User talk:MisterSinister/TOToM (3.5e Sourcebook)/SRP1

Tags

So, you use square brackets in your tags, and that makes it impossible to link to them in the page because of how wikis work with them in general. I don't know if you want to remove them from here or just go through and use {{{anchor|Tag Name}}} at every tag header so linking works. Note that you'll need to do this for all possible combinations of the multitags (Energy:Fire and Air) anyway.

Alternately, I can just remove the direct tag linking from the spell template if you want, though that seemed a useful feature. - Tarkisflux 18:24, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm not particularly attached to the notation - it just happened to be the form I'm most used to using with tags in general. What would you suggest as a good alternative notation? MisterSinister 20:48, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

I'd use the brackets in the text then, but not in the headers. That'll keep the same feel, which the spells share, and cut down on the number of anchors you need to add. Unless you like anchors, then you can just leave it. - Tarkisflux 21:55, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Or I'll just add anchors to the headers. Turns out that will mostly work too. I haven't touched the multi-attribute tags though, since I don't have an easy way to do them and I don't want to just do lots and lots of span ids. The persistable tag suffers a similar problem, since there's 20 different persistables. Everything else links nicely from the template though. - Tarkisflux 03:47, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Duration & Dissipation

Why did you choose a d6 instead of a d20? A d20 gives a higher range of %s to work with, and is more feat friendly. Not to mention the overarching system is called 'd20', so having such a roll not be a d20 is a bit weird. --Havvy 15:11, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Transferable

Would this make sense to have as a tag? --Havvy 15:11, 27 October 2010 (UTC)