Talk:Weapon Descriptions

Just noticed this...

The chart covers damage for Small weapons, and Medium weapons, but not large. Was that intentional? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cypresslyshra (talk • contribs) 14:41, 5 January 2007 (MST). Please sign your posts.

Yes, this is exactly how the PHB arranges weapons, with no large. --Green Dragon 15:45, 5 January 2007 (MST)

Dynamic

Any ideas on how to make this dynamic? --Green Dragon 21:32, 3 December 2009 (MST)

I tried playing with it a while (years) ago, but I ran into a number of limitations with DPL that prevented me from implementing a number of features I was trying to add. I've put DPLing on hold for a bit, because I wanted to re-factor the DPL source code a bit. Progress is slow going. —Sledged (talk) 10:18, 7 December 2009 (MST)

Well couldn't it work now with being included in the template with one parameter doing two things. One being the display. Two being an addition onto Template:x0 on that page? Or would that not work? And dpl's together can (kinda) be tabled - see also All 4e Deities/Main. --Green Dragon 05:19, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

There's a number of minor details that all add up.

First is that throwing together the wiki-markup for a DPL table is clunky to begin with. Little things like the placement of a whitespace character can throw off the whole table. Most times I can eventually get right, but there's little rhyme or reason to how and why. This is primarily due to the state of the source code for the extension which is a bit of a mess. Hence the re-factoring effort.

Second is the little nuances such as ammo indentation and placement. If the ammo is to be projected from another weapon, it should be indented under each weapon that can fire it. If the ammo is thrown instead (such as shuriken, it should only be listed once in its expected alphabetical placement and not indented.

Third is the superscripts for the footnotes for reach weapons, double weapons, and weapons that deal non-lethal damage. Not to mention it's possible to have a double weapon where one end deals non-lethal damage and the other end deals lethal damage which would be listed as 1d8³/1d6.

Last is that the list is getting a bit long so a bit of paging would be useful. —Sledged (talk) 16:18, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree, but at least it is an improvement. If those could be dealt with that would be even better. --Green Dragon (talk) 13:13, 26 May 2012 (MDT)