Difference between revisions of "Talk:3.5e Homebrew"

From Dungeons and Dragons Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(One more page of jumbling: new section)
(One more page of jumbling)
Line 177: Line 177:
Under the 3.5 Spells of the "Complete Homebrew Spell List," when, the link at the bottom of the page for "More spells" is clicked, it leads to the next page, completely jumbled together.
Under the 3.5 Spells of the "Complete Homebrew Spell List," when, the link at the bottom of the page for "More spells" is clicked, it leads to the next page, completely jumbled together.
:Other the monsters page (which is more trouble than it's worth to do the fancy formatting), all of the listed jumbles have been fixed and standardized. If some enterprising soul wants to come along and templatize them, it should be pretty easy and would simplify fixing in future. - [[User:Tarkisflux|Tarkisflux]] <sup>[[User talk:Tarkisflux|Talk]]</sup>  12:26, 17 August 2018 (MDT)

Revision as of 18:26, 17 August 2018


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)


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)


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)


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:
{{3.5e Magical Traps Breadcrumb}} = Back to Main Page3.5e HomebrewEquipmentMagical Traps
{{3.5e Mundane Traps Breadcrumb}} = Back to Main Page3.5e HomebrewEquipmentMundane Traps
All existing traps still have {{3.5e Traps Breadcrumb}} (evaluates to Template:3.5e Traps Breadcrumb), 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)


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)
Did his account get deleted?XX the memenist Xx (talk) 20:34, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
I don't think he actually ever made an account here... --Ghostwheel (talk) 20:40, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Good then. Hopefully he does not create an account here and delete everything including my work and your work XX the memenist Xx (talk) 20:52, 29 August 2016 (UTC)


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)


There's this ugly boxed banner clarifying that the page is homebrew with a warning to check with their DM on the page that I haven't seen before. Is it necessary? And if it is is there a way we can make it prettier? - Aeturo (talk) 21:21, 25 April 2017 (MDT)

How do I submit a race I just made

I just made a race for 3.5 edition, and I am really proud of it. so my question is how do I get other people to see it?- The dude

Do you mean this one? Xoulva (3.5e Race). The formatted was a bit messed up in it... and still is. It looks like you removed some things. Check some other races to see how they're formatted to get an idea for standards. First time is the trickiest. Don't worry much about the winter cleaning tag on there for now, it's basically just a note for people so that stuff that needs fixing doesn't get lost in the mix. We don't like incomplete/messed up stuff in the main navigation if we can help it. If there's anything else you need or have questions on, just ask. --Ganteka Future (talk) 15:14, 9 June 2018 (MDT)

I have formatted the page better

What do you think?

Page contents getting jumbled together

I have noticed that, in the tables of feats, and some of the monster-listings of "more results..." have become jumbled together, instead of showing a list-form for going to each entry.

Has anyone else noted this? If so, can anything be done to fix this problem?

Ah! It's not just me! Time to hunt down some of our codemonkeys... -- Eiji-kun (talk) 22:00, 14 June 2018 (MDT)
Leave a list of the non-monster others and I can quick fix them. Fancy table row stuff will go away until someone wants to sit down and long fix them, but the further results links will be legible. - Tarkisflux Talk 23:11, 14 June 2018 (MDT)

First; thanks for the fast response.

When I follow this path: "Character options" then click on "Standard Feats," at the bottom of the first list of feats, there is the option for "More Feats." When that link is clicked, the next page has, instead of a list of feats, it shows many jumbled together in one long mass.

I honestly have little knowledge of how websites are put together, so I hope a link copied to that page (and its jumbled information) will be of help in fixing it.


Thank you again, I love this site.

List of page content getting jumbled

Okay, as per request, here is a list of the specific feats pages that are still jumbling together when I go to them.

Under "3.5 Feats":

"Standard feats by name..." when the 'more feats' link is clicked at the bottom of the page, the next page displays all feats jumbled together instead of in a table format.

"Standard feats by balance..." under the "Very High balance feats," clicking 'further results' at the bottom of the page leads to a second jumbled page; also, the "Very High balance Epic Feats" table is jammed onto the column on the right-hand, bottom-side, of the page.

The pages for "Category format" with regards to individual feats seems to be working fine as of this posting.

Thank you again for having gotten the Monsters links fixed so fast.

One more page of jumbling

Okay, I have stumbled across one more part where the pages are jumbling together.

Under the 3.5 Spells of the "Complete Homebrew Spell List," when, the link at the bottom of the page for "More spells" is clicked, it leads to the next page, completely jumbled together.

Other the monsters page (which is more trouble than it's worth to do the fancy formatting), all of the listed jumbles have been fixed and standardized. If some enterprising soul wants to come along and templatize them, it should be pretty easy and would simplify fixing in future. - Tarkisflux Talk 12:26, 17 August 2018 (MDT)