Talk:NPC Template - Revision history

Kedoch: /* Quest Information on NPC Pages */

2018-04-11T18:49:11Z

Quest Information on NPC Pages

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:49, 11 April 2018
Line 26:		Line 26:
	#All quests now contain categories for location (i.e. Serbule, Eltibule) and NPC who initiates the quest. This allows for the first time use of DPL to generate quests list (See [[Chirrra]] for an example)		#All quests now contain categories for location (i.e. Serbule, Eltibule) and NPC who initiates the quest. This allows for the first time use of DPL to generate quests list (See [[Chirrra]] for an example)

	Thoughts? I'll look for comments for ~week or so, and unless there is consensus against (or the admins say no!) I'll proceed with this proposed change and update NPC pages accordingly.		Thoughts? I'll look for comments for ~week or so, and unless there is consensus against (or the admins say no!) I'll proceed with this proposed change and update NPC pages accordingly. [[User:Kedoch\|Kedoch]] ([[User talk:Kedoch\|talk]]) 14:49, 11 April 2018 (EDT)

Kedoch at 18:41, 11 April 2018

2018-04-11T18:41:17Z

← Older revision	Revision as of 18:41, 11 April 2018
Line 1:	Line 1:
		==Quest Information on NPC Pages==
		I'd love to hear any thoughts from folks about simplifying the ''Quests'' subheading on NPC pages. My initial thoughts and reasonings are below:

		Currently the same information is manually edited in two locations.
		#On the page containing the quest information itself
		#On the NPC page - if up to template standards that includes five pieces of information: Favor, Objective, Reward spoiler, Requirements and Hints.
		This creates a duplication of work for wiki maintainers working on both pages, and leads to a situation where information may conflict (if one of the two locations is out of date). On an aesthetic note, the spoilers have always looked off to me in this section (being non-indented both in heading and expanded - as well as bold when quest names are not).

		I'd like to propose the following:
		#Switch Quests subheading to be a DPL object pointing to the Category:Quests/NPC Quests
		#Remove spoilers, hints, rewards and requirements from the NPC page (achieved by using DPL instead of manually editing/linking quests pages)

		This would achieve:
		#A cleaner look to the quest subheading for NPC's (the look and information on NPC pages would be standardized).
		#IMO aesthetics of NPC pages would improve by removing the spoiler blocks
		#Decrease the workload for maintainers by removing the need to duplicate information (and verify duplicate information)
		#Centralizes all quest information on the quest page. for a given quest.

		This could impact users:
		#Users who come to the wiki looking for a specific quest by name would likely not be impacted (landing directly on the Quest page)
		#Users who land on the NPC page first ''may'' have one additional click to access the information
		##Sort of... users have to click Expand for spoilers, and many quest on NPC pages don't contain spoilers, objectives or hints.

		Now is a good time for this change because:
		#Except for Druid quests, all quests pages on the wiki have recently been updated/uploaded, following the standardized quest template.
		#All quests now contain categories for location (i.e. Serbule, Eltibule) and NPC who initiates the quest. This allows for the first time use of DPL to generate quests list (See [[Chirrra]] for an example)

		Thoughts? I'll look for comments for ~week or so, and unless there is consensus against (or the admins say no!) I'll proceed with this proposed change and update NPC pages accordingly.

BetaNotus: Cleared out proposed changes that were made a few years back.

2017-05-01T21:15:38Z

Cleared out proposed changes that were made a few years back.

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:15, 1 May 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~==Proposed Changes==~~
	~~Should we have a category or some other notation for NPCs who will/won't talk to players in beast forms? [[User:Karunama\|Karunama]] ([[User talk:Karunama\|talk]]) 01:54, 7 October 2014 (CDT)~~
	: I don't have [[Beast Forms]] gameplay experience, but it makes sense if it is not super obvious in-game. So you mean like eg. the Suspicious Cow in Eltibule? Well if we have '''a category''' something like "Beast Form Friendly NPCs" then we can make a DPL (DynamicPageList) listing within [[Beast Forms]]. But... is it the case that some talk to spider but not wolf, some talk to wolf but not cow , etc? (I don't know). If not, then the category makes sense. Next we could potentially add that to a future [[Template:NPC infobox]] eg. "Talks to Beasts" yes/no. Until then, we can add it to the NPC pages so we don't forget. I think it would fit in the intro text? Another sentence "John Doe talks to players in [[Beast Forms[Beast Form]]" as it will be high up the page, and it won't clog most pages (I think it's limited to a few NPCs). We could also add a section only on relevant NPCs. I prefer the extra sentence so we don't needlessly lengthen the NPC pages for this small info. In time, we can move this info to the "NPC infobox" (another sidebar "info card" thingy). But either way is fine. Cheers --[[User:Gorgonzola\|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola\|talk]]) 04:48, 7 October 2014 (CDT)

	~~==Shop Table Layout (new template with icons)==~~
	Btw, I realize now there is no column for Favor. It sounds like favor is often a requirement and may be worth documenting. On the other hand I think you soon realize as a player, that nearly everything of value is going to be locked with favor anyway. But that's just me. For the time being, don't worry.. with this template format, it is only a matter of adding a new parameter, if we ''really'' need to add favor as a column.. we can do it. Just i'd rather focus on other priorities as long as it works reasonably well. The template can accomodate any number of rows. It allows to make complex formatting of table rows with little code in the article. --[[User:Gorgonzola\|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola\|talk]]) 08:16, 7 October 2014 (CDT)

	~~==Proper Categorization of NPCs (including creatures) to work with DPL (Dynamic Page Lists)==~~
	Some things that come to mind while testing DPL on [[Goblin]] and [[Arthropod]] (creature types). We have to take technical requirements of DPL in mind when designing the categories so we can pull useful lists.

	* [[:Category:Serbule NPCs]] and [[:Category:Under the Hand Bosses]] seem extraneous and have no purpose
	* Instead, we can pull DPL lists that include one ore more simpler categories, for example Serbule + NPCs, or Bosses + Under the Hand

	~~For example [[Ancient Skeleton Guard]] could be categorized as Serbule, Creatures, Skeleton~~

	~~For DPL purposes I think we should use NPCs for friendly characters, and Creatures for things that can be attacked.~~

	~~Then we can pull (using DPL options):~~

	* '''Friends''' (friendly characters) : [[:Category:NPCs]] & [[:Category:Serbule]] (zone, ptional)
	* '''Bosses''' (creatures) : [[:Category:Bosses]] (Creatures here is implicit) & [[:Category:Serbule]] (zone, optional) & [[:Category:Arthropod]] (creature type, optional)
	* '''Foes''' (basic enemies) : [[:Category:Creatures]] & [[:Category:Serbule]] (zone, optional) & NOT [[:Category:Bosses]] (DPL '''notcategory''' option!)

	~~Conclusion:~~

	* A global category that overlaps both enemies and friendly NPCs could be made, but then we could also pull all NPCs + Creatures with DPL.
	* A global enemy/attackable entity category that does not overlap friendly NPCs => Creatures
	* A global category that includes all friendly (non attackable) NPCs => NPCs (NPCs does sound like an overarching category for both friends and foes... but thats what we used so far, it's short so I'd prefer to keep using that, .. also NPCs is often used to refer to distinguish from "mobs" in many games).
	* A global category for named creatures, currently we use => Bosses

	~~Do we need a "named creature" category? I'd rather avoid adding more categories unless there is a use case.~~

	Do we need a "mini boss" category? I'd rather avoid adding more categories unless there is a use case. Though here we could identify the ones that have a curse through the use of the MOB infobox template and some DPL trickery (we have a curse parameter).

	For bosses we can make some trickery with DPL to pull lists based on MOB infobox parameters: for example only those that have a curse. Any template parameter in [[Template:MOB infobox]] can potentially be used as a filter. --[[User:Gorgonzola\|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola\|talk]]) 15:31, 25 October 2014 (CDT)

	~~===Zone Categories===~~
	I think we should use [[:Category:Kur Moutains]] instead of [[:Category:Kur Mountains NPCs]]. The latter creates additional categories that are not necessary since DPL can pull from multiple categories (eg. "Kur Moutains" AND "NPCs").

	Such zone categories coudl potentially include other things like quests, points of interest and so on. In each case, we can pull (zone) + (other category). --[[User:Gorgonzola\|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola\|talk]]) 15:39, 25 October 2014 (CDT)

	~~===Simplifying Categories (with DPL in mind)===~~

	~~'''Bosses & Creatures''' : a boss is implicitly a creature, so it may not be required to include both categories. I can't say as of writing we'll have to see use cases.~~

	'''Bosses & NPCs''' : NPCs should be used for friendly characters, so DPL does not need to exclude them. eg. All Orc Bosses are "Orc&Bosses" and no exclusion is needed. Adding the bosses to "Creatures" category here does not cause an issue. Adding to NPCs makes it required to use an exclusion in DPL which is a requirement that's best not used if we can avoid it.

	~~===Overkill?===~~
	~~Actually, I'm not sure. Maybe DPL shouldn't be abused for things that can be fairly easily maintained, where it limits flexbility in editing pages.~~

	~~Categories on the other hand can be useful for example we can pull all the Orcs on the creature type page.~~

	I'm also not quite sure about the Zone categories, whether to use "Serbule" or "Serbule NPCs". I can't think of specific uses cases atm. --[[User:Gorgonzola\|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola\|talk]]) 15:52, 25 October 2014 (CDT)

Gorgonzola: /* Proper Categorization of NPCs (including creatures) to work with DPL (Dynamic Page Lists) */

2014-10-25T20:52:43Z

Proper Categorization of NPCs (including creatures) to work with DPL (Dynamic Page Lists)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:52, 25 October 2014
Line 45:		Line 45:

	'''Bosses & NPCs''' : NPCs should be used for friendly characters, so DPL does not need to exclude them. eg. All Orc Bosses are "Orc&Bosses" and no exclusion is needed. Adding the bosses to "Creatures" category here does not cause an issue. Adding to NPCs makes it required to use an exclusion in DPL which is a requirement that's best not used if we can avoid it.		'''Bosses & NPCs''' : NPCs should be used for friendly characters, so DPL does not need to exclude them. eg. All Orc Bosses are "Orc&Bosses" and no exclusion is needed. Adding the bosses to "Creatures" category here does not cause an issue. Adding to NPCs makes it required to use an exclusion in DPL which is a requirement that's best not used if we can avoid it.

			===Overkill?===
			Actually, I'm not sure. Maybe DPL shouldn't be abused for things that can be fairly easily maintained, where it limits flexbility in editing pages.

			Categories on the other hand can be useful for example we can pull all the Orcs on the creature type page.

			I'm also not quite sure about the Zone categories, whether to use "Serbule" or "Serbule NPCs". I can't think of specific uses cases atm. --[[User:Gorgonzola\|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola\|talk]]) 15:52, 25 October 2014 (CDT)

Gorgonzola: Thoughts about the zone categories used thus far.

2014-10-25T20:39:14Z

Thoughts about the zone categories used thus far.

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:39, 25 October 2014
Line 34:		Line 34:

	For bosses we can make some trickery with DPL to pull lists based on MOB infobox parameters: for example only those that have a curse. Any template parameter in [[Template:MOB infobox]] can potentially be used as a filter. --[[User:Gorgonzola\|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola\|talk]]) 15:31, 25 October 2014 (CDT)		For bosses we can make some trickery with DPL to pull lists based on MOB infobox parameters: for example only those that have a curse. Any template parameter in [[Template:MOB infobox]] can potentially be used as a filter. --[[User:Gorgonzola\|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola\|talk]]) 15:31, 25 October 2014 (CDT)

			===Zone Categories===
			I think we should use [[:Category:Kur Moutains]] instead of [[:Category:Kur Mountains NPCs]]. The latter creates additional categories that are not necessary since DPL can pull from multiple categories (eg. "Kur Moutains" AND "NPCs").

			Such zone categories coudl potentially include other things like quests, points of interest and so on. In each case, we can pull (zone) + (other category). --[[User:Gorgonzola\|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola\|talk]]) 15:39, 25 October 2014 (CDT)

	===Simplifying Categories (with DPL in mind)===		===Simplifying Categories (with DPL in mind)===

Gorgonzola: /* Proper Categorization of NPCs (including creatures) to work with DPL (Dynamic Page Lists) */

2014-10-25T20:31:53Z

Proper Categorization of NPCs (including creatures) to work with DPL (Dynamic Page Lists)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:31, 25 October 2014
Line 33:		Line 33:
	Do we need a "mini boss" category? I'd rather avoid adding more categories unless there is a use case. Though here we could identify the ones that have a curse through the use of the MOB infobox template and some DPL trickery (we have a curse parameter).		Do we need a "mini boss" category? I'd rather avoid adding more categories unless there is a use case. Though here we could identify the ones that have a curse through the use of the MOB infobox template and some DPL trickery (we have a curse parameter).

	For bosses we can make some trickery with DPL to pull lists based on MOB infobox parameters: for example only those that have a curse. Any template parameter in [[Template:MOB infobox]] can potentially be used as a filter.		For bosses we can make some trickery with DPL to pull lists based on MOB infobox parameters: for example only those that have a curse. Any template parameter in [[Template:MOB infobox]] can potentially be used as a filter. --[[User:Gorgonzola\|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola\|talk]]) 15:31, 25 October 2014 (CDT)

			===Simplifying Categories (with DPL in mind)===

			'''Bosses & Creatures''' : a boss is implicitly a creature, so it may not be required to include both categories. I can't say as of writing we'll have to see use cases.

			'''Bosses & NPCs''' : NPCs should be used for friendly characters, so DPL does not need to exclude them. eg. All Orc Bosses are "Orc&Bosses" and no exclusion is needed. Adding the bosses to "Creatures" category here does not cause an issue. Adding to NPCs makes it required to use an exclusion in DPL which is a requirement that's best not used if we can avoid it.

Gorgonzola: /* Proper Categorization of NPCs (including creatures) to work with DPL (Dynamic Page Lists) */

2014-10-25T20:20:26Z

Proper Categorization of NPCs (including creatures) to work with DPL (Dynamic Page Lists)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:20, 25 October 2014
Line 24:		Line 24:
	Conclusion:		Conclusion:

	* A global category that overlaps both enemies and friendly NPCs could be made, but ~~does it have a purpose?~~		* A global category that overlaps both enemies and friendly NPCs could be made, but then we could also pull all NPCs + Creatures with DPL.
	* A global enemy/attackable entity category that does not overlap friendly NPCs => Creatures		* A global enemy/attackable entity category that does not overlap friendly NPCs => Creatures
	* A global category that includes all friendly (non attackable) NPCs => NPCs (NPCs does sound like an overarching category for both friends and foes... but thats what we used so far, it's short so I'd prefer to keep using that, .. also NPCs is often used to refer to distinguish from "mobs" in many games).		* A global category that includes all friendly (non attackable) NPCs => NPCs (NPCs does sound like an overarching category for both friends and foes... but thats what we used so far, it's short so I'd prefer to keep using that, .. also NPCs is often used to refer to distinguish from "mobs" in many games).

Gorgonzola at 20:19, 25 October 2014

2014-10-25T20:19:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:19, 25 October 2014
Line 18:		Line 18:
	Then we can pull (using DPL options):		Then we can pull (using DPL options):

	* '''Friends''' (friendly characters) : NPCs & ~~Zone~~ (~~optional~~)		* '''Friends''' (friendly characters) : [[:Category:NPCs]] & [[:Category:Serbule]] (zone, ptional)
	* '''Bosses''' (creatures) : Bosses (Creatures here is implicit) & ~~Zone~~ (optional) & {creature type~~} (Optinal~~, ~~eg. Orc~~)		* '''Bosses''' (creatures) : [[:Category:Bosses]] (Creatures here is implicit) & [[:Category:Serbule]] (zone, optional) & [[:Category:Arthropod]] (creature type, optional)
	* '''Foes''' (basic enemies) : Creatures & ~~Zone~~ (optional) & NOT Bosses (~~exclusion~~!)		* '''Foes''' (basic enemies) : [[:Category:Creatures]] & [[:Category:Serbule]] (zone, optional) & NOT [[:Category:Bosses]] (DPL '''notcategory''' option!)

	Conclusion:		Conclusion:

Gorgonzola: Thoughts about proper categorizing in light of DPL options (ie. what categories have a practical use).

2014-10-25T20:15:39Z

Thoughts about proper categorizing in light of DPL options (ie. what categories have a practical use).

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ==Proposed Changes==
 Should we have a category or some other notation for NPCs who will/won't talk to players in beast forms? [[User:Karunama|Karunama]] ([[User talk:Karunama|talk]]) 01:54, 7 October 2014 (CDT)
@@ Line 17: / Line 5: @@
 ==Shop Table Layout (new template with icons)==
 Btw, I realize now there is no column for Favor. It sounds like favor is often a requirement and may be worth documenting. On the other hand I think you soon realize as a player, that nearly everything of value is going to be locked with favor anyway. But that's just me. For the time being, don't worry.. with this template format, it is only a matter of adding a new parameter, if we ''really'' need to add favor as a column.. we can do it. Just i'd rather focus on other priorities as long as it works reasonably well. The template can accomodate any number of rows. It allows to make complex formatting of table rows with little code in the article. --[[User:Gorgonzola|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola|talk]]) 08:16, 7 October 2014 (CDT)

Gorgonzola: Comment about the current Template:vendor table row and Favor.

2014-10-07T13:16:09Z

Comment about the current Template:vendor table row and Favor.

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:16, 7 October 2014
Line 14:		Line 14:
	Should we have a category or some other notation for NPCs who will/won't talk to players in beast forms? [[User:Karunama\|Karunama]] ([[User talk:Karunama\|talk]]) 01:54, 7 October 2014 (CDT)		Should we have a category or some other notation for NPCs who will/won't talk to players in beast forms? [[User:Karunama\|Karunama]] ([[User talk:Karunama\|talk]]) 01:54, 7 October 2014 (CDT)
	: I don't have [[Beast Forms]] gameplay experience, but it makes sense if it is not super obvious in-game. So you mean like eg. the Suspicious Cow in Eltibule? Well if we have '''a category''' something like "Beast Form Friendly NPCs" then we can make a DPL (DynamicPageList) listing within [[Beast Forms]]. But... is it the case that some talk to spider but not wolf, some talk to wolf but not cow , etc? (I don't know). If not, then the category makes sense. Next we could potentially add that to a future [[Template:NPC infobox]] eg. "Talks to Beasts" yes/no. Until then, we can add it to the NPC pages so we don't forget. I think it would fit in the intro text? Another sentence "John Doe talks to players in [[Beast Forms[Beast Form]]" as it will be high up the page, and it won't clog most pages (I think it's limited to a few NPCs). We could also add a section only on relevant NPCs. I prefer the extra sentence so we don't needlessly lengthen the NPC pages for this small info. In time, we can move this info to the "NPC infobox" (another sidebar "info card" thingy). But either way is fine. Cheers --[[User:Gorgonzola\|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola\|talk]]) 04:48, 7 October 2014 (CDT)		: I don't have [[Beast Forms]] gameplay experience, but it makes sense if it is not super obvious in-game. So you mean like eg. the Suspicious Cow in Eltibule? Well if we have '''a category''' something like "Beast Form Friendly NPCs" then we can make a DPL (DynamicPageList) listing within [[Beast Forms]]. But... is it the case that some talk to spider but not wolf, some talk to wolf but not cow , etc? (I don't know). If not, then the category makes sense. Next we could potentially add that to a future [[Template:NPC infobox]] eg. "Talks to Beasts" yes/no. Until then, we can add it to the NPC pages so we don't forget. I think it would fit in the intro text? Another sentence "John Doe talks to players in [[Beast Forms[Beast Form]]" as it will be high up the page, and it won't clog most pages (I think it's limited to a few NPCs). We could also add a section only on relevant NPCs. I prefer the extra sentence so we don't needlessly lengthen the NPC pages for this small info. In time, we can move this info to the "NPC infobox" (another sidebar "info card" thingy). But either way is fine. Cheers --[[User:Gorgonzola\|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola\|talk]]) 04:48, 7 October 2014 (CDT)

			==Shop Table Layout (new template with icons)==
			Btw, I realize now there is no column for Favor. It sounds like favor is often a requirement and may be worth documenting. On the other hand I think you soon realize as a player, that nearly everything of value is going to be locked with favor anyway. But that's just me. For the time being, don't worry.. with this template format, it is only a matter of adding a new parameter, if we ''really'' need to add favor as a column.. we can do it. Just i'd rather focus on other priorities as long as it works reasonably well. The template can accomodate any number of rows. It allows to make complex formatting of table rows with little code in the article. --[[User:Gorgonzola\|Gorgonzola]] ([[User talk:Gorgonzola\|talk]]) 08:16, 7 October 2014 (CDT)