User talk:Islandking

Back to answer
Greetings, Islandking!

Sorry for not answering earlier – was off a couple days.

Looks like I still have to learn a many things about NI – never used the "View area" feature before, and it is much more than I expected! Thanks for hinting me to this …

Okay, I'll wait with my "maps".

As for one of your requests for an NI update – a workaround for your spell look-up might be to use xxx Keepers spell browser in addition, where you can sort by type (innate, priest, wizard (default)), level and name' (and code).

And yes, I noticed your comment on my codes' forum post … well, as far as I know that wasn't the case in the old editions of the games, same codes being used for the scroll and the spell. I'll take a look into this.

For the icons: I think, there's no need to display a pre-EE icon in the gallery if it's not totally different from the EE one – as indeed is the case with the Sword of Grief. If it's only a minor visual overhaul of the original icon, the classic one could simply be replaced. Though, if they are very different, it'd possibly be a better solution to place both icons in the IB, rather than to use a gallery for it that's located on a completely other place on the page …

We could introduce tabbed infoboxes for differences between classic and EE variants of all things, as FR is doing for the various ruleset editions. What about this?

Why do I keep myself away from EEs? ;) Of course you might ask …

I started playing BG in 1999 – and over the time it became and remained my favorite game of all times. (I'm speaking of part 1.) Also the one with the most playthroughs.

Though playing BGT nowadays, I never added large expansion mods, only small things like Unfinished Business. I think, the game's/games are big enough as it is/they are. For the same reason I didn't like the additions that came with the EE – the new companions and areas and – lately – the story expansion for between the both games.

Since I have started to use this wiki and giving thoughts to my own "improvements" to the games, I, however, see some good reasons to consider EE content. This extends to the wiki as well: I think we should overhaul the BG1 area articles and move away from some old dudleyville naming scheme or simply using directions – to the new naming from the EEs. Thoughts?

One thing remains, however: I see a lot of screenshots from the EEs that show characters with a fat, dark outline. Is this the visual style of the EEs? That ugly feature alone would be reason enough to not play those editions …

Thanks for the feedback, regarding CE/VE and IE11. I think I noticed a change since then, but am not sure about it. I'll get back to this if it gets important some day …

-- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 12:24, October 15, 2017 (UTC)

Your edit on Larze
Hi.

What's the reason behind replacing my template with plain code – with the exact same formatting (except the link) but requiring more space? |alignment = Neutral Chaotic Evil vs. |alignment = NeutralBG Chaotic EvilBG:EE -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 20:03, October 15, 2017 (UTC)

That doesn't apply to all templates, and not to this one. Look:

(Tested on User:CompleCCity/Sandbox01)

VisualEditor can handle this. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 10:13, October 16, 2017 (UTC)

Okay, I don't get it …

What do I have to do to get that specific editor you're talking about, the one where this doesn't work? -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 10:41, October 16, 2017 (UTC)

No, what I wanted to know is, how do I get this break you mentioned. For me all looks well when this template is used inside the infobox. What I want is a proof of what you're saying. ;) -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 10:51, October 16, 2017 (UTC)

Okay, then I'm sorry for bothering you.

There are way too many ways to use the way too many modes of editing … ;) Got me some time and edits to find the specific combination that produces this error.

So, that's the solution? Leave templates out of templates? Forever and all times? I hope, they're working on this … -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 11:33, October 16, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Staff of the Ram damage
I do really think, I understand those mechanics, but only to be sure I uploaded an NI screen:

STAF22.itm has only 1 ability which defines the 1d6+12 crushing damage, Dice size = 6 Damage bonus = 12 Damage type = Crushing (2) but no bonus damage.
 * 1) dice thrown = 1

There are 3 effects: Wing buffet (=knock back; Effect 0), Sleep (=stun) and Display portrait icon (Sleep). None of them has additional damage (dices).

So in EE there are 4 effects at least? -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 16:58, October 16, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Staff of the Ram damage 2 and more
Yes, latest GOG, unmodded (at least the files I use for research).

First: I'm no fan of cited in-game descriptions in general – their content could be implemented in the intro section of an article and/or in a background section. But as the description, as well as a possible background, are somehow a core component of an article, the lead section, they always should come first. (Also it looks better, when the Quote of the description serves as an introduction right after the TOC and isn't placed amidst other sections.)
 * As for "inconsistencies" in page layout/section order

Acquisition is important for items – and scrolls are items! – and quests. And I agree that it's the first step in a quest's walkthrough. A quest, however, has no "description", only journal entries which can be/are placed in their own section.

Follows, what I think is plausible, logical and comprehensible:


 * QUEST
 * Intro
 * Acquisition
 * Walkthrough
 * Reward(s) I'm not sure whether to use singular or plural for this.
 * Notes, Bugs, etc.
 * Journal I'd call this "Journal", not "Journal entries".


 * ITEM
 * Intro
 * Background/In-game description
 * Acquisition
 * Upgrade information – where applicable, including upgrader, cost, differences Exact layout of this has to be further elaborated.
 * Gameplay
 * Notes, Bugs, etc.


 * SPELL
 * Intro
 * In-game description/Background For spells I would use the description, rather than a background … I think …
 * Acquisition (of scroll = item)
 * Gameplay
 * Notes, Bugs, etc.

You see? That's not inconsistent. The quest article layout is the only one without a section before "Acquisition", and only because it per se lacks a description. And although for most readers the acquisition of an item is the most important thing to those pages, intro and background/description in most cases are not that long, so that one would have to scroll to get to the acquisition.

Spells often cite AD&D ruleset descriptions and in many cases have much more text than item descriptions. Would this justify their use instead of a self-created background section? And what about extensive and lore related descriptions of some magical items? There exist some pretty long ones, too …
 * In-game description vs. background section

As there are already differences between BG1 and BG2 descriptions of the same object, and further alterations between non- and EE-versions, I think it would be best to use the in-game descriptions only as long as there hasn't been written a background. That background can cite uniquely or well worded content from the description, but also could implement further information from related FR articles. And, as for spells, isn't the mechanics and effects information from the infobox more useful than those descriptions?

Ah … not sure about this.

What's really inconsistent, is that some item articles use "Acquisition", while others use "Location". That should be consistent – and I prefer the former term.
 * The real inconsistency

-- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 10:27, October 17, 2017 (UTC)

-- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 10:32, October 17, 2017 (UTC)
 * Two more things
 * 1) The official abbreviation for pounds is "lb" – without "s" and period. (But sorry for forgetting them at all …)
 * 2) Why do you replace the appearances' whole game name links with those unlinked abbreviations?

I'm happy for you!
I'm so happy for you that you found somebody for creating a really nice Siege of Dragonspear Walkthrough here! Of course I looked at it already and will continue to do so!

I'm still abroad and don't have SoD yet. This woman/man seems to present a wonderful Walkthrough! Excellent!

Congrats!

Gejadus (talk) 00:49, October 18, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Hello Faalagorn how are you?
Hi :). Yeah, I kinda dropped out, been busy with RL and the remaining time I spent on some other things beside BG:EE, but I hope I'll finally get out to finishing it lol. I see you made a talk archive, that's good and was actually wanting to suggest that seeing how lengthy our conversations were – still have to do that for my someday :P. Also I see you liked the idea of custom signature, similar to what I've been using on various wikis for a while :).

Replying to your question, sadly it's only available for those SoD areas exclusively – as Beamdog filled them as "cheatAreas" in BGEE.LUA file, so the names appear in the debug console available upon pressing Ctrl+Space. They can be found either in-game or explored in NI under LUA -> BGEE.LUA file.

For BG2:EE (and if I remember correctly BG:EE without SoD) unfortunately only this stub is available: cheatAreas = { {"BD0010", "Test"}, }

I think PST:EE have the cheatAreas named filled in, as I saw a report about correction in this in Redmine, see Feature #32145 – I don't own PST:EE to check though, and I didn't check that for IWD:EE either, but that's not relevant.

There's a chance this will be added later on, as the "cheatAreas" is remain to be populated in non-SoD EE games (let's see what 2.5 update brings) – I was actually thinking of adding the cheat menu for remaining areas as a feature request on their Redmine.

Until these, the only "official" names are those that are explicitly visible on WMP maps in NI. And the best unofficial ones are those on Dudleyville.

—Faalagorn☎/✓ 19:52, October 18, 2017 (UTC)

Energyblades (Wizard) / (Priest)
Hi Islandking,

are you on the Island Iceland or are you on another one?

Thank you for fixing it BUT I want to explain to you how I got to Energyblades (wizard). I went to the Druid page and clicked on High-Level Class Abilities and Energyblades and came to those from the Wizard instead of those from the Priest! Try it yourself please. Would be nice if you could fix it! Thanks a bunch!

I'm excited about the SoD Walkthrough! Great to have it here!

Gejadus (talk) 22:35, October 18, 2017 (UTC)

Hi Islandking,

all fine concerning the Energy Blades.

Gejadus (talk) 03:51, October 19, 2017 (UTC)

 Ranking list of the BEST SOLO Walkthrough PROTAGONISTS 

Hello Islandking,

I just created a ranking list of th best Solo Walkthrough players on the Gejadus Walkthrough list. What's your opinion about the best Solo Player? Do you want to leave a comment?

Gejadus (talk) 03:54, October 19, 2017 (UTC)

Solo Walkthroughs
Hello Islandking,

thanks for your reply! I'm often surprised how much you know about all the stuff. I didn't know anything about this exploit page and to be honest it's not really my thing.

I went to the Beamdog Forum and had a look again at the page that you recommended about two months ago.

https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/62202/the-free-for-all-lob-scs-solo-challenge/p1

Is it ok to mention Harpagornis name on the Gejadus' Walkthrough page like I do or should I delete his name?

5.Ideas for future Black Pits II Solo Walkthroughs

Contents
[hide]#Gejadus' General Walkthrough (Strategy)
 * 1) Gejadus' How to defeat The Winged?
 * 2) Gejadus' Solo Walkthrough (Strategy)
 * 3) Fighter Mage Solo Walkthrough
 * 4) Dwarven Defender Solo Walkthrough
 * 5) Fighter Cleric Solo Walkthrough
 * 6) Sorcerer Solo Walkthrough
 * 7) Blackguard Solo Walkthrough
 * 8) Assassin Solo Walkthrough
 * 9) Assassin Fighter Solo Walkthrough
 * 10) Totemic Druid Solo Walkthrough
 * 11) Ranking list of the BEST SOLO Walkthrough PROTAGONISTS
 * 12) Ideas for future Black Pits II Solo Walkthroughs

Looking forward to hearing from you!

Gejadus (talk) 07:04, October 19, 2017 (UTC)

Hi Islandking,

thank you for your message again. I'll try to consider what you said.

>>> My question only was if it's ok to mention the name HARPAGORNIS on my Walkthrough page (at the bottom) or should I delete the name Harpagornis again? I don't want to break a rule or offend anybody.

Thanks!

Gejadus (talk) 07:38, October 19, 2017 (UTC)

Hello Islandking,

you are a really patient person! Excellent!

Thanks for you advice! Yes, I will make a link to Harpagornis’s profile on BD forum.

Great to have you here, Islandking!

Gejadus (talk) 09:18, October 19, 2017 (UTC)

Great picture for The Winged!
Hi Islandking,

great job! Great Picture for The Winged!

You improved this page a lot!

Thank you so much!

Gejadus (talk) 04:27, October 20, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Another case about file.suffix
I commented on the forum topic. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 11:23, October 20, 2017 (UTC)

Spell Progression Tables
Hi!

Following my edit on the Spell Progression Tables, I thought it would be a good idea to have separate articles for each spell-casting class, which can go further into detail and at the end can be implemented into the overview article.

I've started with Spell Progression (wizard) (until now only two tables and some sort of a really short intro section, together with a WIP notice), when I discovered that there seem to have been changes from the classic to the enhanced editions.

It would be great of you to copy/paste the file (in the classic game named MXSPLWIZ.2da), either on my talk page or hidden (inside ) on my article. I hope, there are no differences between the enhanced BG1, SoD and BG2EE (ToB) …

Many thanks! -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 15:13, October 20, 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! For the table and the template!

Okay, weren't any changes, unless you have a mod that changes spell progression back to non-enhanced. That means, in the original article in its current state there are some mistakes, starting at level 21 …

For the naming: I thought of a series of Spell progression (class) articles, summarized as and implemented into the existing Spell Progression Tables. I wouldn't call them all "table", and e.g. the section on Mage (Baldur's Gate) doesn't use the term, neither. Suffices to have it in the overview. Also I deviate from the present capitalizing, using upper-case only for the first part of the name. Original source material (AD&D rulebooks) and the manuals are naming it Class Spell Progression, using upper-case for all words and putting the class at the first place, but without the use of the term "table" (well, they are in the section or headed "Tables").

I'm open to this. Personally I think, it shouldn't be over-capitalized, and as they are all the same, the articles should be disambiguated with the class as suffix. (I nevertheless would create a redirect from e.g. Class Spell Progression (and Class spell progression).) If you think, Spell progression table (class) would be the better name, then I really liked to use singular and lower-case. Searching possibly works better without "table", however.

Any opinion about the layout?
 * The implementation of the INT reqs.? Better in their own line? Parenthesis, rather than brackets? Italics yes or no?
 * The total in bold? (I'll change the coloring of that column back to standard.)
 * Anything else?

I plan to expand the intro section for the table (taking the original one, but altering it), give some more useful information, possibly add bugs, hint to differences between editions (if there are any), integrate level-game dependencies into the table and add a section with differences between the games and PnP rules. You probably noticed the expanded table for level 40. When finished, the page will go as template into the overview, though only including the main table and the most important information, with a link to the main article. Thoughts?

-- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 16:44, October 20, 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, and …

… yes, noticed!

But I didn't like your re-ordering of  and   – that seemed arbitrary. You don't have to show me that you're admin, here – I know of that.

Okay, I've renamed the page to your favored capitalization. Or at least as far as I have understood your comment on my talk page.

Why did you mention the "–" for blank cells – this is exactly what I was doing!?!

And I'm not sure if I understood that "How to group your pages …" paragraph. You plan to rename Spell Progression Tables to Spell Progression, without any suffix? Why? As for Experience Tables I would leave it as this – a compilation of mostly "tables" as an overview.

I will try to group the article(s)'s content in a way that it can be transcluded into other pages that refer to the table. Both, the overview of all these tables, and the classes. (That will not work for two different mage articles, Mage and Mage (Baldur's Gate) – are there that many differences between both, that justify an extra article? Okay, next thing: merging those …) Perhaps it will come down to the simple table, that's referred to, and no additional content, which then would be duplicated on certain pages, but that's okay, I think. We'll see …

For the Sorcerer edit: couldn't you have formatted this in a more clean way? ;) With a proper heading and leaving the unused bullet point out? Perhaps even put it at a better place? Currently this piece of information gets totally lost in the page's content …

And now I have an article to write! ;)

-- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 13:02, October 21, 2017 (UTC)

This is why I don't like that visual editor, grrr…

Sorry! But what should I think after an admin did such an arbitrary edit? I didn't know that this came from the editing mode. And that wasn't really an offense; I even thought of placing a ";)" there, but then eventually did this later in my comment.

;)

-- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 13:21, October 21, 2017 (UTC)

Now I'm confused … Do you prefer "–" or blank cells?

With all due respect to your "encouraging" thought – but it looks awful. ;) -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 13:52, October 21, 2017 (UTC)

Re: New templates
Uh… I followed TotSC and ToB, but notice only now that there indeed is no "SoA".

Do as you want. It's the first time that we have "The" as starting word in the title. You want to omit that?

And something for the above topic: Would you please take a look at Spell Progression (wizard) and tell me your opinion? The first paragraph uses the current continous text, but perhaps the bullet list below is better? Or what about a table (further below)? -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 16:19, October 21, 2017 (UTC)

Re's
Hello, Ike. < that's okay? ;)

A collection of replies and thoughts, as I move through the six(!) edits of yours on my talk page …

-- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 14:55, October 22, 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah, you're right! There was something like a big picture … ;) Yes, I allowed myself to do the moves, without waiting for your answer on that topic. Needed it for the templates' use in the Experience Tables, which leads to the next topic …
 * 1) Theoretically – as I wrote – 8,950,000 points of experience are possible in The Black Pits II: Gladiators of Thay. This is not only based on the sum of the starting level (2,950,000 XP) plus the "accumulated XP gain" from the article's table, but also from various internet sources. (That's also where I found a 2da file content, listing the XP caps for the different single- and multi-classes for BP1, somewhere on beamdog's.) 8,950,000 XP means: mages can reach level 33. If this really is possible, I don't know – there might be an additional level cap 2da, or simply missing 2da entries for these levels. And if you take a look on the fighter's evolvement, they would reach even higher levels than 41: specifically 43, following the pattern. What about a test? Start a game, create a mage and a fighter, cheat them to an experience of 8,950,000 and see what happens! Or assign this task to Gejadus. I can't do it, I don't own this game …
 * 2) "Double-" indeed is better than "dual-class", and also better matches "triple". I'll change that.
 * 3) "Convert them into tables"? There is already a table! But it doesn't look good – that's why I wanted your opinion. And actually that article is about spell progression tables – would an additional table with a different context not distract from this? I even thought of omitting that piece of information, shorten it to a brief sentence, hinting to the related entries in the table (for single-class characters) and otherwise linking to the class's page or experience tables. Hm … have to rethink this. Yes – perhaps extra progression tables for multi-classes are the best idea!
 * 4) And following this, I'll get back to the related part of your elaboration later. For the general structure of the overview page (and I – as said – would retain the name and not move "Tables" to a disambig suffix!):
 * 5) two new headers, "Arcane …" and "Divine spellcasters", with the two cleric-mage classes appearing twice (perhaps; or a different solution for them)
 * 6) every table with its own header – to quickly be accessed from the TOC
 * 7) I have to take a look into the gnome's multi-classes, if it's indeed handled as a specialist mage.
 * 8) I splitted the table into "basic" and "expanded" for levels above the maximum reachable because level 40 spell progression isn't important for an unmodded game. That's only of interest for the rare case, somebody would like to know how many spells a certain opponent of a really high level might have access to. I like to leave it as this. And I don't understand what you're wanting to say with "since BG, BGII, ToB etc are already there" …
 * 9) You notice a delay? Really?? Wow, that would be the exact opposite of what I intended to achieve with all this. I'm no programmer – I can't say if the transcluded page is "opened" in the background, I don't know how this technically works. What I know is that it's horrible to edit that large page with such a number of large tables, in terms of performance. Okay, we'll see the result when all tables are done – which will take some more time. ;) As the tables are used on a number of pages (class, class-combos; in the case of the wizard additionally for the specialists) it really makes sense to have only one instance of it – else you would have to apply changes on several articles, and might oversee something.
 * 10) I plan to give each table a subpage, to be more flexible and able to link to a specific table if needed. I'll then already see on the current page, if there's a loss of performance.
 * 11) And now you're coming back to the naming … Why are you saying "Mage Spell Progression is indeed a better name than the Spell Progression (wizard) suffix"? Okay, first we should settle on the use of the general terms "mage" or "wizard". The class is named mage, but they rely on the wizard spellbook. The tables in the source material use "wizard". So I tend to use "wizard" myself. However, the source material – again – calls them "Class spell progression", but I think it's better for a series of similar pages to disambiguate them by suffix, not prefix. So I'll create a redirect from "Wizard Spell Progression", but name the page as is – "Spell Progression (wizard)". And you disagree?

Drizzt's weapons
Hi.

If I might bother you again with another research in EE? ;)

While editing Icingdeath and Twinkle, I noticed some differences between my original game files and the contents from the infobox.

Could you please check
 * the weight of SW1H16.itm (Twinkle),
 * its enchantment,
 * confirm its in-game description,
 * and check if Beast Master and Thief are indeed not able to equip it (have to be of good alignment!)?

Enchantment in BG is 0, in BGII it's 5. Weight should be 3, unless Beamdog has altered it to 4 in EE. The description only to be sure. Is a thief really not able to wield a scimitar in EE? A beast master shouldn't, theoretically, but that wasn't enabled in the item file. Fixed in EE?

By the way: I changed the "not usable by" class Cleric to Clerics, where the plural "s" shall indicate that this applies to all cleric class-combos, too. Okay?

Would be great to have your assistance, here, but do it whenever you want – it's nothing urgent. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 21:08, October 22, 2017 (UTC)

Hello, King.

Let me shortly explain the background of that nick I chose earlier – if there's uncertainty of why … Of course it was based on your user name's initial(s), I and K – when you read it as two words. It's shorter, though. And to make it pronouncable, I then went for Ike. ;) Any allusion to the tour master is totally coincidental.

Upon your answer and edits to my changes …

Certainly you meant "don't hesitate, instead of "hastate", right? At least the translations my dictionary offers me for that latter term don't make any sense. ;)

Many thanks for clarifying the item stats from the EE versions of Icingdeath and Twinkle! But now, um… it gets a bit, um… precarious …

Besides the basic facts, I disagree with most of the changes you did after my edits. Let me explain, what I mean in detail: So much for the infobox, now to the rest of the page: versus You're serious? I hope we can settle this … -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 14:06, October 23, 2017 (UTC)
 * Changing the item group from "weapons" to "scimitars" is okay – I oriented myself by the description on the template page. If you want this "category" more specific, you might think about adjusting that description.
 * I put the values that only appear in the classic BG as second row to spare the listing of all other games' indexes, making the "default" value simply default. I even thought about putting that into parenthesis. Now you re-ordered that. Perhaps one row, without line break, and parenthesis are the better solution? Same for the proficiency type.
 * My formatting of all those game indexes, together with a link, should emulate the according templates, which shouldn't be used in the infoboxes. (In general I disagree with this bug workaround – I would use them, regardless of this making the CE-VE-combo impossible, but I respect your wishes here.) You removed all links and even broke consistency by replacing parts of them with "Classic Versions" and "Enhanced Editions". If you insist on this, okay … But I liked my variant better. (By the way, "Classic Versions" is no title or proper name and should have a lower-case "versions".)
 * What's the reason behind changing "-2 AC bonus" to "Armor Class: -2 bonus", even without a link anymore?
 * Not usable by: Is it really necessary to implement the other requirement here, when this field already is that overstuffed? I mean, what's the purpose of other requirement, if not for this case? And my choice of a small header instead of using the sup'd indexes was purely for aesthetic reasons. Again, in general it looks awful to place the sup'd indexes in front of something – they're intended as a note or index behind something, like references are.
 * Why did you add "(SoA)" to the BGII appearances? ToB has it's own index/link/template. And the items can be carried over to ToB … And why in parenthesis?
 * Why not using the source feature of the quote template to differentiate between CE and EE in-game descriptions, instead placing this as some sort of subheader?
 * Of removing my note for the reason "enhancement level, AC, THAC0 bonus are different things": the only plausible explanation that the classic games and AD&D 2e source books (see the notes on the related FR article) call this weapon "+5" is this being the sum of the two bonuses to THAC0/damage and AC. Period. The bonus to THAC0/damage or AC of almost all items equals their enchantment. So it's only logical to sum the two bonuses of this unique item up.
 * And now for the ugliest thing – please take a look at this:

Delay
Hi. Only wanted to say that I'll get back to our discussion a little later – have to read your answers again, make me some thoughts and reconsider, perhaps try some things and look into others …

Thanks for the deletion(s)! :) -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 07:32, October 24, 2017 (UTC)

Exclamation mark > !
Hi Islandking and CompleCCity,

I'm an excited chess player although I don't find to play this wonderful game right now. It's also a huge effort to play chess!

In chess you can set after certain moves one exclamation mark, even two or for great awesome moves even three!

That's why!

Doesn't matter! I can only use exclamation marks on my Walkthrough page! ;-)

I'll cooperate!

Gejadus (talk) 22:35, October 24, 2017 (UTC)

Articles for mod only creatures?
Hi.

Does the appearance of a creature (unique, with quest) in a mod only justify an own article? See Mal-Kalen and Ulcaster Dungeon. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 07:08, October 25, 2017 (UTC)

So I guess, my change on the Ulcaster dungeon matches your ideas …

But, doesn't this blow up all things potentially too much? Every creature from every mod with their own article – okay. But implement them in their locations of the un-modded game? The idea's okay: as player I stumble about someone, go to this area in the wiki … and learn, they're from a mod.

But then: mod A adds char 1, mod B adds chars 2 to 5, mod C adds char 6. Mod D adds char 7 and, in case you have installed mod A, chars 8 and 9. And so on … Where to make a cut? What about changes to items? Shall we list different enchantment levels not only for the different base games, but also for mods? Where shall we end up?

I guess, additional information on default articles about changes/additions from fixing and restoration mods would be okay. Never in the infobox and default sections, and with as less information as possible and mostly pointing to the mod article – or in this case to the creature –, but in their own section on the article, e.g. "Mod-related", as I did name it in this case. Another possibility, instead of a whole section at the end, would be to make

==Characters== ===Mod-related=== But that's probably the same as you already said with "we can create something like “Mod elements” or “Mod sections” (etc names)"? (By the way – what are those quotation marks and inverted commas you always use?) -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 12:12, October 25, 2017 (UTC)
 * A
 * B
 * D

Just wanted to point you to this, when you asked already …

The way infoboxes work on this wiki, makes this impossible. They use what I call auto-categorizing (don't know if that's the official name for the mechanic), and auto-categorizing can't be en-/disabled for certain pages without a really large effort and further coding, as far as I know – either all articles or none are auto-categorized.

Perhaps there's a possibility to cross-check categories, telling the IB template e.g. "look if CAT "mod…" is existent, then don't use integrated CAT". Perhaps not. I have to do some research, was busy with this topic some months ago …

Another option would be to disable auto-categorizing in general. Thought of that? AC brings many problems, such as redundant parent CATs. For example a clean CAT tree would have "Items" as parent and "Scimitars" as child. If you catgeorize all scimitars into CAT:Scimitars, they are also per infobox auto-categorizing part of the parent CAT – that's not how categorizing should work. So this would be my preference of sorting this problem out – because it also gets rid of other ones. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 13:15, October 25, 2017 (UTC)

P.S. Or you duplicate all infoboxes as a mod version, e.g. Template:Infobox mod creature – and remove auto-cat from those. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 13:17, October 25, 2017 (UTC)

Okay …

There are two (Gamepedia) wikis, I'm admin on, though inactive since around february this year. In the – with exceptions for certain reasons – we have such a clean category tree. In the I started cleaning them up, before I … um, lost interest/felt burnt out/vanished/choose your own accusation …

In this second one another admin largely implemented something similar to SMW. Though I began to get used to use those mechanics, I'm far away from being an expert in this matter. I am unable to set up something like this, at least currently. Talk was, that the original SMW wouldn't be enabled on Gamepedia at any time, but they were going for an alternative solution – ETA unknown (possibly same as here on Wikia). I even don't know how that works what we have there. (And possibly it even is true SMW.)

In the second wiki, auto-categorization is still active, but in a far more detailed way than here. There are parameters defined in the item infobox which already sort each type of weapon in their own child-CAT. I'm unsure, though, if this can be integrated into the portable IBs here – remember, Faalagorn told you something about the general technical differences between the two wiki hosters (as far as I remember to having read somewhere in your talks).

I've somewhen created a specific helping template (general stuff, copied from Wikipedia) that can be used to assist the auto-categorization, but that one fiddles with namespaces. Might be necessary to create a "Mod" namespace to have this work properly on this wiki here …

-- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 15:09, October 25, 2017 (UTC)

Re: About the transclusion
A quick reply – currently I'm heavily occupied with other things …

I just replied to that topic myself. But I think, a possible solution would be the splitting of the pure tables to own subpages. Or true templates – if that's the only way. (I know of large pages on other wikis, that only have large lists of transclusions on them – I don't see where the problem lies …)

Hm … Saftzie said, it wouldn't increase the load on your client. What about this? -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 12:19, October 26, 2017 (UTC)

Gamepedia has a nice feature on the editing page's bottom after using the preview: parser profiling data with performance values. Do you know of something similar for Wikia, restricted to admins? I mean, you also seem to have some insights on page traffic and such … -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 12:24, October 26, 2017 (UTC)

No, didn't spot anything on the Special pages (why don't you give me the link, instead do post an image? ;)

Well, don't worry, those "templates" would simply include the table code, nothing more. ;) So editing wouldn't be different than on the article itself. Do you need a lesson in tables? I could explain much, though not all. :) -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 12:53, October 26, 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm still not comfortable with the differences between the various editing modes.

Well, when they're done, there will not be much to edit on those tables, besides the layout or links perhaps.

Another thing, I noticed (not that it's really important to me): do you have an explanation why I am missing on the "Top Contributors this Week", on the right side of Special:Community? -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 13:17, October 26, 2017 (UTC)

I think that while transclusions have some effect on performance, it's more server side rather than PC side, which may result in slightly longer page loads. However I woudn't worry too much, as it's all hosted on quite performant FANDOM servers anyway, and keep in mind that all the templates are in fact transcluded – an ease of maintaining is more important and MediaWiki should be quite optimized piece of software anyway :). —Faalagorn☎/✓ 15:00, October 26, 2017 (UTC)

"Dedicated transclusion pages" are simply templates :). The only difference between template and regular page is the namespace they belong to, and templates can be translucded via shorthand name – compare and  vs  or , the mechanic is the same except templates can be referenced without explicit namespace —Faalagorn☎/✓ 15:36, October 26, 2017 (UTC)

Game superscripts
Hello!


 * Note: This simultaneously goes to Faalagorn's talk.

Another thing I'd like to know before continuing with the spell progression tables (because it is part of them and important for the layout): Is (was?) planned to make those superscripted game abbreviations, BG etc., icons one day?

So, for example,
 * […] 1d8 +2 slashing damage – with an additional 1d4 piercing damage –, this arbitrary chosen example […]

would become
 * […] 1d8 +2 slashing damageBgee logo.png – with an additional 1d4 piercing damageBg2ee logo.png –, this arbitrary chosen example […]

I know this from a lot of other wikis. I think, it's my preferred solution.

Opinions?

Should this rather go to the board? -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 08:03, October 27, 2017 (UTC)

Follow this on Re: Game superscripts … -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 11:01, October 28, 2017 (UTC)

CE again?
Oh my, I just didn't test if that quote part would also work with, and didn't know that the template breaks the CE's VE … There are wikis that can't handle a pipe in their quote template, so I placed that sort of automatically, sorry.

Oh, and just noticed yesterday, what your use of those special apostrophes might cause, hehe … -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 11:59, October 31, 2017 (UTC)

From the Special:RecentChanges:"contribs) moved page M’Khiin Grubdoubler to M'Khiin Grubdoubler over a redirect without leaving a redirect"

Took me a while to notice what was new. ;) By the way, the text behind doesn't make much sense, "over a redirect without leaving a redirect." -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 13:00, October 31, 2017 (UTC)

Comments are talk pages
Hello.

First let me say that I don't have forgotten the icons, but there are more than 5,000 BAM files for BG only, and not all icons are placed in something so obviously named GUI… And there are other things to do for me, as well …

But now to what I actually wanted to say:

In a certain way I understand your removal of a small passage from an article comment, I replied to recently.

(Link to the change: Talk:Yoshimo.)

I didn't really got the meaning of those words ("pubes"?), but I'm no native speaker and know only little about street language.

But article comments are technically talk pages (see link address above). And it's common sense on wikis that other people's comments on talk pages aren't to be edited (despite perhaps some major formatting issues or to eliminate red links). But the content itself has to be left untouched by other editors, including administrators or moderators.

What you have done, is actually censorship.

So, if you found those words inappropriate, either contact the contributor and ask them to edit it by their own, or delete the whole comment. Cutting content from it isn't the right thing. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 10:53, November 3, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Charisma page edit
Well, in my game (classic ed.) the store prices are adjusted to the party member's charisma who's doing the talking. To clarify this: not the currently chosen member whose inventory is shown during the shopping, but of that who initiated dialog with the merchant, no matter who's the leader. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 13:15, November 4, 2017 (UTC)

Classes and … schools?
Hi!

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about when speaking of "NONE school". (And setting a word as all-upper-case looks ugly, by the way ;) -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 11:45, November 5, 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I supposed, it'd be related to the schools of magic. But I still don't understand that paragraph … -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 12:18, November 5, 2017 (UTC)

Re: My profile sig
Thanks!

It already has improved. (To speak frankly: "only" MDD.) I just have to carefully look how many time and energy I invest on wikiing – might have been occupied a too large part of my life in the past. (Is "condition" the wrong term, too strong?) -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 14:45, November 8, 2017 (UTC)

Oh, oh …
I might have messed up things …

Template:Infobox item

But I did use VE … :( -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 13:58, November 9, 2017 (UTC)

Well, by now the message has disappeared again. Have you made a null edit?

And what's this specific code, you're talking about? -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 14:27, November 9, 2017 (UTC)

CONGRATULATIONS!
I happened to be here again and just realized that you have become NUMBER ONE in the ranking list here! Great! You have deserved it with all your beautiful work here!

I'm not playing Black Pits II right now but enjoy playing BG II, EE! That's the real stuff!

Gejadus (talk) 11:18, November 10, 2017 (UTC)

Area names
That was a good move! :) -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 07:44, November 13, 2017 (UTC)

Take a look at my first post on your current talk page here: "I think we should overhaul the BG1 area articles and move away from some old dudleyville naming scheme or simply using directions – to the new naming from the EEs. Thoughts?" [October 15, 2017 (UTC)] You never answered to this … ;)

Well, the "new" names were possibly only created as redirects. Most articles use or at least hint to both names, and in such a case a redirect is useful. But be a bit careful whith moving forth and back and … Else this happens: Error. (That's from my watchlist e-mail.)

I hope, all those names are now identical to the BG:EE map? -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 12:43, November 13, 2017 (UTC)

Re: About Rasaad's BGIIEE gameplay
Hi islandking,

I just wrote 2,000,000. It's about 2,000,000. If you want to know exactly when I had the impression that Rasaad became really strong I can look it up.

aha, you want me to write "good" instead of "best". - Ok. I'll improve it.

I just looked at the Dorn Il-Khan (quest). At the bottom of this page is mentioned:

Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition FAQ/Walkthrough by Haeravon

Why don't you put this link to the other three Walkthroughs?

In my eyes his Walkthrough is solid stuff.

Gejadus (talk) 02:56, November 14, 2017 (UTC)

I just fixed it.

Gejadus (talk) 03:03, November 14, 2017 (UTC)

Hello Islandking,

it's me again.

Sure we have nice access to the Walkthroughs like this: BROWSE > Walkthroughs

'''My question is, why don't you add Haeravon’s BGEE Walkthrough here as a fourth one beside the currently three ones? Do you not like his Walkthrough?'''

I guess concerning Rasaad I'll have a look at my saved BG II, EE data. Probably Rasaad seemed to become extremely strong at about 2,000,000 exp compared to the other Party members at 2,000,00 exp as well AND he started to be stronger just by using his fists than using a weapon like Celestial Fury.

I will have a look again.

Probably you never played such a high level monk yourself yet. They become incredibly strong because their magic resistance improves as well with each new level.

Gejadus (talk) 07:45, November 14, 2017 (UTC)

Great Idea!
Hello Islandking! This would be a great idea to have links to these two Walkthroughs on the Companion page!

Ok. I understood you now regarding the Monk Rasaad. Feel always free to improve my stuff or delete it.

Thanks!

I'm playing BG II, EE faster than expected. Soon I will face Bodhi for the second time for getting the Rynn Lathorne. Hope that Drizzt is still waiting for me.

Gejadus (talk) 22:20, November 14, 2017 (UTC)

Hello Islandking,

great that you added Haeveron's Walkthrough!

I'm done with BG II,EE. I just defeated Irenicus and started Throne of Bhaal.

I was so fast because I know what to do and the Fighter /Mage and Nalia have each Boots of Speed and Rasaad as a Monk is fast anyway. So my Party could really travel fast! I enjoyed BG II,EE a lot again. Brilliant game!

Gejadus (talk) 10:56, November 15, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Help on IB horizontal layout
My, would have been easier if you'd have left the code for an example … ;)

I'm on it. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 11:44, November 14, 2017 (UTC)


 * Okay, take a look now, please, and then tell me what you mean exactly. Perhaps the STR? -- UserCCCSig.png -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 11:56, November 14, 2017 (UTC)

Walkthrough?
Hi!

You deem that a "walkthrough?" :) So I've written my first WT! :)

Shouldn't it then be in a subpage? No, because it's doesn't really contain strategy. Right?

Is it okay? -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 02:55, November 16, 2017 (UTC)

You're right. At first I thought of the large walkthroughs here, DT and BPII. But those contain these elements you're talking about. Together with their sheer size, this justifies extra articles for them. Could be named Durlag's Tower (strategy) as well, but "walkthrough" sounds better.

Well, okay, thanks. Never was a friend of detailed strategy guides – they always seem too play-style/character-build specific, they always seem to tell, "hey, look, what my party is capable of!" No, better only simple facts, perhaps with the one or other single hint, but nothing too elaborated.

Lvl 3 still misses. I'll see, if I will go back to that one – a savegame I have … -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 09:33, November 16, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Bone Club's Undead effect
Hi.

Reverted the edit, placed a note on the Bone Club.

For the two abilities – I'm not sure. See for yourself, I've added screenshots of the effects (sorry for the name of the second image; you might rename it).

There's no dedicated immunity against "Stun" for Enrage, where the Barbarian Rage has "Stun" and "Power word, stun" listed. Though there's many similar effects' immunities, such as hold and paralyze … -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 10:19, November 19, 2017 (UTC)

Hexxat
Hello Islandking,

"I see you’ve completed the Underdark, not sure of your quest completion % but if you haven’t talked to Clara (or haven’t recruited Haxxat) before you sail off to Spellhold to rescue Imoen, could you go to the Copper Coronet and talk to Clara to see if she’s still available to hire? "

You can't avoid that Hexxat/Clara addresses to you when you talk to Hendak or the former owner of the Slave Pub Copper Coronet). Hexxat/Clara just approaches you. The Swashbuckler didn't take her with him on Hexxat's Grave Quest. He didn't do the Hexxat's Quest and he hasn't recruited her. So after coming back from the Underdark the Swashbuckler will have a look if she's still in the Pub.

Gejadus (talk) 07:39, November 21, 2017 (UTC)

Hi again,

yes after coming back from the Underdark I'll make a test run with Hexxat in Dragomir's cave. It's just a test, not my real Swashbuckler Walkthrough. If I should forget it remind me please. You can always see where I'm at.

Gejadus (talk) 01:33, November 22, 2017 (UTC)

Hi Islandking,

perhaps I should just rush through the Underdark and see what's going on with Hexxat afterwards.

Gejadus (talk) 04:49, November 26, 2017 (UTC)

Hello Islandking,

the Swashbuckler is back from the Underdark and I went into Hendak's Pub in order to see if Clara (Hexxat) is still there. She in NOT! She's also not at the Graveryard District. So whoever said that you can't do Hexxat's Adventure after coming back from the Underdark is right. I guess it has to do with this that Bodhi and lots of other Vampires are already waiting for you at the entrance of the Graveyard District when you come there after having completed the Underdark.

Gejadus (talk) 22:51, November 28, 2017 (UTC)

Re: DPL, vol. 1
Hi.

For the DPL thing I need some research, but will give you feedback soon.

About the Axe of the Unyielding: fixed it. :) -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 16:51, November 24, 2017 (UTC)

Note to myself: Next time read carefully – before speaking of "fixed" … :| -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 12:33, November 25, 2017 (UTC)

Regarding that: you simply negated the contribution from this anon … but where did it came from? I can't imagine, curse scrolls are random loot. Player mistake when looting, confusing the bodies? -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 13:15, November 25, 2017 (UTC)

Boring Solo Walkthrough?
For me it was very exciting to play a Swashbuckler Walkthrough. He's extremely flexible and from level 24 on (> Use Any Item) it's lots of fun and not boring at all. It's just that it nearly got to easy for me on level Insane after getting the Staff of the Magi and the Ring of Gaxx before sailing to the Spellhold Island. My German version has only level Insane. One day I sould really get these improved difficulty versions that you already talked about.

A Fighter / Mage is my favorite Protagonist. So I want to see if I'm able to play through the whole Series except SoD that I don't have yet: BG I, ToS, BG II and Throne of Bhaal.

So when I finally buy Siege of Dragonspear (SoD) I should get a more difficu;y version of playing automatically.

I have lots to do right now so I can only play on weekends. But I'll keep in mind that you want to know if the Swashbucklers finds Clara/Hexxat still in Hendak's Pun after coming back from the Underdark.

Bye!

Gejadus (talk) 06:03, November 26, 2017 (UTC)

Re: DPL, interim
A somewhat un-elaborated, but definite statement from another wiki hoster about SMW: --  -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 18:12, November 26, 2017 (UTC)

Re: About the area page images I
Hi, again. And thanks for consulting me on this. :)

I'm going to create one or more sandboxes, to see the different possibilities. In the meanwhile, could you point me to your old discussions about that topic? -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 09:23, November 27, 2017 (UTC)

Some people …
Hi. Could you please look into this? Thanks. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 18:37, December 1, 2017 (UTC)

I restored my data
Hello Islandking,

thank you for you help! It's all fine!

I could restore my data!

Thanks!

Gejadus (talk) 08:32, December 3, 2017 (UTC)

Hello Iskandking,

thank you for all your great help here!

I enjoy a lot being here on this Baldur's Gate Wiki and contributing a little bit. I hope that all my Strategy stuff helps players to enjoy the Baldur's Series, Black Pits II included more!

You have a really good and nice way of dealing with people here. Thank you so much! This also gives me the impression to be welcome here.

Gejadus (talk) 23:02, December 5, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Fighter/Fighter / Thief ?
But all the multi-classes are sub-pages!?

Got something seriously wrong with that – sorry! I have reverted the related edits, though I wasn't able to "undo" the renaming, so I had to do a second. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 12:37, December 3, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Minor naming
Well, the current description of the Category:Area map notes definitely reads different from your proposed purpose: "Icons that appear on maps indicating the function of the placed location." ;)

I'd go for two categories, because the layered maps are different. Okay, apparently you may blend in character names in EE – which doesn't work in CE –, and also the exit ("Stairs Up" on your example), but I still don't see containers, I don't know if the names work for enemies/creatures, and traps aren't shown neither.

By the way, I noticed some redundant/duplicated files related to this: the ones you used on the Durlag's Tower Walkthrough, and those Thomaslove92 upped for Durlag's Tower (treasure). -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 15:34, December 3, 2017 (UTC)

I'm fine with renaming it to "Area maps with notes" – that's what I thought of when giving my summary. And if NI snaps and different approaches on the topic are grouped together, that's okay, too. I chose specifically "layers" because I wasn't sure of that. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 16:38, December 3, 2017 (UTC)

Re: Implement Str (strength mod) in IB:test, or no?
As I think to remember, it's now rather late in your time zone, so I might not have to feel too bad when I say: I've done that lot today, I don't know if I have the mind for this right now … ;)

I assume you're relating to Cailan. Funny, that I especially missed that field when redoing his infobox. :)

(Wow, my head currently is really thumping …)

Is "total scores" necessary at all? If so, the STR mod. could be implemented as decimal places. All derived stats can be grouped into five intervals, so it might be 18.2, 18.4, 18.6, 18.8 and … oh, wait, then we are at 19. 18.0, 18.2, 18.4, 18.6, 18.8 – that's five. But not very clear to the editor. So 18.01, 18.02, 18.03 … up to 18.00 (as the highest one)?

What about playing around with formatting? Such as "  -ping" the mod.? Or choose a smaller font-size to get rid off unwanted line breaks?

No, I don't think I will today fiddle with the test, I still have to implement some minor changes to those characters I edited, to get them on the same level. And then … I'll see. Tomorrow. (For me it's now early evening, between 6 and 7 p.m.) Hey, that topic doesn't burn, does it? ;) -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 17:45, December 4, 2017 (UTC)

Only to document this somewhere – for now not meant to be part of a discussion.

From the Player's Handbook 2nd edition


 * Chapter 1 : Player Character Ability Scores
 * "[…] any warrior with a Strength score of 18 is entitled to roll percentile dice […] to determine exceptional Strength; […]"
 * Note: That's why the table is named STRMODEX.2da. The "MOD"-part of the name stands for general modifications through strength, not for "strength modifier".


 * The "Table 1: Strength" lists: "18/01-50", "18/51-75", "18/76-90", "18/91-99" and "18/00".
 * No further explanation of terms or such.

By the way, the rule books indeed use lower-case abbreviations for the abilities, "Str", Dex", etc. I preferred upper-cases ("STR", "DEX"), but okay – less space needed in the infobox. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 13:37, December 5, 2017 (UTC)

Status Effects page
This page is great! I like it a lot! Lots of work put in here.

But I haven't seen any Weapons/items mentioned that help to protect you in your Battles like the Shield of Harmony, Peridan, Lilarcor, Blackrazor, Abjatha etc. There are Helmets and Plate Mails, Armors as well....

I would be willing to add my knowledge that I gained but I don't want to mess anything up there on this page.

Do you have any ideas?

Gejadus (talk) 23:07, December 5, 2017 (UTC)

EE GUI names
Hi!

I'd like to know which name exactly pops up when you choose the both spell books in EE. Is it still "Mage Book" and "Priest Scroll", as in the classic versions, or have they been changed? (I can't give you the TLK entries, because the Strrefs already vary from BG1 to BG2, though not the naming.) Could you please help me out with this? Thanks. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 14:25, December 7, 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks! :)

Though now I unfortunately have additional questions, resulting from your screenshots …

There's a little inconsistency. The heading for the Priest Scroll looks as expected. But that field in the Mage Book screen is named "Mage Spells", and "Mage Book" itself appears in the field below, which is empty for priests. Are there differences between types of wizards? Looks the screen different for e.g. a bard? -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 14:58, December 7, 2017 (UTC)

Again, many thanks!

Okay, I publish a WIP article, so you might understand my curiosity. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 15:42, December 7, 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your appreciation. :)

Yes, it's getting a merge, though not technically. I redo and check information simultaneously, and restructure the table at the same time.

Not sure how many time I invest during the initial phases for the description/notes – those may change when cross-checked with the specific spells. E.g. I have listed three values for the Armor's duration, with the BG:EE value taken from the manual, the other two by NI. The spell page itself gives false info at the moment. Maybe I put efforts into this on a wait, depending on how complicated it gets.

I started this because I actually needed a link to the arcane spell book in general, not game-related. And in fact it doesn't make much sense if there are two pages for this.

Yes, will be a long way. I'll check those two pages that you linked, thanks.

Well, just notice that the values on those pages aren't better – Armor still is listed as longing for 9 hours, which is only in the description and nowhere else the case.

I post a modded, expanded GTIMES.2da below, though I haven't checked its correctness. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 16:33, December 7, 2017 (UTC)

Of course you might make suggestions, I even planned to ask for them! :)


 * Code: If I merge those two columns, I will see when the first level's finished and I can get a look on a filled table. Tendency: no.
 * Separated, you can even sort by the code. -- UserCCCSig.png -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 17:45, December 7, 2017 (UTC)
 * Game: The intention of this is simply the same as "Appearance" in infoboxes – maybe redundant for the EEs, but important for the old versions.
 * Headings: I decided to not use level headings, so that a complete and sortable list is available. Same, as on the original pages.
 * Notes/Effect: Actually I don't know if that should be kept at all. If, then it needs further work – a very brief description of what the spell does, so place doesn't matter to the same extent as now.
 * ST? I thought of implementing a Saving Throws column, but dropped the idea because it's too difficult to integrate the various possibilities of ST consequences – and a simple yes/no would serve no real purpose.
 * Range? Another possible column, which could hold "self", "touch", "ranged".
 * Effect 2? If ST and range would be implemented, we could alter the notes/effect (old) column to simply contain "protection", "status effect", "damage" and such.
 * Duration? Implement?

Do you have an overview of which spells can't be learnt by bards? Or does that intro phrase only relate to level dependencies? ("Bards have a limited selection of spells available")

Thanks for clarifying Armor. The BGManual2 still notes 10 turns, as does the classic manual. BG has 3600, BGII 3000. Oh my …

Something else: Why did you do this? I think, "(spell)" is definitely the better disambig suffix. And for your other recent disambiguations: I don't think, file names are an appropriate solution – not clear enough for readers without access to game tools, who still might be legion.

If you want a good (in my opinion) guideline for how to name such pages, take a look at this. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 17:41, December 7, 2017 (UTC)

GTIMES.2da (modded; source currently unknown)
7200 ONE_DAY

14400 TWO_DAYS

21600 THREE_DAYS

28800 FOUR_DAYS

36000 FIVE_DAYS

43200 SIX_DAYS

50400 SEVEN_DAYS

57600 EIGHT_DAYS

64800 NINE_DAYS

72000 TEN_DAYS

79200 ELEVEN_DAYS

86400 TWELVE_DAYS

93600 THIRTEEN_DAYS

100800 FOURTEEN_DAYS

108000 FIFTEEN_DAYS

216000 THIRTY_DAYS

360000 FIFTY_DAYS

5 ONE_MINUTE

10 TWO_MINUTES

15 THREE_MINUTES

20 FOUR_MINUTES

25 FIVE_MINUTES

30 SIX_MINUTES

35 SEVEN_MINUTES

40 EIGHT_MINUTES

45 NINE_MINUTES

50 TEN_MINUTES

55 ELEVEN_MINUTES

60 TWELVE_MINUTES

65 THIRTEEN_MINUTES

70 FOURTEEN_MINUTES

75 FIFTEEN_MINUTES

80 SIXTEEN_MINUTES

85 SEVENTEEN_MINUTES

90 EIGHTEEN_MINUTES

95 NINETEEN_MINUTES

100 TWENTY_MINUTES

150 THIRTY_MINUTES

200 FORTY_MINUTES

250 FIFTY_MINUTES

6 ONE_ROUND

12 TWO_ROUNDS

18 THREE_ROUNDS

24 FOUR_ROUNDS

31 FIVE_ROUNDS

36 SIX_ROUNDS

42 SEVEN_ROUNDS

48 EIGHT_ROUNDS

54 NINE_ROUNDS

61 TEN_ROUNDS

62 ONE_TURN

120 TWO_TURNS

180 THREE_TURNS

240 FOUR_TURNS

300 FIVE_TURNS

301 ONE_HOUR

360 SIX_TURNS

420 SEVEN_TURNS

480 EIGHT_TURNS

540 NINE_TURNS

600 TEN_TURNS

601 TWO_HOURS

900 FIFTEEN_TURNS

901 THREE_HOURS

1200 FOUR_HOURS

1500 FIVE_HOURS

1800 SIX_HOURS

2100 SEVEN_HOURS

2400 EIGHT_HOURS

2700 NINE_HOURS

3000 TEN_HOURS

3300 ELEVEN_HOURS

3600 TWELVE_HOURS

3900 THIRTEEN_HOURS

4200 FOURTEEN_HOURS

4500 FIFTEEN_HOURS

4800 SIXTEEN_HOURS

5100 SEVENTEEN_HOURS

5400 EIGHTEEN_HOURS

5700 NINETEEN_HOURS

6000 TWENTY_HOURS

6300 TWENTY_ONE_HOURS

6600 TWENTY_TWO_HOURS

6900 TWENTY_THREE_HOURS

115200 SIXTEEN_DAYS

122400 SEVENTEEN_DAYS

129600 EIGHTEEN_DAYS

136800 NINETEEN_DAYS

144000 TWENTY_DAYS

180000 TWENTYFIVE_DAYS

288000 FORTY_DAYS

660 ELEVEN_TURNS

720 TWELVE_TURNS

780 THIRTEEN_TURNS

840 FOURTEEN_TURNS

Arcane Spells
Thanks for the input and such. I open a new (and exclusive) topic here for this. Okay …


 * What is or was the purpose of those two overview tables, Arcane Spells (Baldur's Gate) and Arcane Spells (Baldur's Gate II)?
 * The "#" column absolutely makes no sense other than to have a count at the end. Table re-sorted? Not working anymore. Spell added somewhere right in the middle of it? Lots of work to renumber it. Useless.
 * An overview, a complete listing of all available spells of a certain kind is always good. What further information would such a table need?
 * Cross links, "See also"s to related spells are good. Such as a spell of a higher level with basically the same effects, e.g. Larloch's Minor Drain and Vampiric Touch.
 * Is it possible to make the description brief enough, so that no problems with page space occur? In my eyes there's no way of a table with a scroll bar at the bottom …
 * Would it be of advantage to be able to sort by duration, AoE/target (can be pooled), range, ST y/n?
 * Would it suffice to shorten the description to a "(De-)Buff", "Damage", "Detection", "Cure", "Affliction", etc.? Then make it also sortable: easy access to all spells with a certain effect.
 * Somehow "Not usable by" completely makes "School" redundant – can the latter one be omitted? Is its information useful, other than to have an overview of all spells of a certain school? Better placed on yet to create school articles …
 * As one purpose would be to look after a spell with a certain name, an alphabetically sortable table is needed. Hence, as I said before, a splitting into levels wouldn't make sense. (I know that this makes the table difficult to edit for its sheer size ;)
 * But I think of returning up to a certain point to the original concept of splitting by game. Not two articles anymore, so a link always points to one page (similar to a disambiguation), but tabbed subpages – this way you land on the overview and are able to quickly choose the game you need. Would spare the game column, as you proposed. And would list BG, BG:EE, BGII and BGII:EE. Expansions can be integrated with the spell's name.
 * Differences between games would perhaps be better comparable than with two separate articles.
 * And this way the differences between games for some spells mustn't be pressed altogether into the small available space, each table has its own spell specifications.

So, if the new page replaces the two old ones, the purpose would shift from a large table with all available spells and a short version of the spell articles themselves – to a highly sortable one for many imaginable criteria, but with slightly less specific information.

Such a table best would be generated with something like SMW or Cargo – no manual placing of all the wanted information, but automatically done with searching for the data on the single articles.

Would you mind if I used that page as a kind of sandbox, placing a second, same table below and playing around with possible columns?


 * You're serious? A "ranking system?" And who decides which spell would get what rank? ;) Make a poll? (Btw., that's another column that has to find some space ;)
 * Okay, I leave that pipe – perhaps place a space instead. (Though it looked nice. :( … :)
 * Maybe they have reduced the Armor's duration, because most areas became smaller in BGII and movement faster. But in old BGI the spell lasted around the same time, one needed to extensively explore a wilderness area. -- UserCCCSig.png -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 16:39, December 8, 2017 (UTC)

First of all: thanks for your extensive answer! :)

With all you listed there, I fear I have to give up the thought of a table without scrollbar … we'll see.

Is this "a +2 bonus on saving throws against spells of their school; and give enemies a -2 to save against spells of their school" an EE thing? I don't recall that was part of the CEs, at least it's not in the descriptions during character creation.

What do you mean by SoD "makes BG1 somewhat inaccurate"?

Oh my, so much to consider.

No, sorry, I'm absolutely against some sort of ranking there. That's too much depending on personal play style, party composition, situation, maybe even roleplay.

Do you know these lists? Though there seems to be no BG1 counterpart.

Posting, then on to the other comments … -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 13:10, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

You say, that ST/specialization thing indeed isn't mentioned in the CE's descriptions. I'd go so far to say, even not implemented. Is there proof against this?

Well, this table wouldn't include spell progression, so I don't get your point … -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 15:46, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguations
Second topic during the same post – hope, you don't mind.

I can see your point of this "consistency" with Identify, but I still don't agree. The suffix shall deliver the fastest and shortest option to disambiguate titles from one another.

Even for Dispel Magic it is not really correct to disambiguate between "arcane", "divine" and "inquisitor". The former two are types of magic, the latter is a class. So in my eyes it would be better to use "wizard", "priest" and "inquisitor", perhaps even only "paladin". Though Paladins make indeed use of the "priest" spells, this one's closer to a disambiguation by classes than the current solution.

Back to Identify: what exactly disambiguates the both pages? The one surely is a spell, but the other? No suffix, because it's a general description of the process. That's okay, but I'd still prefer "spell".

Next: why do you add the "disambiguation" suffix to all of these pages? From which guideline is that? This is the first wiki I encounter, where this is done in such an extensive way. I really think, North Forest would suffice, without a suffix.

For that page (a redirect to the suffix page – you even not make use of your own edits yourself ;), it's easy to choose. don't care about neighbored regions or whatever, they are from two "games" (if you count "Expansion" as one), so: or, if you like that better,
 * "North Forest (Shadows of Amn)" and "North Forest (Throne of Bhaal)"
 * "North Forest (SoA)" and "North Forest (ToB)"

For the ones you want to create, I'd needed examples to see which possibilities there are.

Another thing: the suffix shouldn't be part of the article's intro sentence. Is Chain Mail +3 (CHAN21.itm) indeed only found in ToB? And the other variant only in TotSC? Then the suffix in my eyes is clear … (Is chain heavy armor? Or medium?)

By the way, I've stumbled upon some disambiguations that used capital letters in their suffix (don't ask me for examples, I don't recall) – I guess that's not intended like this? -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 16:39, December 8, 2017 (UTC)

Yes, because Harry is a character too important to make a simple disambiguation page out of him. That's what's meant with the sentence "However, if a character is of enough notability, (ie Harry) then the disambiguation page will be titled (Harry (disambiguation))." But take a look at e.g. Peter – there's no Peter (disambiguation), and there's a lot of such pages. And that's not the only wiki where this is the case. In fact, this is the only wiki I know, where "(disambiguation)" as suffix is added in that number …

To say it again, I strongly disagree with file names or similar mechanics as article suffix. It's not important if a game has some tool to see them (and Fallout has, even opposed to NI for BG, the official Construction Set, that's also used by the developers (as well as all Elder Scrolls games from Morrowind on, or NWN1), so don't use this argument) – it's simply bad style, non-meaningful per se, non-encyclopaedic and useless for people who don't use these tools. I ask you urgently to find other solutions. (I will try by myself.)

A first step might be to list all items of a certain name – and then see how they could be disambiguated? Or what speaks against that what I've done on Edventar's Gift? Not single pages, only list those variants and their use on some sort of parent item? Keep in mind, that creature-exclusive items often have no name at all, and aren't accessible via normal means. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 13:36, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

I really appreciate that intent of yours, and somehow I already sort of supported/expected it when placing e.g. "Skull: …" in the infobox of Albert.

And actually I'm not really a fan of listing individual items only as an overview on a similar item article – they indeed deserve their own one.

So that's a good project, definitely, even if it needs lots of disambiguations.

But still I would go to find a different approach for the naming, like e.g. (and I don't have taken a current look into those items) "Paws (wolf)", "Paws (dread wolf)", "Paws (brown bear)", if you know what I mean. That's better than "B-1", "B-2", "B-4", etc.

Back to "disambiguation" as suffix. (I don't have researched that topic on FRW, and I know enough wikis to have reliable sources for my opinion ;)

As some basics always two things have to be considered:
 * what might the reader be looking for, and is the use of a suffix necessary for this, respectively does the used suffix help this reader?
 * how will this work and look in the search bar (and the link proposals while editing)?

So, yes, your suffixing indeed does have a purpose, namely to tell the reader, "wait! here's more to this name; and if you click the one without suffix, you probably might not land where you wanted to go".

On the other hand, if I type in the initial letters of something I'm looking for, and I see then a big list of things that all start with these letters, then I am already forced somehow to take a deeper look.

The term without any suffix as basic disambiguation page is the shortest to type, probably the first in the list, and the easiest one to be chosen by an editor who doesn't know what else to choose. If I simply want to tell somebody that something's happening in Baldur's Gate, be it the city or the game, and I have no plan of how the various districts are named on this wiki, or how the game titles are written exactly, I'd go and do it in this exact way: type, place my sentence, and done.

(Let's see what's happening in the preview … ah, you've made a redirect from it to the disambiguation!)

And what does happen if I want to open exactly that page? Type  into the search bar and see, I got SoA, the game, the EE, II EE, II expansion and SoD – no city, no disambiguation. But when I came here, I thought this would be the game …

Okay, especially for this term, I'd say Baldur's Gate is the Harry and should be the (non-suffixed) game. But other people might say, it should be the city, because the game was named after the city. Another idea would be to name the series this way. (By the way, the wiki lacks a BG "series" link.) I don't know … Mainly I notice, that the term itself, without suffix/not expanded, doesn't appear when I'm looking for it, which is confusing.

Keep in mind that a redirect always appears at last in the search bar/link proposals.

Until later. :) -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 17:04, December 9, 2017 (UTC)

Article comment IP talk
Nice of you, to give a warning before deletion, but perhaps difficult to achieve by that IP – if they change it at least once a day, as is the case for me. And they even don't get a notice about your message … ;) -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 16:39, December 8, 2017 (UTC)

Quote placing
And on it goes …

So you prefer it beside the infobox, rather than on top of it? Okay, I will regard this in the future. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 16:39, December 8, 2017 (UTC)

I thought about that by myself, especially in combination with permanent header notes, such as the also italicized disambiguations, abouts, and such. So I'm perfectly fine with it. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 13:41, December 9, 2017 (UTC)