Talk:Status effects - Revision history

Flun: /* This article */

2013-10-24T19:50:43Z

‎This article

Flun: /* This article */

2013-10-24T19:46:37Z

‎This article

Flun: /* This article */ linked glyphs

2013-10-24T19:35:37Z

‎This article: linked glyphs

Ion frigate: /* This article */

2013-10-24T18:06:44Z

‎This article

Spudwalt: /* This article */

2013-10-23T19:22:00Z

‎This article

Flun: /* This article */

2013-10-23T13:56:51Z

‎This article

MoogleDan: /* This article */

2013-10-23T12:12:15Z

‎This article

MoogleDan: /* This article */ Response to CC

2013-10-23T12:08:53Z

‎This article: Response to CC

Ion frigate at 02:31, 23 October 2013

2013-10-23T02:31:51Z

MoogleDan: /* new 0.13a status effect DRAIN */

2013-07-29T12:16:59Z

‎new 0.13a status effect DRAIN

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:50, 24 October 2013
Line 28:		Line 28:

	:::::Regarding linked status glyphs, this seems to work: <nowiki>[[Regen+\|{{LightMagenta\|Regen+}}]]</nowiki> --> [[Regen+\|{{LightMagenta\|Regen+}}]]		:::::Regarding linked status glyphs, this seems to work: <nowiki>[[Regen+\|{{LightMagenta\|Regen+}}]]</nowiki> --> [[Regen+\|{{LightMagenta\|Regen+}}]]
−	:::::You would just need to write the word twice. If that's annoying we could make a template so you just write it once, e.g. [[Template:LightMagentaLink]]. I would not suggest linking [[Template:LightMagenta]] since there are some uses of that template which [http://crawl.chaosforge.org/Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:LightMagenta don't need links]. --[[User:Flun\|Flun]] ([[User talk:Flun\|talk]]) 21:35, 24 October 2013 (CEST)	+	:::::You would just need to write the word twice. If that's annoying we could make a second template so you just write it once, e.g. [[Template:LightMagentaLink]] --> <nowiki>{{LightMagentaLink\|Regen+}}</nowiki> --> {{LightMagentaLink\|Regen+}}.
		+	:::::I would not suggest linking up [[Template:LightMagenta]] since there are some uses of that template which [http://crawl.chaosforge.org/Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:LightMagenta don't need links]. --[[User:Flun\|Flun]] ([[User talk:Flun\|talk]]) 21:35, 24 October 2013 (CEST)

@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 ::::I'm thinking that a list, like [[List of unrands]], is probably the best compromise between the different views here, with an article being made for each status effect.  The chart itself might actually become rather unwieldy, given how many sources there are for status effects (spell, enemy spell, evocation, god ability, wand, potion, card, miscast, encumbrance, monster attack, monster halo, probably more), and how there's less coherence to them than I thought.  The list entries would be a single line.  Ideally, it would be cool if we could make the status light itself link to the article; not positive how to do it, though we might try looking at NetHackWiki's monsymlink template, since it accomplishes a vaguely similar thing (link inside a template). -[[User:Ion frigate|Ion frigate]] ([[User talk:Ion frigate|talk]]) 20:06, 24 October 2013 (CEST)
-:::::Regarding linked status glyphs, this seems to work:
+:::::Regarding linked status glyphs, this seems to work: <nowiki>[[Regen+|{{LightMagenta|Regen+}}]]</nowiki> --> [[Regen+|{{LightMagenta|Regen+}}]]
-:::::* <nowiki>[[Regen+|{{LightMagenta|Regen+}}]]</nowiki> --> [[Regen+|{{LightMagenta|Regen+}}]]
+:::::You would just need to write the word twice. If that's annoying we could make a template so you just write it once, e.g. [[Template:LightMagentaLink]]. I would not suggest linking [[Template:LightMagenta]] since there are some uses of that template which [http://crawl.chaosforge.org/Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:LightMagenta don't need links]. --[[User:Flun|Flun]] ([[User talk:Flun|talk]]) 21:35, 24 October 2013 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:35, 24 October 2013
Line 26:		Line 26:

	::::I'm thinking that a list, like [[List of unrands]], is probably the best compromise between the different views here, with an article being made for each status effect. The chart itself might actually become rather unwieldy, given how many sources there are for status effects (spell, enemy spell, evocation, god ability, wand, potion, card, miscast, encumbrance, monster attack, monster halo, probably more), and how there's less coherence to them than I thought. The list entries would be a single line. Ideally, it would be cool if we could make the status light itself link to the article; not positive how to do it, though we might try looking at NetHackWiki's monsymlink template, since it accomplishes a vaguely similar thing (link inside a template). -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] ([[User talk:Ion frigate\|talk]]) 20:06, 24 October 2013 (CEST)		::::I'm thinking that a list, like [[List of unrands]], is probably the best compromise between the different views here, with an article being made for each status effect. The chart itself might actually become rather unwieldy, given how many sources there are for status effects (spell, enemy spell, evocation, god ability, wand, potion, card, miscast, encumbrance, monster attack, monster halo, probably more), and how there's less coherence to them than I thought. The list entries would be a single line. Ideally, it would be cool if we could make the status light itself link to the article; not positive how to do it, though we might try looking at NetHackWiki's monsymlink template, since it accomplishes a vaguely similar thing (link inside a template). -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] ([[User talk:Ion frigate\|talk]]) 20:06, 24 October 2013 (CEST)
		+
		+	:::::Regarding linked status glyphs, this seems to work:
		+	:::::* <nowiki>[[Regen+\|{{LightMagenta\|Regen+}}]]</nowiki> --> [[Regen+\|{{LightMagenta\|Regen+}}]]
		+	:::::If we don't want nested templates, we could do something like this:
		+	:::::* <nowiki>[[Regen+\|<span class="nhsym clr-brightmagenta">Regen+</span>]]</nowiki> --> [[Regen+\|<span class="nhsym clr-brightmagenta">Regen+</span>]]
		+	:::::We could make call it something [[Template:LightMagentaLink]], since there are uses of [[Template:LightMagenta]] which [http://crawl.chaosforge.org/Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:LightMagenta don't need links]. --[[User:Flun\|Flun]] ([[User talk:Flun\|talk]]) 21:35, 24 October 2013 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:06, 24 October 2013
Line 24:		Line 24:

	:::I like the chart idea. [[User:Spudwalt\|--spudwalt]] ([[User talk:Spudwalt\|talk]]) 21:22, 23 October 2013 (CEST)		:::I like the chart idea. [[User:Spudwalt\|--spudwalt]] ([[User talk:Spudwalt\|talk]]) 21:22, 23 October 2013 (CEST)
		+
		+	::::I'm thinking that a list, like [[List of unrands]], is probably the best compromise between the different views here, with an article being made for each status effect. The chart itself might actually become rather unwieldy, given how many sources there are for status effects (spell, enemy spell, evocation, god ability, wand, potion, card, miscast, encumbrance, monster attack, monster halo, probably more), and how there's less coherence to them than I thought. The list entries would be a single line. Ideally, it would be cool if we could make the status light itself link to the article; not positive how to do it, though we might try looking at NetHackWiki's monsymlink template, since it accomplishes a vaguely similar thing (link inside a template). -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] ([[User talk:Ion frigate\|talk]]) 20:06, 24 October 2013 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:22, 23 October 2013
Line 22:		Line 22:

	:: From an editor's point of view I think IonFrigate has good arguments that keeping track of changes will be easier for individual articles. The changed [[List of unrands]] looks much better now. Reducing [[Status effects]] the same way into a list would have my vote. --[[User:Flun\|Flun]] ([[User talk:Flun\|talk]]) 15:56, 23 October 2013 (CEST)		:: From an editor's point of view I think IonFrigate has good arguments that keeping track of changes will be easier for individual articles. The changed [[List of unrands]] looks much better now. Reducing [[Status effects]] the same way into a list would have my vote. --[[User:Flun\|Flun]] ([[User talk:Flun\|talk]]) 15:56, 23 October 2013 (CEST)
		+
		+	:::I like the chart idea. [[User:Spudwalt\|--spudwalt]] ([[User talk:Spudwalt\|talk]]) 21:22, 23 October 2013 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:56, 23 October 2013
Line 18:		Line 18:

	:Losing the status effect descriptions would be fine, but only if we have pages for all of them, and with a consistent naming convention preferably based on what someone playing the game is actually going to see (Fast for haste, Sil for silence, etc.); I wanted the site to have a comprehensive collection of every status modifier a player might encounter over the course of the game, complete with at least some explanation of what it means, and while it definitely got way out of hand, this page seemed like the fastest satisfactory approach. As for the great big chart, I'm not sure that'd be necessary if every status effect did have its own page; that way, players could look up what they need and see detailed information on each effect (which specific spell/god ability causes the effect, which monsters inflict this with the attack, and so on). Honestly, if we're going to overhaul this page, I'd say we should just reduce it to a Category after pulling each status effect out to its own entry. --[[User:MoogleDan\|MoogleDan]] ([[User talk:MoogleDan\|talk]]) 14:08, 23 October 2013 (CEST)		:Losing the status effect descriptions would be fine, but only if we have pages for all of them, and with a consistent naming convention preferably based on what someone playing the game is actually going to see (Fast for haste, Sil for silence, etc.); I wanted the site to have a comprehensive collection of every status modifier a player might encounter over the course of the game, complete with at least some explanation of what it means, and while it definitely got way out of hand, this page seemed like the fastest satisfactory approach. As for the great big chart, I'm not sure that'd be necessary if every status effect did have its own page; that way, players could look up what they need and see detailed information on each effect (which specific spell/god ability causes the effect, which monsters inflict this with the attack, and so on). Honestly, if we're going to overhaul this page, I'd say we should just reduce it to a Category after pulling each status effect out to its own entry. --[[User:MoogleDan\|MoogleDan]] ([[User talk:MoogleDan\|talk]]) 14:08, 23 October 2013 (CEST)
		+
		+	:: From a reader's point of view, I don't think someone is going to sit and read about all the possible status effects available in the game. The reader just wants info on the particular status effect that interests them. In this case single articles make more sense.
		+
		+	:: From an editor's point of view I think IonFrigate has good arguments that keeping track of changes will be easier for individual articles. The changed [[List of unrands]] looks much better now. Reducing [[Status effects]] the same way into a list would have my vote. --[[User:Flun\|Flun]] ([[User talk:Flun\|talk]]) 15:56, 23 October 2013 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:12, 23 October 2013
Line 17:		Line 17:
	Anyway, one way or another, I think this article really does need to be changed - things like this have a tendency not to get updated, because no one wants to go through and manually read through every status to find obsolete/changed ones. Inaccuracies had a tendency to persist in the old unrands article. -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] ([[User talk:Ion frigate\|talk]]) 04:31, 23 October 2013 (CEST)		Anyway, one way or another, I think this article really does need to be changed - things like this have a tendency not to get updated, because no one wants to go through and manually read through every status to find obsolete/changed ones. Inaccuracies had a tendency to persist in the old unrands article. -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] ([[User talk:Ion frigate\|talk]]) 04:31, 23 October 2013 (CEST)

−	:Losing the status effect descriptions would be fine, but only if we have pages for all of them; I wanted the site to have a comprehensive collection of every status modifier a player might encounter over the course of the game, complete with at least some explanation of what it means, and while it definitely got way out of hand, this page seemed like the fastest satisfactory approach. As for the great big chart, I'm not sure that'd be necessary if every status effect did have its own page; that way, players could see detailed information on each effect (which spell causes the effect, which monsters inflict this with the attack~~, what does this particular color mean for this particular status effect~~, and so on). Honestly, if we're going to overhaul this page, I'd say we should just reduce it to a Category after pulling each status effect out to its own entry. --[[User:MoogleDan\|MoogleDan]] ([[User talk:MoogleDan\|talk]]) 14:08, 23 October 2013 (CEST)	+	:Losing the status effect descriptions would be fine, but only if we have pages for all of them, and with a consistent naming convention preferably based on what someone playing the game is actually going to see (Fast for haste, Sil for silence, etc.); I wanted the site to have a comprehensive collection of every status modifier a player might encounter over the course of the game, complete with at least some explanation of what it means, and while it definitely got way out of hand, this page seemed like the fastest satisfactory approach. As for the great big chart, I'm not sure that'd be necessary if every status effect did have its own page; that way, players could look up what they need and see detailed information on each effect (which specific spell/god ability causes the effect, which monsters inflict this with the attack, and so on). Honestly, if we're going to overhaul this page, I'd say we should just reduce it to a Category after pulling each status effect out to its own entry. --[[User:MoogleDan\|MoogleDan]] ([[User talk:MoogleDan\|talk]]) 14:08, 23 October 2013 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:08, 23 October 2013
Line 16:		Line 16:

	Anyway, one way or another, I think this article really does need to be changed - things like this have a tendency not to get updated, because no one wants to go through and manually read through every status to find obsolete/changed ones. Inaccuracies had a tendency to persist in the old unrands article. -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] ([[User talk:Ion frigate\|talk]]) 04:31, 23 October 2013 (CEST)		Anyway, one way or another, I think this article really does need to be changed - things like this have a tendency not to get updated, because no one wants to go through and manually read through every status to find obsolete/changed ones. Inaccuracies had a tendency to persist in the old unrands article. -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] ([[User talk:Ion frigate\|talk]]) 04:31, 23 October 2013 (CEST)
		+
		+	:Losing the status effect descriptions would be fine, but only if we have pages for all of them; I wanted the site to have a comprehensive collection of every status modifier a player might encounter over the course of the game, complete with at least some explanation of what it means, and while it definitely got way out of hand, this page seemed like the fastest satisfactory approach. As for the great big chart, I'm not sure that'd be necessary if every status effect did have its own page; that way, players could see detailed information on each effect (which spell causes the effect, which monsters inflict this with the attack, what does this particular color mean for this particular status effect, and so on). Honestly, if we're going to overhaul this page, I'd say we should just reduce it to a Category after pulling each status effect out to its own entry. --[[User:MoogleDan\|MoogleDan]] ([[User talk:MoogleDan\|talk]]) 14:08, 23 October 2013 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:31, 23 October 2013
Line 7:		Line 7:
	:Temporary (reversed by gaining XP) skill drain now replaces the old permanent XP drain that draining attacks used to cause. I can write it up in the next couple days, though one of the more current players around here may also wish to do so. -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] 21:20, 28 July 2013 (CEST)		:Temporary (reversed by gaining XP) skill drain now replaces the old permanent XP drain that draining attacks used to cause. I can write it up in the next couple days, though one of the more current players around here may also wish to do so. -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] 21:20, 28 July 2013 (CEST)
	::I try not to repeat information TOO often on here, especially for features that won't be official for some time, but draining deserves a warning and status effects already had a History section for it to be added into. Done! --[[User:MoogleDan\|MoogleDan]] 14:16, 29 July 2013 (CEST)		::I try not to repeat information TOO often on here, especially for features that won't be official for some time, but draining deserves a warning and status effects already had a History section for it to be added into. Done! --[[User:MoogleDan\|MoogleDan]] 14:16, 29 July 2013 (CEST)
		+
		+	== This article ==
		+
		+	This is starting to look like the old [[List of unrands]] article: just too large to be that useful, vulnerable to broken redirects, and generally, let's face it, kind of ugly. So here's how I propose to reorganize it:
		+
		+	* Don't describe the status effects here. Just link to the articles they're relevant to, and be sure to mention the status light on said articles.
		+	* An idea I have might be to make this a great big chart. The status lights would be in the leftmost column in alphabetical order, the next column would be 1-3 word description (i.e. "Powered by death" for {{LightMagenta\|Regen+}}), and the other columns would be to indicate how that status effect can arise: spell, god, potion, mutation, etc. For example, the {{Blue\|Fast}} status effect would have as its second column "Haste", and then an X in the columns for spell, potion, wand. These X's would in fact be links to the [[Haste]], [[potion of speed]], and [[wand of hasting]]. Do people like this idea? I think it would be more compact and readable.
		+
		+	Anyway, one way or another, I think this article really does need to be changed - things like this have a tendency not to get updated, because no one wants to go through and manually read through every status to find obsolete/changed ones. Inaccuracies had a tendency to persist in the old unrands article. -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] ([[User talk:Ion frigate\|talk]]) 04:31, 23 October 2013 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:16, 29 July 2013
Line 6:		Line 6:
	A Zot trap summoned Soul eater in 0.13a/trunk inflicted an formerly unknown status effect DRAIN to my octopode. Add & crystal ball cat? -- [[User:Bwijn\|Bwijn]] 14:09, 28 July 2013 (CEST)		A Zot trap summoned Soul eater in 0.13a/trunk inflicted an formerly unknown status effect DRAIN to my octopode. Add & crystal ball cat? -- [[User:Bwijn\|Bwijn]] 14:09, 28 July 2013 (CEST)
	:Temporary (reversed by gaining XP) skill drain now replaces the old permanent XP drain that draining attacks used to cause. I can write it up in the next couple days, though one of the more current players around here may also wish to do so. -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] 21:20, 28 July 2013 (CEST)		:Temporary (reversed by gaining XP) skill drain now replaces the old permanent XP drain that draining attacks used to cause. I can write it up in the next couple days, though one of the more current players around here may also wish to do so. -[[User:Ion frigate\|Ion frigate]] 21:20, 28 July 2013 (CEST)
		+	::I try not to repeat information TOO often on here, especially for features that won't be official for some time, but draining deserves a warning and status effects already had a History section for it to be added into. Done! --[[User:MoogleDan\|MoogleDan]] 14:16, 29 July 2013 (CEST)