Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
Playing the Game
Play by Post
Living Worlds
Living 4th Edition
New Wiki Working Group
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="stonegod" data-source="post: 4977302" data-attributes="member: 36973"><p>Okay, just ran into a <strong>major</strong> snag in the new wiki that prevents it being used exactly the way we have been doing.</p><p></p><p>VaultWiki does not have the extension that some MediaWiki's do that allow it to do math in templates. In other words, there is no way to automatic math checking (i.e., adding the various mod values for defense) without some seriously tricky recursive template execution that I haven't looked into. CES doesn't seem to have an extension to support math expressions either.</p><p></p><p>So, there a few things I need judges (both from L4W and LEB, as we are using the same sections so far) to ponder. I see a few ways forward:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Junk the ENWorld Wiki and move it offsite.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Modify the Math section by:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Requiring the numbers to be provided by the authors (no auto-calc)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Junk the section as given, and just request a CB summary</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Junk the section entirely</li> </ul></li> </ul><p></p><p>My thoughts: I think we should just junk the section and request a Character Builder summary if the user can provide one. Why?</p><p>- The CB can check much of the math for us</p><p>- Its very labor intensive to fill this out every time, especially if there is a tool that does it. Removing this barrier will make character writing up easier.</p><p>- I <strong>believe</strong> many judges check by putting things into the CB anyway</p><p></p><p>Of course, there are some weaknesses with this approach:</p><p>- Not all of our users use the CB (e.g., DDI is required for level 4+)</p><p>- The CB does have some bugs</p><p>- The CB will not capture some of L4W/LEB's differences from cannon (oversize weapon creatures)</p><p>- I could be wrong on how much the judges are using the CB for checking</p><p></p><p>In any case, I am a strong opponent of moving the wiki off-site. I've stated this many times. While I think we need a way of doing math checking, I don't think the wiki's lack of doing that for us is the straw that will break the camel's back.</p><p></p><p>So, thoughts?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="stonegod, post: 4977302, member: 36973"] Okay, just ran into a [b]major[/b] snag in the new wiki that prevents it being used exactly the way we have been doing. VaultWiki does not have the extension that some MediaWiki's do that allow it to do math in templates. In other words, there is no way to automatic math checking (i.e., adding the various mod values for defense) without some seriously tricky recursive template execution that I haven't looked into. CES doesn't seem to have an extension to support math expressions either. So, there a few things I need judges (both from L4W and LEB, as we are using the same sections so far) to ponder. I see a few ways forward: [list][*]Junk the ENWorld Wiki and move it offsite. [*]Modify the Math section by:[list] [*]Requiring the numbers to be provided by the authors (no auto-calc) [*]Junk the section as given, and just request a CB summary [*]Junk the section entirely[/list][/list] My thoughts: I think we should just junk the section and request a Character Builder summary if the user can provide one. Why? - The CB can check much of the math for us - Its very labor intensive to fill this out every time, especially if there is a tool that does it. Removing this barrier will make character writing up easier. - I [b]believe[/b] many judges check by putting things into the CB anyway Of course, there are some weaknesses with this approach: - Not all of our users use the CB (e.g., DDI is required for level 4+) - The CB does have some bugs - The CB will not capture some of L4W/LEB's differences from cannon (oversize weapon creatures) - I could be wrong on how much the judges are using the CB for checking In any case, I am a strong opponent of moving the wiki off-site. I've stated this many times. While I think we need a way of doing math checking, I don't think the wiki's lack of doing that for us is the straw that will break the camel's back. So, thoughts? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Playing the Game
Play by Post
Living Worlds
Living 4th Edition
New Wiki Working Group
Top
