I've already noticed at least one thing (no transclude properties). I'll take a look at that too. Surgo 01:39, October 8, 2009 (UTC)
If you have access, you should be able to check it / enable it by tweaking the value of $smwgQComparators as explained in the file SMW_Settings.php. Or at least that's what the doc page tells me. Thanks for looking into it :-) - TarkisFlux 01:42, October 8, 2009 (UTC)
I don't have access -- whenever I need a setting changed, I have to bug upstream Wikia to add support for that setting in their own software. So I think you understand that if I want to make some setting change requests, I want to do all of them that we would conceivably need at the same time. Surgo 01:46, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

Ratings Committe Finalization Edit

Surgo, can you come to a decision on the RC rules and members? There's been some confusion and a lot of problems now, and noone seemed to have any major things to add. All we really need to do is make sure all the side-pages are working alright (which TK has done a good job of doing) and figure out a template style to use for favorings on talk pages, and I think we're good to go once we pick the members. Karrius 19:31, September 25, 2009 (UTC)

What exactly do I need to make a decision on? Doesn't look like there's much in the way of argument. Surgo 22:31, September 25, 2009 (UTC)
How many people will be on the committee, who they will be from the candidates, etc. --Ghostwheel 22:47, September 25, 2009 (UTC)

Tome Feat Templates Edit

Just wondering why you're keeping the different feat type templates separate for the scaling tome cases instead of doing one template with a switch in it that changed the output to be relevant to the scaling... - TarkisFlux 00:40, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Simplicity of reading and editing. Surgo 00:45, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Table Row BugEdit

I have no idea what it causing this, and thought you might have better luck. With a sortable textleft d20 table, when you click on further results (not shown due to overflow) it takes you to a special page without the table formatting. I left an example at the bottom of 3.5e_Feats for you to take a look at later. - TarkisFlux 20:20, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

Figured out what it's doing finally... The table row template is working fine and passing everything appropriately. But when you click on "Further Results..." it moves to a special query page and continues displaying the results formatted with the table row template and in table format, but does not pass the table wrapper. So instead of getting a nice looking table, we get confusing table syntax results that bump up against each other. Can we just update the css of the regular ask tables instead of sticking the results in a wrapper? Or can we update the special querry pages to put the results in a table wrapper? Or am I going to have to hard code the tables to be 1) really really long or 2) decent size with hard coded additional pages using offsets? - TarkisFlux 16:10, October 9, 2009 (UTC)
Regarding editting the default SMW css, I can't edit it and I suspect you can't either. So here's a list of what we would need to change and where to make the ask table look like a non-zebra table that you can forward to our host when you make your big request, if that's the direction you wish to take it.
  • table.smwtable -> background-color: #E6D88D
  • table.smwtable th -> background-color: #E6D88D
  • table.smwtable td -> background-color: #FDF9D3
  • table.smwtable tr.smwfooter td -> background-color: #E6D88D
That'll match the colors of the ask table to the default colors of the wiki, which doesn't much support skins but would make the tables less of an eyesore for the average user. I'm sure there's a less heavy-handed way to do it, I just don't have a strong enough background in web crap to think of it. - TarkisFlux 17:51, October 9, 2009 (UTC)
I think the best way to deal with this problem right now is to ignore it and put limit=9999 or whatever. Sure I'll get around to fixing this in the Semantic MediaWiki code eventually, but that's probably a ways off. Surgo 18:43, October 9, 2009 (UTC)
I agree, but wanted to give you the chance to overrule it. Plus, I had already tracked it down and wanted to post the results somewhere for later. - TarkisFlux 19:30, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

Hai Edit

I super approve this new wiki (in particular, the standards of quality and methods of enforcement) and will be taking a quick tour to familiarize myself with the place. Is there anywhere in particular you'd advise I start? -- Armond{{Bacon}} 04:50, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

Hope you enjoy. We're currently working on getting all the navigation (3.5e Homebrew, etc.) pages working -- that's the jumping-off point for finding most stuff on here. Surgo 11:29, October 9, 2009 (UTC)
While you're protecting high-traffic pages, you probably ought protect some of the more commonly used templates as well. I once found out the hard way that a template used on 1,000+ pages can crash a wiki if even a single character is removed.
As for Monobook: I wouldn't worry too much about it if I were you. Monaco is the site's default skin, which means the majority of viewers will be using it. I can deal with Monaco, unuseable though I think it is, until more important things are fixed. -- Armond {{Bacon}} 18:37, October 9, 2009 (UTC)
The "more important things" you mention actually take a good chunk of time that I'd need to have all in one block. It's easy for me to fix this small stuff like making Monobook work okay. No worries, I'll do it tonight and Monobook will go back to actually working. Surgo 18:41, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

3.5e nav Edit

The pages are either broadly ready to go, or placeholdered pending usability stuff / me figuring out how to get a bunch of thumbnails to automagically add new entries when people add an appropriate file (I have a general idea on that one, but I think a custom template like your template row is what I need to do; suggestions welcome). Last time I played with one of the semantic templates we hit a snag, so I wanted to bug you about the general plan to add properties to things like classes and creatures and all that before I went and edited any of it. I imagine the plan is to use existing templates (like 3.5e Feat) where appropriate, and non-outputting templates (like 3.5e class semantics) where the preload doesn't use a template in general.

So, wanna issue a confirmation / expound upon the plan? A big chunk of the plan would be nice, because once this stuff is largely in place I intend to hit up Sam to port the basic structure over to the 4e homebrew (with whatever additional properties or values make sense for those cases). And after that go back and fix whatever outlier articles still don't conform for one reason or another. - TarkisFlux 01:29, October 15, 2009 (UTC)

It's best to catch each other on IRC sometime to talk about this. I'll see what I can do. Surgo 01:49, October 15, 2009 (UTC)

Quick Question Edit

Any idea how I generate a list? For example, a list that contains ((Base Class && Doesn't have a balance rating)) so I can see if I missed any of the base classes? Or a list that contains ((User == Ghostwheel && Base Class)) so I can generate a list of things with my name on it, if you get what I mean? Thanks --Ghostwheel 01:23, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

Surgo will probably have something else to suggest, but I'd say your best bet is Special:Ask and just building whatever throwaway search you want at the time. Be careful of the dreaded semantic delay though. - TarkisFlux 01:43, November 4, 2009 (UTC)
Look at Eiji's userpage. -- Jota 17:44, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

Another quick question; how do we upload OGL material? --Ghostwheel 06:07, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

Same way you upload any other material, just use Template:OGL Top and Template:OGL Bottom. Surgo 16:20, November 28, 2009 (UTC)
What if we find OGL material that has a good idea behind it, and want to change it in various ways to make it more balanced? It wouldn't still be the original material, so would we even need the OGL template? --Ghostwheel 19:38, November 28, 2009 (UTC)
Depends on the changes...if it's just based on the OGL material, it's not OGL. If it's pretty much the same with different numbers (a clear derivative work), it's OGL. Surgo 20:05, November 28, 2009 (UTC)
If there's no author template for OGL material, where should we note balance points and/or ratings? --Ghostwheel 15:42, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
Honestly, I don't think we should put balance points and/or ratings on OGL material that we didn't create, but rather imported from other sources. Surgo 16:18, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
Why not? It's just as homebrew and no more official than the stuff we make. --Ghostwheel 16:25, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
I would like to make a couple distinctions here. A) It's published (not a problem by itself, it just makes putting the author template on the individual pages not-really-fitting) and most importantly B) It was uploaded without explicit permission. I think the B is the most important part here. Surgo 02:22, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
Most were uploaded with changes made, so not exactly the same feats, and also adding a balance rating doesn't change the content, just labels it and gives newcomers a rough estimate of what level game they can include the material in. Still not seeing any real argument against adding balance ratings... :-/ --Ghostwheel 03:11, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
Wait, they were uploaded with changes made? That was never indicated, and it was very non-obvious (you said it was from some published book and didn't say you made any changes to it). If you're doing *that*, I'd prefer you upload the original text in a way similar to how I've been uploading the Dread Codex (you can even put ", Book Name" on the end like I've been doing) and then upload another page with your own version (that doesn't have to be OGL). Surgo 03:15, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
Ugh, though you said above that if only minor changes were made, they needed the OGL template. At any rate, most have good ideas, but are complete trash as-is. Would I really need to upload the originals? Just feels like adding crap to the wiki. --Ghostwheel 03:18, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
This is a case I'm willing to make a "trash" exception for because it wouldn't show up in the general search lists (thanks to having Category:OGL) and it also fits in with the goal of having a big OGL archive. That said, sorry about the earlier statement -- it is fine under CC-BY-SA -- from what you uploaded though you made it look like you hadn't written any of it, and were attributing the text to the published material. Nah, don't bother with that -- provided what you're uploading is different, upload it under your own name and give it a balance point and everything. But if it's really similar it would be a good faith gesture to upload the originals too. I think that good faith gesture is a good idea, considering how generally nice the publisher was for releasing it under the OGL in the first place. Surgo 03:23, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
Might another option be to note where the original it was based on came from? Uploading all the feats in there is something I just don't have the time/effort to do at this juncture, mostly the ones that I'm interested in or have potential. --Ghostwheel 03:27, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, that works too and I believe it satisfies the good faith measure fine. Surgo 03:30, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
Would a new template be appropriate for this, and similar things? If so, would you mind making one? I'm still not certain how wiki-code and such works... --Ghostwheel 03:52, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
No template required, just say somewhere "this is based off the feat of the same name in (insert book)" or whatever. Surgo 04:13, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
what if you called it the same name as the original and and just called yours a 'variant'? i've seen that done more than a few times around the couple wiki sites.--Azerinth 14:25, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
Surg, could you explain again why we shouldn't assign balance ratings to OGL material? --Ghostwheel 08:20, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

It's official... Edit

Thought you'd like to know that Green Dragon is officially going through and removing authorship tags from every article on the other wiki. Also, I have still made no progress getting him to remove the content made by myself or anyone else that requested it. Hurray for getting out when we did. -- Dracomortis 04:41, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I have actually been trying to get him to do it too. I mean, with the authorship tags gone, editing and change should increase. No longer a little box that says, "Editing: No please". Pretty soon, the only place on the web to find authentic, author maintained articles will be right here on wikia.
Any content we left behind will no longer need "adopting" or whatever. After just a few small edits and a picture change, most of my old articles can become something completely different anyway. I look forward to working on and maintaining my projects here and letting my old stuff evolve away into dust. Hopefully we all do. --Jay Freedman 23:17, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

Property: School Edit

So, did you not want to reuse it for the psionic or maneuver or whatever other groupings we have? Property for each one then? - TarkisFlux 03:19, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

On a somewhat related note - Holy shit! There's a template size limit! And making the spells levels grouped by school into a single template exceeds it! Unless you can see a way to shrink these down, I can't make a super easy template for Sor/Wiz spells :-( On the up side, this is an awesome category name Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded - TarkisFlux 05:16, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
I can shrink it down pretty easily. Surgo 12:30, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

A Query Edit

What exactly is the copyright rules on stuff on this wiki? I was considering making a campaign setting on this wiki but putting it in a book later--ThirdEmperor 06:03, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

If you upload it here, you license it to the wiki under the CC-BY-SA license. You can relicense it for another purpose later if you wish, but we always have it licensed to us under that license. Surgo 17:04, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
What about images? What are the rules on what you can and can't use as a image for your class?--ThirdEmperor 08:47, January 1, 2010 (UTC)
The image must fall into one of these three categories:
  • It's a free image (Creative Commons or a similar license, or public domain).
  • You have explicit permission to use it.
  • Its use falls under fair use.
The last is by far the hardest category to nail down. Surgo 16:01, January 1, 2010 (UTC)

Neighborly Edit

Surgo, I understand that a primary aim of this wiki is to have homebrew content that is rigorously balanced with existing content, but referring to that aim as having articles that are "better quality" than others is rather condescending and demeaning of the hard work that has gone into other wikis, especially those within Wikia Gaming that you're a part of. Hence, I think it would be appropriate to change the text on the front page of your wiki from "Unlike other Dungeons and Dragons wikis, this wiki is centered around aggressive quality control." to simply "This wiki is centered around aggressive quality control." if you want to keep your same wording, or "This wiki is focused on providing well-balanced homebrew content." which looks to be a more accurate description of the purpose of the wiki. The front page prevents any but admins editing it, which is why I'm posting a message for you here. --MidnightLightning 22:42, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

I think that was posted out of frustration with a different wiki that isn't a part of wikia at all, so I doubt that it was aimed at any of our friends at wikia gaming. You make a good point though, and I've gone ahead and removed the offending bits and hopefully made it a bit more welcoming overall. - TarkisFlux 22:55, November 13, 2009 (UTC)
While I understand your point MidnightLightning, and I would normally agree with it (and it appears Tarkis has already changed it anyway, which is totally fine with me), I'd like to note that we are, as far as I know, the only wiki on Wikia that is focused around homebrew material at all -- thus I don't think the statement was demeaning to, well, anyone. That objection noted, it's already changed and gone by the time I'm posting this. Surgo 00:37, November 14, 2009 (UTC)
While this wiki may be the one whose focused most broadly on all aspects of homebrew content (covering all the sub-categories from here), there are a few that are more focused on individual areas of homebrew content. There is the d20 Adventure, a newer wiki which includes D&D 3.5 environments/encounters, and d20 NPCs which includes D&D custom monsters and classed monsters that don't show up in the SRD that I know of. I know of these since I'm an administrator of the d20 NPCs wiki, and hence the reason I was posting here to begin with. Thank you Tarkis for making that change promptly! --MidnightLightning 14:38, November 16, 2009 (UTC)
I wasn't aware d20 NPCs had monsters. I guess it's a good thing the change has been made then! Surgo 15:24, November 16, 2009 (UTC)

Discussion for a nonexistent page Edit

I recently posted an inquiry about the 'lifesight' mentioned in the Whispers of the Otherworld (3.5e Feat) entry. NameViolation pointed me to where the best rerference was. Now i have questions concerning the implications of 'Lifesight' that i wish to discuss on this site, but there isn't a page for the referenced feat that 'lifesight' is based off of. Is it appropriate for me to start a discussion of 'lifesight' on either Whispers of the Otherworld (3.5e Feat) or Ghost Cut Technique (3.5e Feat), where lifesight is also mentioned, or should i create an entry for the feat and then start a discussion there?--Azerinth 14:46, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

I think Lifesight shouldn't be a link, but rather a reference to the book Libris Mortis. Surgo 16:19, November 28, 2009 (UTC)
alright but then is there an approiate place to discuss it on this site?--Azerinth 17:12, November 28, 2009 (UTC)
Certainly! You can create a thread in Forum:Watercooler. Surgo 18:06, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

Creature BotEdit

Just a note - your creature bot shouldn't be putting subtypes in parentheses and should be removing them when found. The parrens are already covered by the template, and keeping them in the page is gonna screw up properties (see the parrens in the properties of SRD:Achaierai) as well as double them up in the entry. - TarkisFlux 21:20, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

Damn, I thought I missed something. Surgo 21:21, December 5, 2009 (UTC)
While you're at it, can you remove any '''s (ie: bolding instructs) in the creature= param? It's already covered by the template, and the extra bolding instruct is causing the name property to show as bolded for those entries that have it. - TarkisFlux 21:40, December 5, 2009 (UTC)
Will do. Surgo 21:42, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

OGL StuffEdit

Should we stick them in Cat:User so it's linked through homebrew? If not, what sort of structures do you feel like putting together for it (since the only other structure is SRD or Unearthed Arcana, and it's not those)? Sorta worried that the feats Ghost's been adding from BoEM2 aren't going to show up anywhere outside of categories, and would like to get it sorted while the number is small. - TarkisFlux 05:32, December 8, 2009 (UTC)

Also on Fandom

Random Wiki