Talk:3.5e Homebrew

Namespace
I think it might be better to have a namespace in front of pages such as: "3.5e:Ninjageddon (Spell)" instead of "Ninjageddon (3.5e Spell)". This is something we would probably want to start doing now. --Aarnott 15:37, 12 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Possible, though there's a limit to how many namespaces I can have on a Wikia. What are the benefits of a namespace vs. what we have now, aside from searching? Surgo 19:46, 12 August 2009 (UTC)


 * From my understanding, that is the benefit. Is the number of namespaces allowed a low number? --Aarnott 02:32, 13 August 2009 (UTC)


 * That number is 3, though if we beg we might be able to talk it up to 4. Surgo 03:08, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Templates
Would it be appropriate to have a separate section for Templates under the 'For DM's' section? --Be well 14:51, September 23, 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, that will be done. Surgo 14:57, September 23, 2009 (UTC)

Tinkering
Hey Gan, as long as you're tinkering can you fix the order of the items so they're less random?

For players, something more like every book ever published:
 * Races
 * Classes
 * Character Options
 * Equipment
 * Optimized Builds
 * Special Abilities (or anything less ridiculous than what it's named right now)

For DMs, something that groups similar bits together better like:
 * Campaign Settings
 * Quests
 * Maps
 * Environments
 * NPCs
 * Creatures
 * Creature Templates (per prior request)
 * Deities

And for general just drop sourcebooks and variant rules at the top of the list instead of the bottom please. At least I think that makes the pages flow better. - TarkisFlux 00:43, October 6, 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, right now the order is alphabetical... not really the way it needs to be. Order of "most used" or some such is much better. That said, the "For Players, For DMs and General" listing style doesn't need to be kept at all either. It really needs to be reworked again completely and rethought over the next few days. I'll give it some more thought and get back to you later. How does "Class Abilities" sound as an option to replace "Complex Special Ability Components"? Gotta find out if 3.5e Discussions is a no-go for this wiki as well. Additionally, if you have any recommendations on the small text wording, that would be awesome. --Ganteka Future 01:16, October 6, 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not really opposed to the Player / DM / Everyone split, as it helps categorize stuff and direct attention away from things you aren't going to want. It also keeps the subgroups manageable in whatever order we decide to go with because they're few in number. I don't know that I'd go with a most used order, because I can see it leading to the current setup where the order doesn't have any game flow to it. If the lists were longer (like if we get rid of the user / column split) it might be necessary or fantastic, but I don't see the point for a 6 or 7 item list like now.


 * Class Abilities sounds great. I like it better than the "special abilities" that I've been doing for semantic properties and category stuff, and if it gets put up here I'll go tweak the rest of the supporting structure.


 * I think Discussions is probably redundant with the Forum, but I don't know what purpose it served at the old wiki.


 * I'll get back to you on small text wording, none of it jumped out as needing to be redone but I'll kick it around for a bit. - TarkisFlux 03:08, October 6, 2009 (UTC)


 * On "discussions", it served as a FAQ/forum area, but was poorly done and source of many an error (they basically gave you a blank page, resulting in all sorts of formatting errors and gibberish jumble). With out chat room and how often at least one person is in there it's redundant, and probably would only cause trouble.  Drop it. -- Eiji Hyrule 17:53, October 7, 2009 (UTC)


 * Tarkis is correct -- the forum system has completely replaced Discussion. Surgo 17:55, October 7, 2009 (UTC)

Traps
There is nowhere to place traps, and the IRC channel is having a brainstorm session on them. It'd be a good idea to have a section for them for DMs to look up. --Havvy 02:19, December 22, 2009 (UTC)


 * I guess it'll go next to equipment. Let me clear up weapons first and then I'll add a section. Surgo 03:50, December 22, 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't know if you added this to equipment or not yet, but it might work better to combine NPCs (which I know you want to pawn off, but we still have for now), Monsters, and Templates into subpages of a new page called Encounters, of which Traps would be a subpage like the rest. - TarkisFlux 22:16, March 3, 2010 (UTC)


 * Shall we take them out of "Equipment" where Traps currently lay? I was going to add one soon but I am debating on how I should format it, that and I am BAAAAAD at the CR/pricing/etc.  Instead of following formulas I just make logical traps.  "Reverse Gravity + Prismatic Wall = Fun" and stuff like that.  What shall I do? -- Eiji Hyrule 02:52, March 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * I just wasn't sure it had been put in or not (and actually going and checking didn't occur to me cause i'm dumb today). Carry on Eiji. Worst case it gets bot moved later :-) - TarkisFlux 04:18, March 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * Voicing support for an encounters section. Putting traps on the equipment list feels wrong, and having a section to write up premade encounters seems like a good idea. Also, it looks like there isn't a traps breadcrumb yet. --IGTN 00:46, May 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * If you make a preload you can feel free to steal mine. I'm going to be making tons of traps. -- Eiji Hyrule 01:25, May 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * They have preloads, just the breadcrumbs at the bottom don't work. I went and set up two:
 * All existing traps still have (evaluates to ), which doesn't work since there are two possible places it can point. If we're not getting an encounters page, that needs to be fixed, either by human or bot. But dividing between magical and mundane traps doesn't make sense except that they're on the equipment page which is split up that way. An encounters page (divided, maybe, into NPCs, Traps, Prebuilt Encounters, and maybe Monsters) would solve that problem. --IGTN 01:36, May 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * All existing traps still have (evaluates to ), which doesn't work since there are two possible places it can point. If we're not getting an encounters page, that needs to be fixed, either by human or bot. But dividing between magical and mundane traps doesn't make sense except that they're on the equipment page which is split up that way. An encounters page (divided, maybe, into NPCs, Traps, Prebuilt Encounters, and maybe Monsters) would solve that problem. --IGTN 01:36, May 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * All existing traps still have (evaluates to ), which doesn't work since there are two possible places it can point. If we're not getting an encounters page, that needs to be fixed, either by human or bot. But dividing between magical and mundane traps doesn't make sense except that they're on the equipment page which is split up that way. An encounters page (divided, maybe, into NPCs, Traps, Prebuilt Encounters, and maybe Monsters) would solve that problem. --IGTN 01:36, May 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * We're trying to move "Magical" to "Magic". Bleh, I got busy before I could fix all the equipment. Surgo 01:56, May 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * Will fix on the breadcrumbs. --IGTN 02:01, May 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Fixed on breadcrumb. Should I move the Magical Traps page so that the breadcrumb works? --IGTN 02:05, May 24, 2010 (UTC)

Factions
Hey we need somewhere to put homebrew factions or I'm going to start pasting them on your userpages.--ThirdEmperor 22:27, March 20, 2010 (UTC)

Completeness in Tables
The lists of projects (quests, campaign settings, and sourcebooks) should have a column for the completeness rating of the entry in question, so that you can see at a glance if something is complete enough to use without needing to click on the article. This would improve usability, since the complete and incomplete projects will be clearly divided from eachother. Also, people looking for a project to join would be able to quickly find projects that are just starting. --IGTN 07:58, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * For an example of what this would look like, I've added this column to the campaign settings page. --IGTN 10:09, May 25, 2010 (UTC)

Character Sheets
I think we have enough variants now that change core mechanics that the pre-boxed sheets D&D has already created are going to be irrelevant and unusable in quite a few campaigns that use really any of the material posted here. Should we create a new section for character sheets specifically designed for wiki material?--Change=Chaos. Period. SC 21:04, 9 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't think so. They could be uploaded as image files and attached to the relevant changes though. - Tarkisflux 22:00, 9 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I personally like this idea. I really hate just using plain paper for my character sheets.--ParakeeTalk 17:12, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Green Dragon
Why do people hate him? What did he do?--ParakeeTalk 14:10, 2 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Hate is a very strong word and I certainly wouldn't use it to describe the way I feel towards him. He's been very offensive to the people here in the past (and actually he going at it again right now). His actions have included arbitrary bannings, a general attitude of "my way or the highway", refusal to display proper accreditation for content users have authored, and, most recently, accusations and threats of legal action over copyright laws he doesn't understand. The biggest offensive action he took really was shutting down his site for a week or so when he got angry, which at the time, we thought might be indefinite. And considering that we were active users there at that time, it was very upsetting to think that all our creative work was destroyed. --Aarnott 16:53, 2 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Sounds like a real asshat. Should we contact | Anonymous?--Change=Chaos. Period. SC 17:32, 2 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Nah, we're above that, plus, he can't touch us now so all his chaotic howlings are just farts in the wind now. He has no power and for all his talk of legality, no legal system in the world would hear his insanity.  We're safe.
 * My personal beef is that he effectively stole all my work (ironic). All I wish to do is delete my stuff over there so I can wash my hands of the damn place, but noooooo, that would make too much sense and be against his "if you post anything, I own it" policy, his China-level censorship policy, and his "logic is diplomacy, ergo laws and reason for the goal of sanity ia ia goog'thulthu fthagn" policy. -- Eiji-kun 18:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Skills?
There doesn't seem to be a section for adding homebrew skills and skill tricks. I think these would be useful sections to add. Alcyius 19:02, 14 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Skill Tricks. You're right that there doesn't seem to be a section for skills, so just use 3.5e Other, possibly with a title of (3.5e Skill). If you really care, I suppose you could make a page for skills and link it in 3.5e Character Options, but I doubt there will ever be enough of them for it to really be worthwhile; after all, the only person who makes skills around here makes up rules for them too: Tome of Prowess. --Foxwarrior 19:20, 14 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I could expand the skill tricks section to include skills pretty easily. There were a few other skills floating around once upon a time, not sure if they were removed though. - Tarkisflux Talk 19:46, 14 June 2012 (UTC)