PathfinderWiki
Log in

Portal talk:Character Options

From PathfinderWiki
← $1

Redesign

Given the ongoing discussion of removal of feats and traits from the wiki, this portal would require a major overhaul were this to be implemented. What other information could be added to make this page less empty if we remove the two largest boxes? Or should we remove the page entirely? -- Yoda8myhead 21:51, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Add the Magic Section under it perhaps? I don't know if it should remain, after the heavy de-crunching. --Vagrant-Poet 00:39, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Magic and Classes shouldn't be on the same portal, though. They're entirely different things. -- Yoda8myhead 00:45, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure there's much else to add at the moment. Playable races and ethnic groups, perhaps. We could also run with alternate class features, but those fall under the same category as feats and traits. Actually, now that I think about it, there's no real reason to completely remove such information from the project. Right now the biggest problem is that each entry is linked as an article, even though most of those article have not been created, and those that have are severely lacking by necessity. Leave them as a plain index. Remove any wiki linking, and allow them to remain as plain text.
Forgive me if this option was already discussed; I've been ill the last few days and need to get caught up on things. -- Heaven's Agent 15:07, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
I agree. They should be de-linked, thats a great solution. Dead links removed, while keeping a hady list of additional feats, but more so it keeps the page relevant, thus belaying any major overhaul. --Vagrant-Poet 22:28, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm still torn on this portal and the crunchy nature of it. I did a lot of work on traits today, and others have been adding them over the last few days and it just seems to be in complete contrast to the site's goals. There are a lot of other machanics-based sites out there within the Pathfinder community. I don't think people will be unable to find stuff. But I do see it getting to be a huge headache for us to maintain these lists and such whenever a new feat or trait comes out. There's got to be a good solution, but I don't know what it is. -- Yoda8myhead 21:34, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Yoda. I think we should focus on purely fluff and leave the crunch to others. I'd rather we did something well (and it's not like there's enough to keep up with) than try to tackle too big of a project and fail. -brandingopportunity 04:38, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Deletion

This particular portal and all transcluded pages have been the subject of debate for months. They continually fly in the face of our own No crunch policy and are misleading to new Chroniclers who are not familiar with the canon-centric Scope of the project. Further discussion can be seen here and here among other places that I can't find now. Please continue all discussion on the topic here, where it belongs so that we have a single place for it. I will make a note to this effect on both of these pages, indicating that I have added the deletion template to this page. -- yoda8myhead 03:23, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I further propose that we should delete all trait and feat articles from the project along with this page, so consider their removal part of the discussion as well. We won't leave them up after taking down the portal, is what I'm saying. --yoda8myhead 03:30, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Agreed. I think we should also mark all of the conversions for deletion so that nobody takes them as tacit approval to post more. We'll wait to actually nuke them until they're archived somewhere. --Aeakett 03:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. There's no reason to clutter the project with this type of information; we've got enough on our plates with the setting itself. -- Heaven's Agent 05:08, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Do we actually have to wait before nukeing the conversions? they are all Alpha or Beta Conversions, none of them are final product conversions.... just saying... Cpt kirstov 11:36, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
I said to wait only because yoda8myhead said he wanted to get them up on DMTools.org. You do make a good point though. Also, I can look into grabbing copies that we can store offline. Or we could just move them to some dark corner of yoda8myhead's user page as sub-pages? Thoughts? Suggestions?

(Resetting Indent)
Now you've got me wondering what other things yoda might have tucked away in the dark corners and recesses of the project, that he doesn't want anyone to ever find ...

Back on topic, though, I'd be fine with simply deleting the conversions outright. But then again, I never understood the reason behind them. Sure, I played the APs with the alpha and beta rules, but I never had a need to actually convert the adventure material; I had no difficulty running things as written. Perhaps my opinion shouldn't hold much weight in this matter as a result? -- Heaven's Agent 15:08, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

The conversions are a separate issue, but I agree that they should be removed as soon as possible. If we can't get them moved to another site that handles statblocks and such, then we'll just lose them. I put a lot of work into converting the adventures as I ran them, but I understand that they're out of date now that the final rules have dropped. If it's the consensus that they should be removed sooner rather than later, then I don't have a problem with that.
As to the deletion of the Character Options portal and all trait and feat pages, I believe time is of the essence. The last thing I want to see is a new Chronicler show up and spend a lot of time adding Council of Thieves traits only to find all crunch removed next week. Yesterday's incident regarding the Second Darkness traits is one I'd like to avoid, both because it wastes people's time, but also because it doesn't give new Chroniclers a great impression of the editing experience here at PathfinderWiki. If all Admins are in agreement, and I believe we are, then I say we trash this sucker today. Enough tip-toeing around what we should have done a long time ago. -- yoda8myhead 16:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Absolutely, let us unleash our clockwork horde upon them... they are all categorized right? --Aeakett 17:48, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
As long as I get to watch what I hereby dub the "March of the Automatons"; we'll be recording this for posterity, right? And who's bringing the popcorn?
Unleash the bots and let's be done with these articles. -- Heaven's Agent 17:54, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
I believe they are all categorized. I'll double check that. We might find stragglers that weren't over time, but we should be able to get most of them in one fell swoop. Currently YodaBot is the only clockwork that can delete, so I guess it falls to me to take care of? Perhaps we should grant Aeakett-bot sysop privileges as well so that it can delete things too.
As for watching the bots do their thing, just set your recent changes page to show bots and keep refreshing! -- yoda8myhead 17:59, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
How about "March of the Automata"? I think the old-timey plural form has more character... and we're now officially off the rails.
We can give aeakett-bot privileges if you like. Can I do that now? Where do I do it from? --Aeakett 18:13, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
I believe to add someone as an Admin (sysop) you need to have Bureaucrat privileges. At this time, only Alfred and I have those. So I'll go ahead and give you little geared slave a pat on the back. -- yoda8myhead 19:08, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Main Page Sidebar

Although this page has been deleted, there is still a link to it from the main page sidebar (Features > Character Options), which invites new users to create the page again. FYI. --Goblin Witchlord 15:46, September 9, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, good catch! It's fixed now. --Aeakett 17:28, September 9, 2009 (UTC)