Template talk:3.5e Feat

Feat TemplateEdit

Now is probably the time to change this if we want to. The feat templating seemed like a good idea at first, but in practice made things harder to edit and maintain (I think). What do people think about switching everything back to a non-templated version? I have no problems plowing through the existing feats to get them standardized. --Andrew Arnott (talk, email) 15:33, September 8, 2009 (UTC)

If you have no problem doing that and updating the preload...sure, go ahead. Just make sure you preserve the semantic properties that the template now sets and also, if possible, have the feat types (like [Metamagic] or [Fighter]) also be their own semantic property: Type. I was going to do that bit with the feat template when I had the time. Surgo 15:47, September 8, 2009 (UTC)

Before I fire away at this, what do you think of the current look-and-feel of the feat formatting? --Andrew Arnott (talk, email) 17:19, September 8, 2009 (UTC)

I think the current look-and-feel is pretty good, but I'm certainly not married to it if you have a better idea. Surgo 17:20, September 8, 2009 (UTC)

I don't have any better ideas. I'll let this sit until tomorrow just so that other people can give their input if they have any. --Andrew Arnott (talk, email) 17:25, September 8, 2009 (UTC)

Upon thinking it over, I really like having the feat template around. Most feats do fit into it, and it's pretty useful to have. No reason someone can't just not use the template if they fall outside of its rigid format though. Surgo 19:51, September 30, 2009 (UTC)

Template Section AdditionsEdit

Fluff, ExampleEdit

I am requesting two additional optional fields for this template:

|fluff= and |example=

The fluff text would be automatically italicized and placed right before the |benefit= section. The reason for this addition is for semantic reasons. The benefit should be mechanical, and the fluff should be fluff. This could also be called |flavor=. And remember, flavor is mutable.

The |example= section would, if filled out, create a new paragraph and give a bold Example: start after the benefit section. The reason for this addition is also for semantic reasons, but would also help remind people that examples can be provided. It also feels less weird to write |example=<example here> than to manually put in newlines, and bold the word example.

--Havvy 19:13, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. There's no problem in giving optional fields, especially if there's a feat with a complex mechanic that may require explanation. - TG Cid 20:58, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

Fluff and Example added. - TarkisFlux 22:51, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Tarkis Flux. --Havvy 16:19, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

DependsEdit

Idea: Addition of a new paramater |depends= where upon which you would place which feats are required to take the feat. The feats would show up auto-linked in the Prerequisites line, and they would have a property set or something. Then the template would show somewhere which feats depend on this feat to give people an idea of what feat chains they can take. Maybe a line such as "Feat Chains: This feat is a prerequisite for the feats A, B, and C."

As long as we have semantic mediawiki, we might as well use it to our best interests to help people choose which feats they wish to take.

--Havvy 07:23, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

EqualToEdit

Some feats are replacements or count as other feats. It would be nice to show which feats these are by using Semantic Mediawiki and a new parameter. It might be necessary to make two parameters. |EqualTo= and |Replacement=. Equal to can be taken beside the feat that is equals and replacement is a replacement feat that cannot be taken beside. For Equal To, we could add a line "Special: This feat counts as Dodge for the purposes of prerequisites." And for Replacements, "Special: This feat counts as Dodge for the purposes of prerequisites. You may not take both Dodge and this feat at the same time." Also, it would probably be necessary to have a parameter |EqualToSRD= that if it has content, means the feat that |EqualTo or |Replacement contains is an SRD feat instead of a homebrew feat.

Then, in the feat template, there is a check to see if a feat has replacements, and if so, has a line showing that. It should probably be something like so: "Equivalent Feats: A, B, C"

This and the above request put together will make feats a more complicated template (four new parameters, some arcane coding..), but it would also make us have one of the most useful feat pages on the web. And this is self-updating information, so it gets better over time. --Havvy 07:23, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Another way of putting this is, is that I'm asking to get an implementation of a self-referential relational database of which feats depend and which feats can be replaced. The cross-linking would be good for the wiki as a whole. --Havvy 18:31, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Might want to use the name |virtual= and |vrs= instead of needing four more properties. |vrs= would mean virtual: [r(eplacement) [of s(rd)]]. Only three feats would not work under this system, and they won't have replacements in the future (the Hero's Edge discipline feats to be precise) --Havvy 09:43, 11 January 2011 (UTC)