User talk:Dmilewski

Archives
Archive 1 (Discussions 1 – 30)

Your NPC Classes and NPC's

Recently I made the page User NPC Classes with Descriptions, making each NPC Class need not only in the right category, but also added to this page. As I was looking over your recent NPC Class contributions I noticed none of them were on this page, and I decided you would rather add them User NPC Classes with Descriptions than have me do it. So, all your new NPC classes should be added to this page. Also, each NPC you make should be added to 3.5e NPCs as it has not been converted over to the new method of just using categories for organisation. Thanks so much, and I also hope you NPC Classes are in the right categories (Category:Combat-Focused, Category:Bad Guy, Category:Good Guy, Category:Strong Spellcasting, where applicable.). Thanks. --Green Dragon 18:51, 12 November 2006 (MST)

Rating the PrC's

D&D Wiki has quite a bit of Prestige Classes, with only two having been rated on D&D Wiki's rating scale. So, on a small mission to try to get ratings of PrC's done, I would like you to help. All you would have to do is go to 3.5e Classes then to any PrC page. Click on the PrC you would like to rate; then rate its balance by clicking on the "here" in the Please, help D&D Wiki by rating the balance of this item here. I hope you can take the time to help D&D Wiki become a useful tool for every visitor that comes here; and thanks in advance. --Green Dragon 22:29, 29 November 2006 (MST)

SRD Editing Only

Hello. Recently, I was thinking that it might be a good idea to make a new level of power on D&D Wiki. Above Sysop would be something like SRD Editor, and this would include the people that understand the SRD well enough to make changes without violating copyrights, etc. The 3 (possible 4...) people that would be in this group would be Me, You, and Sledged (Possibly Blue Dragon if he wants to be part of this group). Is this a good idea, or not? --Green Dragon 22:54, 11 December 2006 (MST)

Let me think about that. My gut says that it should be a separate editorship from admin. From SRD editorship, you get the ability to edit the SRD (but not move pags). From Admin, you get the ability to move pages.

The reason I am saying this is because I would not (to be brutally honest) trust Pz.Az.0Maus, editing the SRD in any way. People like that, that for some reason become admins (I know, I know, my fault), seem not to understand the problems with wierd edits to the SRD. Just to give my reasons for this idea... --Green Dragon 19:16, 12 December 2006 (MST)

Protecting the SRD is good. So is getting help with it. In that, I'm conflicted. Run the thought past the other folks. We'll see if there's a consensus. --Dmilewski 20:20, 12 December 2006 (MST)

Okay, I will after the adminship candidates are over. --Green Dragon 21:19, 12 December 2006 (MST)

Mithral Shirt

The cost for a mithral shirt and the cost for a chain shirt with the mithral enhancement do not match. —Sledged 23:21, 22 December 2006 (MST)

All that math needs checking. I'll put that on my to-do list. If you see any numbers that a wrong, please just correct and post errata on the discussion page. If you see a pattern of mistakes, you can fix the pattern (and alert me to the mistake), or just bop the error over to me. --Dmilewski 11:03, 23 December 2006 (MST)

Weapon Description Pages

So I've been working on a layout to include more size-related information on the weapon description pages, and this is what I have so far (the base weapon is the gauntlet):

Critical: x2 Range Increment: — Type: Bludgeoning
Size	Cost	Damage	Weight
Fine	*	—	1/16 lb.
Diminuative	*	—	1/8 lb.
Tiny	*	1	1/4 lb.
Small	2 gp	1d2	1/2 lb.
Medium	2 gp	1d3	1 lb.
Large	4 gp	1d4	2 lbs.
Huge	*	1d6	4 lbs.
Gargantuan	*	1d8	8 lbs.
Collossal	*	2d6	16 lbs.
* The SRD gives neither this value nor a means to determine it.

What do you think? I'm considering making it into a template for user submitted weapons. —Sledged 13:24, 28 December 2006 (MST)

Terrific. I was going to ask you to make a template. No need! Here's a few things that we could do:

Weapon	Cost	Damage	Enhancement	Cost	Benefit
Small	1 cp	1d2	Alchemical Silver	10 gp	-1 damage, weapon is silvered
Medium	2 cp	1d3	Darkwood	15 gp	halve weight

Alternatively, we could put enhancements on a different table (with more appropriate formatting than this).

	Small	Medium	Large	Benefit
Adamantine	2 gp	8 gp	30 gp	Ignore DR
Mithril	1 gp	5 gp	10 gp	Halve weight
+1	2,000 gp	2,001 gp	2005 gp	+1 to hit and damage

--Dmilewski 14:24, 28 December 2006 (MST)

How about this:

Enhancement Costs

	Steel	Adamantine	Alchemical Silver	Cold Iron	Crystal, Deep	Crystal, Mundane	Mithral
Average	2 gp	—	22 gp	4 gp	—	—	—
Masterwork	302 gp	3,002 gp	322 gp	304 gp	1,002 gp	302 gp	502 gp
+1	2,302 gp	5,002 gp	2,322 gp	4,304 gp	3,002 gp	2,302 gp	2,502 gp
+2	8,302 gp	11,002 gp	8,322 gp	10,304 gp	9,002 gp	8,302 gp	8,502 gp
+3	18,302 gp	21,002 gp	18,322 gp	20,304 gp	19,002 gp	18,302 gp	18,502 gp
+4	32,302 gp	35,002 gp	32,322 gp	34,304 gp	33,002 gp	32,302 gp	32,502 gp
+5	50,302 gp	53,002 gp	50,322 gp	52,304 gp	51,002 gp	50,302 gp	50,502 gp
+6*	72,302 gp (720,302 gp)	75,002 gp (723,002 gp)	72,322 gp (720,322 gp)	74,304 gp (722,304 gp)	73,002 gp (721,002 gp)	72,302 gp (720,302 gp)	72,502 gp (720,502 gp)
+7*	98,302 gp (980,302 gp)	101,002 gp (983,002 gp)	98,322 gp (980,322 gp)	100,304 gp (982,304 gp)	99,002 gp (981,002 gp)	98,302 gp (980,302 gp)	98,502 gp (980,502 gp)
+8*	128,302 gp (1,280,302 gp)	131,002 gp (1,283,002 gp)	128,322 gp (1,280,322 gp)	130,304 gp (1,282,304 gp)	129,002 gp (1,281,002 gp)	128,302 gp (1,280,302 gp)	128,502 gp (1,280,502 gp)
+9*	162,302 gp (1,620,302 gp)	165,002 gp (1,623,002 gp)	162,322 gp (1,620,322 gp)	164,304 gp (1,622,304 gp)	163,002 gp (1,621,002 gp)	162,302 gp (1,620,302 gp)	162,502 gp (1,620,502 gp)
+10*	200,302 gp (2,000,302 gp)	203,002 gp (2,003,002 gp)	200,322 gp (2,000,322 gp)	202,304 gp (2,002,304 gp)	201,002 gp (2,001,002 gp)	200,302 gp (2,000,302 gp)	200,502 gp (2,000,502 gp)
+11 or more	square of the bonus x20,000 gp + 302 gp	square of the bonus x20,000 gp + 3,002 gp	square of the bonus x20,000 gp + 322 gp	square of the bonus x20,000 gp + 2,304 gp	square of the bonus x20,000 gp + 1,002 gp	square of the bonus x20,000 gp + 302 gp	square of the bonus x20,000 gp + 502 gp
* If weapon has a magical bonus greater than +5 or a special ability worth more than +5, the weapon has the epic market price given in parenthesis.

Note that darkwood is missing since it doesn't apply to the gauntlet. Also the header "Steel" will change depending on the weapon (e.g. "Wood" for a club, and "Steel/Wood" for an arrow). —Sledged 21:23, 28 December 2006 (MST)

Wow... that's... totally intimidating and overwhelming. No offense. That table makes my brain melt. (However, that's GREAT for a master enchantment chart. I will steal that for the SRD.)

So now, which data do we want to eliminate? When I first did that section in the SRD, I chose to list the most common prices. What if we just list the special materials costs for Standard and Masterwork, then included an enchantment guide below that? (Our readers can do the simple addition in their heads.) You also want to include darkwood, as negative information is information. (It then becomes clear that Darkwood is not there on purpose.) The result is far cleaner and less overwhelming, but contains the same information. The "magic" section needs to look better than I have it.

Gauntlet Enhancements

Material	Average	Masterwork1	Special
Steel	2 gp	302 gp	—
Adamantine	—	3,002 gp	Bypass DR
Alchemical Silver	22 gp	322 gp	-1 damage
Cold Iron	4 gp	304 gp	If enchanted, costs additional 2,000 gp.
Darkwood	n/a	n/a	1/2 weight
Crystal, Deep	—	1,002 gp	Psionic
Crystal, Mundane	—	302	No rusting, not metal
Mithral	—	502 gp	1/2 weight
Magic or Psionic +1 adds 2,000 gp +2 adds 8,000 gp +3 adds 18,000 gp +4 adds 32,000 gp +5 adds 50,000 gp		+6 adds 72,000 gp2 +7 adds 98,000 gp2 +8 adds 128,000 gp2 +9 adds 162,000 gp2 +10 adds 200,000 gp2
Wielding a masterwork weapon provides a +1 enhancement bonus on attack rolls. If weapon has a magical bonus greater than +5 or a special ability worth more than +5, the weapon is epic. Multiply magic cost by 10.

I suppose my table is a bit over the top. Your table looks good, though. Cleaning up the layout for the magic bonuses won't be too difficult. One thing I hadn't considered is that some weapons can be composed of both darkwood and a special metal or crystal, such as an arrow. Also, do you want to include hardness and hit points? —Sledged 11:31, 29 December 2006 (MST)

Saying "no" to complication can be hard. Hardness and hitpoints should be worth it. (Nobody ever remembers that stuff, so having the reference helps.) Compound items cross into the "overly complicated" realm. That's lots of work for little payback. We should simplify double-weapons into double-weapons with both heads having the same material or the same enchantment, then put a note at the bottom that says as much. (People don't read the fine print about double-weapons, so we should just price them out correctly for being full doubles.) Since most materials don't affect hardness and hitpoints, I think that those numbers belong up with damage/weight/crit block. --Dmilewski 11:54, 29 December 2006 (MST)

Here's what I have so far. I couldn't find a layout that looked good for the magical/psionic enhancements to be in the same table as the material enhancements, so I put them in their own table.

The SRD doesn't explicitly give the hps for a gauntlet nor a direct means of figuring it out. My best guess is that it'd be about the same as a light blade.

The SRD also doesn't say whether or not extra cost for magical cold iron weapons applies to psionic weapons, so I just said "magical," and left it up to the DM to decide whether or not to extend it (which may or may not have been WotC's intent).

Critical: x2 Range Increment: — Type: Bludgeoning Hardness: 10
Size	Cost	Damage	Weight	hp
Fine	*	—	1/16 lb.
Diminuative	*	—	1/8 lb.
Tiny	*	1	1/4 lb.
Small	2 gp	1d2	1/2 lb.
Medium	2 gp	1d3	1 lb.
Large	4 gp	1d4	2 lbs.
Huge	*	1d6	4 lbs.
Gargantuan	*	1d8	8 lbs.
Collossal	*	2d6	16 lbs.
* The SRD gives neither this value nor a means to determine it.

Gauntlet Material Enhancements

Material	Average	Masterwork1	Hardness	hp	Special
Steel	2 gp	302 gp	10		—
Adamantine	—	3,002 gp	20		Bypass hardness less than 20
Alchemical Silver	22 gp	322 gp	8		-1 damage
Cold Iron	4 gp	304 gp	10		Magical enchantments cost an additional 2,000 gp.
Darkwood	n/a	n/a	5	n/a	1/2 weight
Crystal, Deep	—	1,002 gp	10		Psionic
Crystal, Mundane	—	302 gp	8		No rusting, not metal
Mithral	—	502 gp	15		1/2 weight
Masterwork weapons have a +1 enhancement bonus on attack rolls.

Gauntlet Magical/Psionic Enhancements

Bonus Value	Additional Cost1	Hardness Increase2	Additional hp2
+1	+2,000 gp	+2	+10
+2	+8,000 gp	+4	+20
+3	+18,000 gp	+6	+30
+4	+32,000 gp	+8	+40
+5	+50,000 gp	+10	+50
+6	+72,000 gp3	+12	+60
+7	+98,000 gp3	+14	+70
+8	+128,000 gp3	+16	+80
+9	+162,000 gp3	+18	+90
+10	+200,000 gp3	+20	+100
+11 or more	+ bonus x bonus x 20,000 gp	+ enhancement bonus x 2	+ enhancement bonus x 10
Increase total cost for magical enhancement by 2,000 gp for cold iron weapons. Unlike the additional cost, the increase the weapon's hardness and hit points are only gained from the weapon's bonus, not its special abilities. If weapon has a magical bonus greater than +5 or a special ability worth more than +5, the weapon is epic. Multiply magic cost by 10.

—Sledged 20:06, 29 December 2006 (MST)

That's an astounding amount of data per weapon. I am honestly SHOCKED how much data is connected to a single weapon. I like this layout well enough to run with it. --Dmilewski 21:00, 29 December 2006 (MST)

That's D&D for you. It gets more complex with each edition. —Sledged 22:06, 29 December 2006 (MST)

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar

Recently you passed 20,000 edits (375 edits ago) on D&D Wiki, the most of any D&D Wikian! Congratulations! So, for achieving this enormous task I give you The Tireless Contributor Barnstar. Thanks for helping with everything you have.

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	I give you The Tireless Contributor Barnstar for reaching 20,000 edits, with every one of these edits being very worthwhile and very helpful. Every single one of these edits has helped make D&D Wiki what it is, thanks. --Green Dragon 01:23, 31 December 2006 (MST)

MSRD

Are you going to add the MSRD to D&D Wiki? If so, thanks in advance, it's been a long time in coming. --Green Dragon 22:07, 31 December 2006 (MST)

Email?

Hello Dmilewski, I was wondering if you had received an email from me recently. Thanks, --Blue Dragon 15:40, 2 January 2007 (MST)

Yup. Edited my home page a bit. --Dmilewski 16:21, 2 January 2007 (MST)

Edits on Villainous Abilities (3.5e Variant Rule)

Recently IP 69.148.22.216 edited Villainous Abilities (3.5e Variant Rule). Because you do not have a static IP address I am not sure if this is you. However, I am just alerting you so you know it was edited. Thanks. --Green Dragon 14:41, 3 January 2007 (MST)

Rating the Staffmage

Hello. I was just wondering if you would mind rating the Staffmage I just recently edited. All I want to see is how balanced I made it... If you could do this I would be very happy, thanks. --Green Dragon 22:52, 4 January 2007 (MST)

Another question, would you mind rating the Ghost Monk? --Green Dragon 23:50, 10 January 2007 (MST)

Wikipedia

Recently you linked to many Wikipedia articles via SRD monsters. So, do you think it would be appropriate to have the Wikipedia article link to D&D Wiki's SRD Monster (also giving D&D Wiki more visitors)? --Green Dragon 17:33, 13 January 2007 (MST)

I think it is perfectly appropriate. --Dmilewski 19:09, 13 January 2007 (MST)

Okay. --Green Dragon 00:54, 14 January 2007 (MST)

Environment Section... Where?

Where is the environment section of "Wilderness, Weather, & Environment" in the SRD? —Sledged 16:51, 17 January 2007 (MST)

Missing. I'll have to restore this.--Dmilewski 18:39, 17 January 2007 (MST)

Working Mans BarnStar

	The Working Man's Barnstar
	Dmilewski added the entire MSRD to D&D Wiki and for doing this I give him this Barnstar. Adding the MSRD was a huge job, and Dmilewki cannot be congratulated enough. Thanks. --Green Dragon 22:24, 25 January 2007 (MST)

So, I give you this Template:The Working Man's Barnstar for adding the MSRD. --Green Dragon 22:24, 25 January 2007 (MST)

Feat Descriptors

So I was browsing through the feats, and I noticed that the way the categories are assigned, there's no way to view all the feats—and only those feats—with a specific descriptor. If I'm trying to put together a psion and I'm trying to select my psion bonus feat—which has to be either psionic, metapsionic, or psionic item creation—and I go to SRD:Psionic Feats, I have to filter through feats like Antipsionic Magic and Autonomous which are related to psionics but aren't psionic feats in that they lack the [Psionic] descriptor.

I suggest having category pages specifically for feat descriptors:

• Category:Divine (Feat Descriptor)
• Category:Epic (Feat Descriptor)
• Category:General (Feat Descriptor)
• Category:Item Creation (Feat Descriptor)
• Category:Metamagic (Feat Descriptor)
• Category:Metapsionic (Feat Descriptor)
• Category:Psionic (Feat Descriptor)
• Category:Special (Feat Descriptor)
• Category:Wild (Feat Descriptor)

And these descriptors would be assigned to the SRD category. Additionally, we could have more categories for user-contributed feats that have descriptors introduced by WotC products, but aren't part of the SRD:

• Category:Exalted (Feat Descriptor)
• Category:Metabreath (Feat Descriptor)
• Category:Monstrous (Feat Descriptor)
• Category:Vile (Feat Descriptor)
• Category:Tactical (Feat Descriptor)
• etc...

—Sledged 12:25, 30 January 2007 (MST)

The feats have been needing a review. Thanks for asking the question.

If I am interpreting you correctly, I presume that the category would be [[Category:Wild (Feat Descriptor)]]? --Dmilewski 13:17, 30 January 2007 (MST)

Yup, that's it. —Sledged 14:03, 30 January 2007 (MST)

I think that appending "Feat" would work sufficiently well. Example: Category: Wild Feat. I had a similar problem with "light", leading to Category:Light Armor and Category:Light Weapon. ("Light" is its own PITA category.) This is a bit more self-explanatory and easier to remember. --Dmilewski 14:27, 30 January 2007 (MST)

Got the categories made and populated:

• Category:Divine Feat
• Category:Epic Feat
• Category:General Feat
• Category:Item Creation Feat
• Category:Metamagic Feat
• Category:Metapsionic Feat
• Category:Psionic Feat
• Category:Special Feat
• Category:Wild Feat

and three demo pages for the feats and rules:

• Feats Overview (SRD Rules Evaluation)
• SRD:Feats
• SRD:Feats by Type

Whatcha' think? ——Sledged (talk) 13:14, 3 February 2007 (MST)

Smooth. Looks great! --Dmilewski 13:41, 3 February 2007 (MST)

Now all that needs to be done is to make 3.5e Feats work with the same categories... The SRD and the Homebrew items should be working together to help campaigns, they should not be separated and divided. Would you like me to help with the DnD Feats's category changes? --Green Dragon 14:22, 3 February 2007 (MST)

Is Ability Surge (3.5e Feat) the kind of categories were aiming for? --Green Dragon 15:20, 3 February 2007 (MST)

Yup. That's it. If we add all the user feats, we'll need to create more categories. We'll need a category for each descriptor. —Sledged (talk) 09:56, 4 February 2007 (MST)

And we would have to re-organize 3.5e Feats. --Green Dragon 18:38, 4 February 2007 (MST)

SRD Namespace

How would you feel about asking Blue Dragon to create a custom namespace for the SRD? I've been finding that as more and more articles get added to the wiki, it's getting harder and harder to search for specifics within the core rules. If the SRD had it's own namespace, searches could be limited to just that namespace. —Sledged (talk) 13:40, 6 February 2007 (MST)

Great minds think alike. I've been thinking about that. We can do a single OGL namespace, an SRD namespace, or SRD and MSRD. I'm not sure which would work best. I'm currently leaning towards the namespaces called SRD and MSRD. (This makes it easy for folks to check the proper namespace when searching for something specific and to search each reference document separately.) Wade in with any implementation suggestions or improvement. --Dmilewski 14:59, 6 February 2007 (MST)

I say just stick with SRD and MSRD namespaces. If more publishings are added, such as the OGC from Unearthed Arcana (which Cúthalion expressed a willingness to do here), namespaces can be added for them, as well. —Sledged (talk) 16:54, 6 February 2007 (MST)

Great. Will you drop the note to BD?--Dmilewski 17:55, 6 February 2007 (MST)

It's not going to happen, I think. Edit counts do not get carried over between different namespaces with the current version of MediaWiki their are more problems. If one wants to search through all of the namespaces, they cannot, they would have to go individually, etc. This has already been partially tried with the D20M section, and it never got off its feet. I don't think this is the best idea, however if you are worried about the ease of search I am sure I could ask Blue Dragon to make an extension (or something) that would make it so only "SRD Rules" "Just MSRD" or "Just SRD" search options exist. What are your opinions about a more customized search and not so much of splitting this site apart? --Green Dragon 12:53, 7 February 2007 (MST)

I'm not talking about splitting the site. What I'm talking about is having "SRD:" appended to the title of every SRD page (though it's a bit more complicated than that), the same way that all the template titles begin with "Template:", category titles being with "Category:", and so on. So that when you do a simple search, you can just select the checkboxes at the bottom of the search page for which namespaces to which you want to limit the search. —Sledged (talk) 13:26, 7 February 2007 (MST)

Namespaces will do exactly what Sledged is talking about. Green Dragon is talking about splitting the site into four different sections, but a custom namespace would be perfectly acceptable. These namespaces have now been added. --Blue Dragon 15:58, 7 February 2007 (MST)

Now to move all 3,514 pages. —Sledged (talk) 16:34, 7 February 2007 (MST)

I will move them all, don't feel pressured. --Green Dragon 16:51, 7 February 2007 (MST)

I was gonna say break into managable chunks. It's the feats, spells, and FXs that'll be the time consumers. Also, I think since they will all have the (M)SRD namespace, the "SRD" in suffix of the titles could be removed. —Sledged (talk) 17:36, 7 February 2007 (MST)

That should be scriptable? Manually converted, that would change Widget (SRD Equipment) to SRD:Widget (Equipment)? Have I followed correctly?--Dmilewski 08:52, 8 February 2007 (MST)

That's what I'm talking about. Though if a script is going to be used, I wouldn't worry about it, unless modifying the script is a minor issue. Additionally, the script would have to make sure titles like Spells (SRD) don't end up as SRD:Spells (). —Sledged (talk) 14:33, 8 February 2007 (MST)

If you guys want, I can make a script run database-end. It will save lots and lots of time, and will be just as accurate (depending on the rules that it is given). Let me know what you want. Thanks, --Blue Dragon 21:55, 8 February 2007 (MST)

Script it. By all means, script it. If it can convert references inside documents, that would just PERFECT. --Dmilewski 06:55, 9 February 2007 (MST)

Database end will not work; the revisions of what has happened to every page must be present. A non-database script is the only way this will work and Blue Dragon is working on one now... --Green Dragon 13:57, 10 February 2007 (MST)

The problems: Every category will be very screwed up as the SRD items are now only listed under the "S" instead of correctly alphabetically. Blue Dragon said he will fix this sometime. Also the links should work (redirects) however Blue Dragon will work on fixing them next. No need to do anything manually. Is this what you envisioned or is something wrong? --Green Dragon 22:31, 11 February 2007 (MST)

This is about the exact level of complication that I was expecting. It's a big project and snafus should show up. My thanks to Blue Dragon for doing the scripting. Changing namespaces is a load of work, but I do believe that having a dedicated search for the rules set is worth the effort. Hopefully Blue Dragon can submit his alterations upstream and other wikis can get the benefit of our problemsolving. --Dmilewski 06:36, 13 February 2007 (MST)

DPL2 version 0.9 has a "column" parameter. If you set it to 3, and set "mode=unordered" you won't have to worry about the alphabetical headers. —Sledged (talk) 07:34, 13 February 2007 (MST)

We're on 0.7.7. We'll have to wait for Blue Dragon to update the server.--Dmilewski 09:18, 13 February 2007 (MST)

A question about that: Would the namespace still be listed (used). I mean would the SRD items still go under S when their are not just SRD items or would it disregard namespaces? --Green Dragon 18:28, 13 February 2007 (MST)

CR List on Creature Page

I would find it convenient if there were links to the CR category pages directly from the SRD creature section. When I design an adventure I usually look for monsters by CR, not alphabetically. Aarnott 13:36, 7 February 2007 (MST)

I'll put that on my to-do list. --Dmilewski 08:47, 8 February 2007 (MST)

For SRD creatures, there seems to already be a page: Category:Creatures by CR. Nothing links to it, and it should probably be just a regular page instead of category; nothing has been assigned to it, and its content is the result of DPL tags.

Aarnott, are you talking about a page for only SRD creatures, or both user-contributed and SRD creatures? —Sledged (talk) 14:33, 8 February 2007 (MST)

I added a links to Creatures by CR (SRD) under the creatures page. It never got moved into the creature page when we redid the SRD structure. This is supposed to be a category, as I want it to appear under the Category page. (I sometimes find things by category and find this useful.) --Dmilewski 20:51, 8 February 2007 (MST)

I agree, that should help many people. --Green Dragon 13:58, 10 February 2007 (MST)

This is great! So handy, thanks a lot. And to answer Sledged, I only meant SRD creatures. The user-defined ones already have a listing by CR. Aarnott 11:10, 12 February 2007 (MST)

Gotcha. Though I wasn't asking if you meant user creatures by themselves, but a page that has all the creatures on the wiki by CR; both user and SRD. —Sledged (talk) 11:15, 12 February 2007 (MST)

He can make wiki-wide pages like this himself. This will help show us that he's "admin material." It's a good DPL project, too. --Dmilewski 11:33, 12 February 2007 (MST)

Aarnott, your going for admin (RfA)? And, yes, I do think it is a good thing to learn wiki-code better (especially dpl's) --Green Dragon 23:50, 12 February 2007 (MST)

Orphaned MSRD Pages

I didn't know if you were aware, but there are several orphaned MSRD pages, especially revolving around classes (acolyte, archaic weaponsmaster, and many others). Any plan to fix this? --EldritchNumen 04:00, 10 February 2007 (MST)

Just joking. Sorry. They were listed under orphaned pages, but I checked the MSRD and they are linked to. Must just be some flaw in the system. --EldritchNumen 04:04, 10 February 2007 (MST)

DPL lists are included in the orphaned pages. To see the real orphaned pages (which is a little out-dated - I will update it today) use the Orphaned Pages - Excluding DPL and SRD (Should also include MSRD their). --Green Dragon 13:59, 10 February 2007 (MST)

Spell Categories

I noticed you where trying figure out what to name the categories of spell (and power) descriptors. I have two suggestions. Either do the same way the feat descriptors were done (e.g. "Category:Fear Spell"), or use "effects" (e.g. "Category:Fear Effect") since all spells with a specific descriptor are also an effect of the same name. —Sledged (talk) 16:35, 11 February 2007 (MST)

Now that I think about it, "effect" would be better since it can cover spells, powers, spell-like, psi-like, supernatural, and exceptional abilities. —Sledged (talk) 16:40, 11 February 2007 (MST)

Oooh. Good thinking. Consider it adopted. --Dmilewski 18:48, 11 February 2007 (MST)

Quicken Redirect

I just noticed the Quicken redirect. If Quicken redirects to Quicken Spell, where does that leave the other quicken feats? (Quicken Spell-Like Ability, Quicken Power, and Automatic Quicken Spell.) —Sledged (talk) 12:49, 28 February 2007 (MST)

Good catch. Here's a question for you: how to we keep [Quicken] non-committed? Once we begin tagging using aliases, someone

"...will end up a redirecting term to one page when it applies to multiple terms." Is that along the lines of how you meant to finish that sentence? —Sledged (talk) 16:01, 28 February 2007 (MST)

In general, most quickens refer to Quicken Spell, so that's not a bad default. What I did for other name-space collisions was to go with longer words. "Good" is "Good Effect." Quicken should be [Quicken Spell]. Enforcing that is more editorial policy. Honestly, I don't know how to lock in an empty page so that it forever turns red, which is what we would need to do to keep Quicken non-allocated.--Dmilewski 15:23, 28 February 2007 (MST)

I don't think you can lock a page that doesn't exist. I tried it with MyClass (3.5e Class) by creating the page, protecting it, then deleting it. Didn't work. I logged out and was able to create the page again.

The only alternative of which I can think, is to make [Quicken] just a locked page hosting links to everything in the SRD to which it applies. —Sledged (talk) 16:01, 28 February 2007 (MST)

I think that is the best answer. It could look like something below. We can institute that as a standard and use that for any abbreviation collision, then LOCK IT.

Quicken is an ambiguous term. Do you mean:

• Quicken Spell Feat
• Quicken Power Feat
• Quicken Spell-Like Ability
• Automatic Quicken Spell Epic Feat

--Dmilewski 16:31, 28 February 2007 (MST)

I knew this would come up, and now is as good as any time to mention it. What we need is somethig like Wikipedia's "disambiguation page"; that would solve these problems (and be like Dmilewski's example - just better). --Green Dragon 20:35, 28 February 2007 (MST)

Exactly what I was thinking. How do they manage disambiguation on Wikipedia? Is it coding or manually created for every page with an ambiguous title? This problem (which has come up with quicken) applies to several other pages as well... in the next few days I'll try to go through the redirects and see which ones are problematic and make a list (if we have to do it manually; hopefully sledged or blue dragon can whip up some useful plug-in, but it seems like a fairly nasty issue at the apex of linguistics and computing...). "Weapons," for example, is a nasty redirect (it brings you to User Created Weapons, which has no link to the SRD weapons... which, to be honest, is actually rather irritating (because a redirect like this does not allow you to use search effectively!). —EldritchNumen 01:18, 1 March 2007 (MST)

(Yeah, I could see this coming, too.) I'm happy to steal from the best. Off the top of my head, problem children include: good (alignment, spell effect, creature subtype), evil (alignment, spell effect, creature subtype), light (light effect, light weapon, light armor, light encumbrance), fire (fire effect, fire subtype) --Dmilewski 06:05, 1 March 2007 (MST)

Until you get a system implemented, I will mark anything that I see as ambiguous as Category:Ambiguous. That will make it easy to find pages that crop up.--Dmilewski 07:13, 3 March 2007 (MST)

I've started with four terms: quicken, climb, swim, and run. —Sledged (talk) 11:35, 1 May 2007 (MDT)

SRD Categories

Currently, none of the SRD classes are in categories such as Category:Arcane Spellcasting or Category:Divine Spellcasting. Is this something you're in charge of? (I was pointed in your direction, and nearly all the pages that need changing are locked to me...) Armond 08:54, 21 March 2007 (MDT)

I have not taken time to do this. If you crank out who should have which category, I'll paste the tags in. FYI, the usual page for requests is the SRD:Talk page. --Dmilewski 09:12, 21 March 2007 (MDT)

Redirects: Categories and Definitions

What should be done with terms that have both a definition and a category of the same (or similar) name like "humanoid" (which currently redirects to the category). It's a bit of an inconvenience to type out "SRD:Humanoid Type (Creature Type)" every time I want to link to the term, but it would also be a pain to type out ":Category:Humanoid Type" every time to link to the category. (I link to both fairly often.) Of course making it a disambiguation page would just require the long text for linking to both pages. So I thought one solution would be to use the singular ("humanoid") to redirect to the definition, and the plural ("humanoids") to redirect to the category. But then I realized that it was a partial solution at best because of elves (race), elf (creature), and elf (subtype category), and there's also words whose plural and singular forms are the same ("fey," "undead," and "vermin").

What say you? —Sledged (talk) 16:50, 8 May 2007 (MDT)

I feel your pain. As it stands, the header for SRD creatures should point to the Type and Subtype definition. For the SRD, I hard coded those. We can set the dis-ambiguous sets of [Humanoid Type] and [Humanoid Category]. That partially solves the issue. At least, that gives us a "proper" answer. That doesn't solves the "improper" answer, what to do with the generic term [humanoid].

My rule of thumb is this: point to a definition or rules wherever possible, and to a category page if there is no better place. --Dmilewski 17:34, 8 May 2007 (MDT)

Neutral Alignment Category(ies)

Should there be two neutral categories to distinguish the law-chaos axis from the good-evil axis?

• Category:Neutral (Law-Chaos) Alignment
• Category:Neutral (Good-Evil) Alignment

—Sledged (talk) 11:23, 17 May 2007 (MDT)

I always hated that in the SRD. I would strongly encourage those categories (or similarly named ones). --Armond (talk/contribs) 14:46, 17 May 2007 (MDT)

I don't see the use. However, it's easy enough to DPL up a page. If you want to add it, and there are folks who do find it useful, I don't see any harm.--Dmilewski 14:53, 17 May 2007 (MDT)

Let's see how many others would find it useful, or otherwise have an opinion. —Sledged (talk) 12:11, 26 May 2007 (MDT)

I think separate categories are a good idea, they are distinct alignments and it's odd that they're lumped together. --Daniel Draco 12:15, 26 May 2007 (MDT)

Oh, DUH, you mean Category:Neutral Good Aligned Creatures and Category:Neutral Evil Aligned Creatures, and Category:Chaotic Neutral Aligned Creatures and Category:Lawful Neutral Aligned Creatures?--Dmilewski 13:24, 26 May 2007 (MDT)

I think he's saying there ought to be one category that includes NG, TN, and NE, but nothing else, and another that includes LN, TN, and CN, but nothing else. I can see the use, though it's not hugely high-priority.--Mobius-Talk 13:30, 26 May 2007 (MDT)

Since you're soliciting opinions... There are various classes (notably Druid) that specify "any neutral alignment". This motivates the "any neutral" category. (Does that exist? I can't find it.) I, personally, have no immediate need for the suggested categories, but if others do, I see no reason to deny them. –Cúthalion (talk) 06:57, 28 May 2007 (MDT)

Right now Category:Neutral Alignment is the "any neutral" category. Any creature/NPC that has a neutral component in its alignment goes in that category. Classes are not as of yet assigned to the alignment categories. My suggestion was to replace the one category with the two proposed categories. DLP can be used to recombine them (or simulate the recombination thereof). —Sledged (talk) 08:01, 28 May 2007 (MDT)

So a few a for the new categories and no one is out-right against it. First, is anyone opposed to the category names I initially suggested, or have other suggestions for the category names? —Sledged (talk) 16:33, 8 June 2007 (MDT)

I think those should work. They may be hard to remember and type in when searching/adding them, however they are inclusive and people should easily be able to figure out what they mean. I think the benefit outweighs the possible problems. I say keep the names above. --Green Dragon 16:56, 8 June 2007 (MDT)

Awesome Job

Edit - just made this an h2 so it's not under Neutral Alignment Category(ies) 71.219.137.212 12:18, 20 May 2007 (MDT)

you are teh 733tn3ss. You just moved 8 categories around to make it easier to search :) 71.219.137.212 16:11, 19 May 2007 (MDT)

Is he l33t enough to merit a barnstar? --Armond (talk/contribs) 00:12, 20 May 2007 (MDT)

Perhaps, I think so 71.219.137.212 00:18, 20 May 2007 (MDT)

Thanks! The MIC is the 733tn3ss. Had to get those item slots sorted out.--Dmilewski 04:48, 20 May 2007 (MDT)

By the way, Barnstars can be given by anyone, even IP's. --Green Dragon 23:41, 22 May 2007 (MDT)

Barnstar

	Barnstar
	I give you this Barnstar for modernizing the categories of all the homebrew feats on D&D Wiki to match the SRD's categories, which are more accessible, and then modernizing the titles of all the feats to be more standardized. Thanks. --Green Dragon 22:28, 30 May 2007 (MDT)

Dude!

Flession 08:12, 31 March 2007 (MDT) Good God, man, do you ever sleep? Like all I see on the recent pages is your work on the SRD...In fact, I have come up with a list of things you could very well be doing instead of updating the SRD:

• Work - That's right, that thing you do when you're not watching TV or stuffing your disgusting food hole. It could very well be where you ARE right now, wasting company time, and getting paid to goof off.

• School - "We don't need no education"? Nice grammar, moron, you just proved my point. In school, you would learn that the correct way to say that phrase is "We doesn't need no education"...idiot!

• Calling Your Mom - Your mom misses you, she went through countless hours of labour to bring you into the world, and how do you repay her? You come to THIS website instead of talking to that sainted woman. For SHAME!

• Walking your dog - Yes, that poor little innocent creature whimpering by the door wants to go outside and urinate. If you don't get up off your lazy butt and walk him he's going to pee right on your rug, and whose fault would that be? Plus, you need the exercise, tubby.

• Watching TV - TV viewership is your most important role as a citizen. The networks do not spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to come up with programming, and pay executives millions of dollars for scheduling for you to goof off here. Plus, advertisers are spending billions each year to reach you, and there you sit, not even watching TV! What are you going to talk about at work tomorrow, everyone else was watching TV and YOU missed it! You will have no idea what they are talking about!

• Talking to an actual human being - Yes, remember, the art of conversation? You should interact with your fellow man...or woman.

• Exercising - Look at yourself, fat, disgusting waste of space that you are. You're a disgrace. Get up, go outside and move...ugh. If you still can.

• Making sweet, sweet love - But looking at you, and the fact that you can no longer carry on a conversation, let's skip this one.

• Masturbate - Because you obviously aren't getting sweet, sweet love.

• Volunteering at a local charity - Helping your fellow man is the most rewarding and fulfilling thing you can do. Feed the homeless, visit the sick, do something to earn some good karma points, etc. Or if you're Catholic, work off some of that time in Purgatory.

• Read a book - Sheesh, would it kill ya to read a book? Some of the modern giants of literature, like John Grisham, Stephen King, Dan Brown and Tom Clancy, require almost as little thought as watching TV!

• Spend time with your children - Seriously, your kids are punks, if you don't spend some quality time with them, they're gonna end up on the streets selling crack. Even worse, they could end up like you! *shudder*. If you have a daughter, you better go have a tea party with her NOW, or she'll wind up doing porn, or as a prostitute, or worst of all, marrying Larry King.

• Take your car to be serviced - They don't put the 3,000 mile sticker on your car because they're trying to sell motor oil... well, actually they are, but your car needs to be serviced. Maintaining it religiously doesn't mean driving around and praying nothing goes wrong!

• Learn a second language - ¿Cuántos idiomas conoce Usted? ¿Uno? ¡Tu madre es una puta vieja, fea, sucia y gorda!

• Cooking a delicious and nutritious meal - That slop you eat isn't fit for hogs! Microwaving TV dinners does not count as cooking, and going to McDonald's certainly doesn't! But if you could literally burn water, you could always take classes.

• "GET OUT THERE AND SING THE SONGS, BITCH! - (slap) Now, look what you made me do! I'm sorry, baby, I just get so mad sometimes, honest, I didn't mean it"... Sorry about that, we let Ike Turner post that one.

• Repenting your sins/praying for your eternal soul - This site is home to some of the most deplorable acts of heresy and sacrilege. If you have read any pages at all, your soul is in serious peril. Hell is no joke!

• Breastfeeding your newborn baby - That is, assuming you're female, although I've seen some dudes with big ol' jugs...

• Checking that patient you left in dialysis - Uh-oh, the machine took too much, now the patient looks like an empty Capri Sun pouch!

• Donating your liver - Do this quick, all that beer isn't doing it any favours!

• Praying to Gosh - Gosh is pure unfiltered like. If you don't like Him back, he may dang your soul to heck!

• Listening to the last words of your dying relative - He may be confessing some really juicy gossip, like where Jimmy Hoffa's buried...Or maybe confessing the location of his secret Nazi gold!!

• Checking the ignition system of the shuttle - ....3....2....1...nuthin'... better luck next time NASA!!

• Finishing that plastic surgery you started on Michael Jackson years ago - You've been particularly lapse on this. His nose fell off, for crying out loud! Finish the job, he's still 15% natural!

• Taking care of that life form you developed - (Lackadaiscalus doofi) isn't going to feed itself...although your laziness in not cleaning out the refrigerator created it in the first place.

• Running away from the giant wave - It's coming closer...closer...oh, just give up, Stand up, raise your arms, cheer, sit down, wait for it to come back around the stadium...oh, wrong wave...yeah, surf's up, WAAAAAY UP! Better make tracks, darlin'.

• Breathing - And looking at you, you're lucky I reminded you to do this... slack-jawed gawker!

• Visiting some windswept steppes - This isn't really a suggestion, I just had to tack on my signature phrase.

• Restoring this article to its original (and correct) American spelling - Seriously, what is your favorite color of humor? Dammit!!! Do me the honor of cutting that out!

• Changing the spelling of all bastardised (read: American) words to agree with the proper and honourable British spelling conventions - This is done out of spite towards the Americans, with the benefit of much humour and colourful arguments, usually threatening to ram our testicles down our oesophaguses.

• Your mom - Ba-zing!

• Join the Military - What better way to show your patriotism than to willingly throw one's life into the gory cogs of the government's war machine? You too can have every ounce of human feeling and individuality painfully scoured from the inside of your back-slanted skull and replaced with the soothing panacea of bigotry and chauvinism! Plus, you'd get to frag the hell out of some real live brown people - no more settling for the pale substitutes of bargain-bin computer games! Join today, point-n-click!

• Break your[heroin addiction - Just kidding. It's good for the economy.

• Working on your thesis - Ever notice how you've been a college student longer than most of your professors have been teaching? Ever thought there was a reason behind it?

• Blink - You might want to do this more often, causing less watery eyes when you stare at your dumb computer screen.

• Start another World War - Because hey, war is good for the economy, right?...

...hope you get a laugh out of this :D

LOL. Thanks. :P FYI, I'm on two months of paternity leave. In another few weeks, it's back to work.

Feat auto-table

Hey Dmilewski,

There's another chance to waste hours and hours on this wiki. I copied the dlpc features that auto-create the class tables for feats, but now the feats need dlpc entries. Something like:

<dplc> |{{Feat Description |<!-- feat name --> | <!-- prerequisite --> | <!-- short description of benefit --> | <!-- NBoF rating --> }} </dplc>

I mean, I just know you feel like updating all feats again :P Btw, here's one of the pages where it already works: 3.5e Spelltouched Feats --Mkill 20:46, 25 July 2007 (MDT)

Your homebrew stuff

Hi again,

I read some of your self-written feats etc., and I must say I really like your ideas. I hope you don't mind me ripping some of them apart. I found that you take some leeway when it comes to using the right game terms, and often, while I do get what the feat's intended effect is, it doesn't do what you want or it has unintended side effects. Like Balance Drills (3.5e Feat), where the difference between base reflex save and reflex save changes the whole effect.

Also, you tend to be too complicated. Animal Feat Training (3.5e Feat) uses 400 words, the one I proposed on the talk page uses merely 60. That's 20%. Experience has is that shorter and easier rules are easier to understand, easier to remember and harder to cheat.

I really respect the amount of work you put in the page so I hope you don't mind me making reviews. --Mkill 04:04, 26 July 2007 (MDT)

Game writing is technical writing. The fine points get you. I can pick out the errors and shortcomings of others quite easily, but it is hard to pick them out for myself. Your example is good one. So please, review. Comment. Make obvious corrections where necessary. Sledged is rather good at that as well. We NEED more of that here on this wiki.

I'll review Animal Feat Training. --Dmilewski 05:36, 26 July 2007 (MDT)

I know what you're talking about. I sometimes make blatant errors in stuff I wrote myself. --Mkill 06:46, 26 July 2007 (MDT)

I've noticed that you have a good eye. You're right up there with Sledged. (That man has corrected more of my errors than I can say.) Please point out things. Suggest things where they are needed. For obvious errors, just correct and note them. You don't need to write an essay. A note will do in most cases. "Changed 'Reflex Save' to 'base Reflex save'. This seems closer to what was intended."

In some areas, our thinking is just different. I tend to be "adventure oriented." For an ability to work effectively with the game as played, it must apply to a mobile adventuring party in a meaningful time frame. There are things in the base rules that are not adventure oriented. For example, Animal Handling. When I write feats for those things, I change the way that the game works. From my point of view, I take something that is not meaningful in the context of the game and make it meaningful. My animal handling feats take animal handling, which is marginal for all classes, and creates a way to make it useful for a normal adventuring character.

I've reviewed Animal Feat Training. I'll comment more there.

To reiterate. Please do comment and question. FYI, my first drafts often need to be rewritten. This is normal for me. Draft #1 usually works out the idea. Draft #2 is all about readability and flow. --Dmilewski 05:36, 26 July 2007 (MDT)

If you want to change the way how the game works, write houserules, don't make a feat. If I see a feat on the internet, I expect it to work exactly with the RAW (rules as written). If a feat is written for houserules, note that in the description and put a link to the house rule. What a feat can do is fix minor annoyances (such as all the feats that allow monks to multiclass like a normal, sane character)

And one thing is very important: Always cross-check the actual rules when you write a feat. For example, it's called "base attack bonus", not "basis attack bonus". If you're unsure about how something is called, just check it. And when you write a feat that applies to Jump checks ([[Improved Astonishing Leap (DnD Feat)]]), check the Jump description, it says right there that you can end a turn right in the middle of a jump.

A lot of what Sledged and me critized could be easily averted if you bothered to check the SRD. At least that's what I do. --Mkill 07:06, 26 July 2007 (MDT)

Mistakes aside, my writing should build from RAW. That's its intent. All my writing is houserules. The Wiki itself is almost entirely house rules. Nothing that we have written is RAW. Every submitted feat is a house rule. Every submitted class is a house rule. There is nothing wrong with house rules. Like it or not, the RAW is fair game here.

An important thing to note: Everyone here has some beef with the RAW. RAW is not holy. RAW is not unchangeable. RAW is not without flaws. I happen to like exploring off in new directions, and like seeing what it takes to make that direction work. Why else write new things?

Our philosophy on feats differs. IMHO, feats change RAW for a character, introduce abilities, remove penalties, and help make awkward things workable. In the SRD, Weapon Finesse changes RAW, Tracking introduce an ability, Improved Sunder removes a penalty, and Spring Attack makes something awkward workable. Feats are the great fudge-factors of the game. You do not need to agree with me.

For the Handle Animal feats, these struck me as something which should not be class abilities, but should work for multiple classes across the game. The fighter focusing on Handle Animal should be as viable as the Ranger focusing on Handle Animal. The Combat School feats are an exploration of what feat-intensive feats could look like. They are listed under Combat School, which are listed under Variant Rules. It's just a peculiarity of this Wiki that Green Dragon prefers feat entries broken out into separate entries. You may not like it, but that's our current policy. --Dmilewski 08:12, 26 July 2007 (MDT)

Category redirect

Dear Dmilewski,

Category redirects are teh evil. Don't ever create a category redirect (again). Never. I repeat. Never ever create redirects in the category namespace. Since you have admin status, I assume you know enough about Wikis that you understand why you should never ever do this. Thank you.

(The corpus delicti) --Mkill 11:42, 30 July 2007 (MDT)

Strong wording. That type of wording is reserved for Green Dragon or Blue Dragon.

When correcting folks, don't use a sledgehammer when a light pat will do. Lighten up. You'll get better results in changing behavior. Communicate directly, but simply. Ordinary conversational tone works well. Cite Wikipedia style if you need an authority, which is our style guide unless we've choosen to do otherwise.

I'll rewrite your wording a little. "I found a category redirect that you made for [Subtype]. Category redirects are "teh evil". I presume that you know why, but in case you don't, here's a [Wikipedia Link] which talks about this."

As it stands, I don't know why it's bad. I'll assign myself the homework of rereading Wikipedia's style guide for categories. I think that you've found the one (or two?) that I've made.

As you get to know us, you'll find that we have strength and weaknesses. For example, Sledged is our heavy-template person and a great eye for detail, Blue Dragon is just back-end, and I do the heavy editing and ambitious content creation. I've also done text-conversion scripting. I'm relatively new to MediaWiki, having started last year to convert the SRD. I don't presume to know everything. --Dmilewski 15:10, 30 July 2007 (MDT)

I'm sorry. I shouldn't post on wiki when I'm stressed out with RL stuff. I'll be more civil next time. --Mkill 07:43, 2 August 2007 (MDT)

SRD Help

Because you are labeled as the "SRD Guy" I thought of something that may help you keep it under control more (especially the talk pages). here it is. It is a recent changes that just looks at items in Category:SRD. I hope this helps you, and feel free to put it on your user-page. --Green Dragon 15:35, 11 August 2007 (MDT)

Oops, actually it will not look at the talk pages... Arrg... I need to figure out how to make that work... Sledged (or anyone really), any ideas? --Green Dragon 15:36, 11 August 2007 (MDT)

There you are:

DPL Removed because it caused an error

If you update the DPL there would be a feature to add in the edit time, too. --Mkill 08:27, 12 August 2007 (MDT)

First off, Mkill, your dpl is making an error on the page (you can see it by looking at the top). I would recommend modifying it or removing it from this page. Second off, I was more thinking an actual rc page would be better (one can see the diffs, more than 5 edits without modifying the dpl, can see who made the edit, etc). Does anyone know of a way to make that work? --Green Dragon 11:53, 14 August 2007 (MDT)

Something about the way the loop functions and the dpl extentions interact. The archive template uses the loop functions extention. If I get rid of either one, the error goes away. Looks like something to notify Blue about. —Sledged (talk) 11:55, 16 August 2007 (MDT)

Let's try it now:

• SRD:Bugbear Zombie
• SRD Talk:Diplomacy Skill
• SRD Talk:Dragon Type
• SRD Talk:Saddle
• SRD Talk:Weapons
• SRD Talk:Splint Mail
• SRD:Splint Mail
• SRD Talk:Candle of Invocation
• SRD Talk:Templates
• SRD Talk:Skeleton

—Sledged (talk) 11:58, 28 November 2007 (MST)

New Armor Template

After months of sitting in my todo list, here's the new armor template:

full plate

—Sledged (talk) 11:48, 16 August 2007 (MDT)

And material enhancements template:

enhancements

—Sledged (talk) 15:57, 16 August 2007 (MDT)

I humbly bow to your Wiki-Fu. Ready to do this again for 4.0?--Dmilewski 17:56, 16 August 2007 (MDT)

Sure... the NPC/Monster stat block is the only template I see giving me any trouble. Designed for end users, not implementers. —Sledged (talk) 14:52, 17 August 2007 (MDT)

I like it :). I also like the categories on the bottom of this talk page :P. --Green Dragon 11:39, 18 August 2007 (MDT)

I knew there was a reason I didn't include categories with the weapons template. —Sledged (talk) 13:11, 18 August 2007 (MDT)

Baby

` Due in February? Congratz! my family is also expecting a Baby in February on the 23rd. You? --Calidore Chase 11:36, 8 September 2007 (MDT)

WAS due in Feb. She's six months now. --Dmilewski 12:16, 8 September 2007 (MDT)

Babies are heavy... ROFLMAO. Mine weighs 25 pounds now! I keep expecting my arms to start looking like Arnolds from all the carrying I do. --Calidore Chase 02:41, 9 September 2007 (MDT)

Mine's 18 lbs. She got so heavy that I could no longer carry her in one arm. Now, I'm strong enough to carry her in one arm again. Yeah, those kids make you work. Some folks can put their babies down. I never could. I always had to walk and carry. Thank God she now likes to squirm on the ground. --Dmilewski 05:07, 9 September 2007 (MDT)

Mine walks and runs these days, but he still likes to be carried, much to the pain and discomfort of my arms and back. --Calidore Chase 14:24, 9 September 2007 (MDT)

Abbr. for Assassin

Now that I've finally stopped laughing, I think it would be better to use "Asn" as an abbreviation for "Assassin." You risk causing abdominal injuries with readers if you use "Ass". —Sledged (talk) 11:33, 27 September 2007 (MDT)

Doh! Well, you got a good laugh out of it. LOL. (Though in my defense, if there's an assassin at the table, there's usually an ass at the table as well.)--Dmilewski 11:37, 27 September 2007 (MDT)

Lol. I concur. --Green Dragon 22:30, 27 September 2007 (MDT)

If I may, I would suggest using 'sin', as in assas'sin'. We use this term in Guild Wars, an online MMORPG, and it seems to wark more, uhhh, aproprietly than trying to use the first letters. Zau 11:29, 27 April 2008 (MDT)

I second that- 'asn' could mean multiple things, and could get confused with 'assn'. It is also a clever pun on the assasin's job. --Palantini 23:31, 18 May 2008 (MDT)

Spell Categories

After all the changes you have made to the spell categories, if I were you, I may want to take a look at all the DPL's that deal with spells (such as in 3.5e Complex Special Ability Components) and fix them up... --Green Dragon 23:22, 1 October 2007 (MDT)

Your Feats

Hey, I just noticed your edits on your feats today—changing them to general feats and what not. However, now that they are general feats, I would imagine that it would be good if they were linked to from 3.5e General Feats so people, coming to D&D Wiki, can see them. If you don't have the time or would rather I add them to 3.5e General Feats please let me know. Thanks Dmilwski! --Green Dragon 15:47, 9 October 2007 (MDT)

Thanks for the reminder. I'll do it. I keep forgetting that those lists aren't DPL scripts.--Dmilewski 20:15, 9 October 2007 (MDT)

No problem. Anyway, all the feat pages really need to be upgraded sometime to use dplc's... Their is a lot to do on D&D Wiki, as I am sure you know :). --Green Dragon 20:17, 9 October 2007 (MDT)

About the DPLCs; I've been tinkering with the later versions of DPL2 on the official web site, and I've found that many of tasks (if not all) that Blue's customizations do, can be done with latest version of DPL2. Though the last time Blue tried to update DPL2, there were some issues. I don't know for sure, but I think it may be due to the global variables used by DPL2 and Blue's customizations. Anyway, I wouldn't mind exploring the idea of trying to upgrade DPL2 again. —Sledged (talk) 22:21, 9 October 2007 (MDT)

I am 100% for the idea of trying to update them again. --Green Dragon 23:10, 15 October 2007 (MDT)

Deleting Doubler Redirects

Hey, Dmilewski, those "double redirect delete" edits you have done tody have been adding content from several pages into single pages (it happened to Balrog and Aztec Warrior)... Can you sort it, please? --Sam Kay 11:42, 20 October 2007 (MDT)

Bot issues

Hello Dmilewski! Sorry that I just recently blocked you, but I pulled the site a few minutes ago thinking that I had a very serious database problem which was merging all of the tables together. Upon further inspection, however, I realized that it was just a bot gone wrong! Try to get the bot fixed ASAP, and an anonymous edit on this page will get you unblocked right away. Sorry for the problems! — Blue Dragon (talk) 12:30, 20 October 2007 (MDT)

I've got the bot stopped. My sincerest apologies for bad edits. How do you want to rectify this? I can revert by hand.

The bot ran correctly until the most recent edits to the script. Before I run the bot further, I will track down the error. Dmilewski.

Hello Dmilewski. Me and Green Dragon should have the reverts covered, but you might want to look over everything seeing that six eyes are better than four. :). I have unblocked your user. Try not to let this happen again, but luckily it didn't run too long without being noticed! — Blue Dragon (talk) 12:42, 20 October 2007 (MDT)

Thanks. I'll leave you guys to work that out. I'll give the bot a rest. I tracked down the error. In tracking down a different error, I turned something off and forgot to turn it back on.

I normally spot check my bot as it runs, but baby-duty distracted me. I'll have to restrict bot changes to times when I can verify the edits while the bot runs. Dmilewski.

Please join the WFR Guild

I have watched your tireless work with wonder and awe. I cannot imagine how much work you have put into this site. I applaud your efforts, and wish to personally welcome you as an honorary member of the WFR Guild, along with Green Dragon and the other amazing members of this site. I am the Guild Headmaster currently, and would love to have all of you join. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns about what it takes to join. Non-Elftown Members are a really new concept for my moderators, so please be patient, and let them know that 'xido' personally asked you to join from http://www.dandwiki.com . That goes for Green Dragon and everyone else who has proven their worth here. I welcome you all. -- xido 18:23, 4 November 2007 (MST)

Neutral vs Nonaligned

You've categorized some creature's as neutral-aligned (both axes) and some as nonaligned. What exactly is the difference between the two? —Sledged (talk) 16:12, 28 November 2007 (MST)

Neutral-axis creatures are creature that could make moral choices. Nonaligned creatures are one that do not have the capacity to understand morality. There's a few creatures that I'm not sure of because they seem nonaligned, but they are smart enough to understand, such as elementals, griffons, and behemoth animals. In general, anything with a 2 or less intelligence and is "always neutral" is nonaligned. --Dmilewski 18:53, 28 November 2007 (MST)

I'm not sure that distinction needs to be made, or that users will immediately understand the difference. It also begs the question "what about non-neutral creatures that lack the capacity to understand morality like skeletons, zombies, and retrievers?"

On a semi-related note, for a while I've been wondering whether or not there should be [[:Category:Usual Alignment]] and [[:Category:Always Alignment]] categories. —Sledged (talk) 10:43, 29 November 2007 (MST)

Good questions.

Nonaligned began as a way to identify creatures that were always neutral. I've dithered about this a bit, and I think that labeling them as "always neutral" a clearer move. I've had this on my personal list of things to do.

I don't see a strong need for categories for "usually" or "always" alignment other than neutral creatures. How do you see this being useful?--Dmilewski 12:05, 29 November 2007 (MST)

Just another level of categorization, and for uniformity; I figure if you're going to tag the neutral creatures with "usual" and "always" you might as well do it across the board. —Sledged (talk) 12:12, 30 November 2007 (MST)

As a DM, I am wondering- will a nonaligned monster attack the weakest player or the player who attacked it last?--Palantini 23:34, 18 May 2008 (MDT)

Non-aligned is only a tag. It says nothing about behavior. --Dmilewski 06:40, 19 May 2008 (MDT)

On that point, how SHOULD I determine who a monster will attack? Should I allow its int. lvl. to influence this? Should it be the weaker player? Who dealt it the most damage? who dealt damage last? Palantini 00:32, 20 May 2008 (MDT)

That's a complex question. Go to [DnD_Discussion] and ask that question.--Dmilewski 06:46, 20 May 2008 (MDT)

Teleportation Categories (Effect, Subschool, and Subdiscipline)

In the pages SRD:Spells and SRD:Powers, teleportation is the only subschool/subdiscipline listed under "Effects" that isn't a spell/power descriptor. So, of course, I noticed that there are three different categories for teleportation, whereas all the other subschools/subdisciplines do not have an "effect" category. All spells/powers of a specific subschools/subdisciplines are effects of those types, as are all spells/powers with specific descriptors are effects of those types. In fact, the only difference between a subschool/subdiscipline and a descriptor (that I can tell) is that a subschool/subdiscipline is always part of a specific school/discipline, whereas a descriptor can be assigned to a spell/power of any school/discipline. How would you feel about replacing all the subschool/subdiscipline categories with effect categories?

Lastly, I suggest renaming the header "Effects" in the SRD:Spells and SRD:Powers pages to "Descriptors" and removing teleportation from the list (or alternatively leave the header as is and add all the other subschools/subdisciplines to the list, but that seems a bit redundant). —Sledged (talk) 11:43, 4 December 2007 (MST)

I feel strongly that a spell should be tagged with its appropriate school and subschool, along with any descriptors it has. I know that the rules use Teleportation in three different ways, and that this can be confusing. So be it. The issue is the rules, not the categorization. I only create categories for categories that are apparent in a description or categories that are referenced in the text. Teleportation is referenced as a Subschool, a Subdiscipline, and an Effect. Thus, by self-definition, teleportation gains three categories. Each category serves a different purpose. This may be sloppy, but those are what the rules give me.

In most instances, a usage of "X effect" is referred to its subschool or subdiscipline. It is only in the case of an effect having both a subschool and a discipline that I create a separate effect entry. Teleportation is particularly evil as it has a subschool, a subdiscipline, and is used as a bracketed [Effect]. Sloppy, but true.--Dmilewski 15:08, 4 December 2007 (MST)

Ooooh... That is nasty. Didn't notice that before.

I think I'm going to contact WotC CustServ on this one. It looks like a throw-back from 3.0, under which teleportation was only a descriptor, not a subschool/subdiscipline (or so I'm concluding. I don't have a 3.0 PHB/SRD in front of me confirmed). I'm seeing that the only spells and powers with it as a descriptor are the power decerebrate, the epic seed transport, and few epic spells that use the transport seed: damnation, dreamscape, safe time, and time duplicate. I think we can chalk up the power as an isolated incident. And the epic rules got the short end of the 3.5 updates in several ways.

To complicate the issue even further, the epic spells eclipse and eidolon, which require the transport seed, have the descriptor "Transportation" instead of "Teleportation."

And as a side note, nailed to the sky has "Teleportation" as a descriptor, but the page is tagged with the subschool. —Sledged (talk) 15:44, 4 December 2007 (MST)

In most instances, a usage of "X effect" is referred to its subschool or subdiscipline.

That statement is a bit misleading, because it always depends on the term preceding the word "effect."

• "Abjuration," "conjuration," "divination," "enchantment," "evocation," "illusion," "necromancy," and "transmutation" always refer to the schools,
• "calling," "charm," "compulsion," "creation," "figment," "glamer," "healing," "pattern," "phantasm," "scrying," "shadow," and "summoning" always refer to the subschools,
• "acid," "air," "chaotic," "cold," "darkness," "death," (which is missing in the SRD:Spells page) "earth," "electricity," "evil," "good," "fear," "fire," "force," "language-dependent," "lawful," "light," "mind-affecting," "sonic," and "water" always refer to the descriptors,
• and a couple miscellaneous effects, such as "sleep" and "moral," (not necessarily a comprehensive list), refer to none of the above.

As for "teleportation" and "transportation," after looking up the 3.0 PHB, the ELH, and the 3.0 SRD, I'm 100% sure those are mistakes. According to Developing Epic Spells, When two or more epic seeds are combined in an epic spell, all the descriptors from each seed apply to the finished spell. None the seeds used to create eclipse and eidolon have the "transportation" descriptor, and the only descriptor among the used seeds is "teleportation." So there never was "transportation" descriptor or effect.

Under, 3.0 "teleportation" was, in fact, a descriptor and not a subschool (and teleport was a transmutation spell). So the transport seed and the epic spells dreamscape, eclipse, eidolon, nailed to the sky, safe time, and time duplicate should be part of the "teleportation" subschool instead of having the "teleportation" (or "transportation") descriptor, and damnation should just have it removed without it being replaced with the subschool (it's an enchantment spell). —Sledged (talk) 11:50, 5 December 2007 (MST)

There's a trainwreck. Will you do the updates?--Dmilewski 12:46, 5 December 2007 (MST)

Ok, The above power, seed, and spells have been fixed. Do you want the "sub(discipline)school" -> "effect" change, too? And while were on the subject, since under the psionics-magic transparency rule, clairsentience, metacreativity, psychokinesis, psychometabolism, and telepathy powers are equivalent to divination, conjuration, evocation, transmutation, and enchantment spells respectively why not change "school" to "effect," too? Then the appropriate disciplines can be categorized as their magic equivalents. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sledged (talk • contribs) 13:34, 5 December 2007 (MDT). Please sign your posts.

Let's table that for the moment. I think that changing everything to "effect" will cause as many problems as it resolves. For now, let's categorize the Category:subschool and Category:subdomain categories as their appropriate effect. --Dmilewski 18:38, 5 December 2007 (MST)

Unearthed Arcana

So I started transcribing some Unearthed Arcana material. Seeing how you are kind of the admin responsible for the SRD content, I thought I'd put it past you (at Green Dragon's suggestion). Take a look: UA:Reputation. If you think this looks good, I'll continue to do more at my leisure. Comments? --Othtim 23:58, 14 January 2008 (MST)

Barnstar

	Barnstar
	I am giving Dmilewski this barnstar for helping with our growing list of publications here on D&D Wiki. He added most of the current publications, quite a hefty task in and of itself, and really is helping D&D Wiki have a comprehensive list of all d20 publications. Thank you so much for helping with this enormous task. --Green Dragon 18:02, 24 January 2008 (MST)

WOW

I just arrived here yesterday and I saw all the publications you were updateing in the recent list so I had a look at your page and have seen all the work your doing and have done its just awe inspiring! Sorry was having a little trouble with the template I ported over from wikipedia for the barnstar should look better now. Hawk 08:24, 6 February 2008 (MST)

	The Rosetta Barnstar
	For all the work you've done translateing the SRD from Wizards into wiki form my hat is off to you sir. Hawk 08:24, 6 February 2008 (MST)

Catkin

Response moved from User talk:Zombiecow#Catkin as the discussion was started here. --Green Dragon 21:35, 24 February 2008 (MST)

Hey, I'm currently making a campaign setting, would It be alright if I put your Catkin (3.5e Race) into it as one of the races in my world?, cos that would be great, I'm Zombiecow 00:48, 23 February 2008

Everything that I have put up on there Wiki is here to be used. Please use what you will. --Dmilewski 07:46, 23 February 2008 (MST)

thanks a bunch dude, your a legend! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zombiecow (talk • contribs) 00:03, 25 February 2008 (MST). Please sign your posts.

Novels, magazines, ETC.

Green Dragon told me to come to you about whats being done with these. I saw the section with dargon magazine and stuff. I have a bunch of books from AD&D up to dnd 3.5, plus i have about 100 editions of dragon magazine, and i have polyhedron, another DND magazine. What exactly do you want done with this stuff?--Cerin616, Drew 13:42, 23 March 2008 (MDT)

At the moment, we are just working documenting what existed, who the various publishers are, what they published, when it was published, etc. Basic stuff like that. Look at what I did for the Wizards of the Coast section, including product information, categories, and images. Do you think that you can replicate that for your publications?

At this point, I have not given any thought about what we should do with magazines. My initial suggestion is to document the major articles in each issue. For example:

• Sailing Bards by Stan Rogers
• The Huns of Navaronne (an Alternate Earth Adventure) by J. Joe Smith
• Whittler Prestige Class by Y. Ankee

I hope that this helps.--Dmilewski 18:52, 23 March 2008 (MDT)

haven't been on in a while but yea ill try and do something. like i said i got a ton of works.--Cerin616, Drew 17:53, 11 April 2008 (MDT)

Monster Requirements

For a while, I have been wondering what I need for each of my monsters (stats). I have a lot but not sure if it is all that is required. Could you please list all the info I need for my monsters or lead me to a sight that does so? Thanks. Palantini 18:37, 21 May 2008 (MDT)

You can take a look at CR Estimation Table (3.5e Guideline). This is an article that I never finished. It should help to figure final metrics. My suggestion to you is to take an existing creature an modify it in some way. If you want a new giant, find an existing giant. You also want to look at SRD:Creatures and SRD:Improving Creatures. You can also "repaint" a creature. I use this cheat all the time. If I want a water giant, I take a fire giant and I call it a water giant. My players never know any different. Likewise, a dire bat could be a pteradactyle. Groucho Marx had a saying, "I only steal from the best." It's a good truism to live by. Stealing is quicker and immensely effective. --Dmilewski 19:20, 21 May 2008 (MDT)

Thank you very much for the suggestion- I will go to the store and buy the Monster Manual immediantly...unless I can find a full archive here... Do you think I should buy a copy? Palantini 20:25, 21 May 2008 (MDT)

We have most of the monster manual in the SRD. Look under creatures.--Dmilewski 06:51, 22 May 2008 (MDT)

--Dmilewski 14:22, 14 November 2008 (MST)

Homebrew Setting

I've been reading your Endhaven pages, and I think you've got a great world set up. I'm working on adding our group's home-world, Valgora, onto the wiki. Was seeing if you've got any pointers or suggestions to make it more wikiable. Also, if I understand right, you did alot of the SRD wiki'n and was wondering how good your wiki skills are. I'm trying to make a bottom footer navigation box template (much like you see across wikipedia, with the show/hide feature and categorized page links) and just can't figure it out for the life of me. If not, who would be the user to ask for assistance?   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   13:23, 14 November 2008 (MST)

For technical-fu, talk to Sledged. My skills are good, but my time is short. 2-year-olds suck down time. Kids are very rewarding work, but they do leave you juggling priorities.

Endhaven is an adventure-centric world. Why adventure? Why go somewhere? How can you make a difference? That's the ideal behind Endhaven. The heroes and villains aren't special invaders, but your own faults turned outward. My structure supports that ideal. I want you, a DM, and see adventure ideas. I want you to see hooks to steal. Want the Loam in your world? Steal 'em. I want a world that rocks so well that you WANT to steal it.

What is your ideal? What makes your place come together? Why adventure there? What makes your world worth saving? Those are the things that you should be focusing on. --Dmilewski 14:22, 14 November 2008 (MST)

FYI

I recently cleared out the broken and double redirects. Alot of the double redirects where old wikiworld that had been moved once or twice before settling on Endhaven. You may want to take a quick glance over the Candidates for Deletion to see all the blank old wikiworld redirect pages just to make sure nothings amiss. I don't foresee anything being wrong but just a head's up.   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   13:05, 24 December 2008 (MST)

AdminBadge

I'd like to label you as an admin with the [[Template:AdminBadge]] on your user page. If you have a reason you don't think you should have the badge or you don't think the badge is a good idea, please discuss it on the badge's discussion. -Valentine the Rogue 16:05, 11 April 2009 (MDT)

Cool. --Dmilewski 16:41, 11 April 2009 (MDT)

Regarding sorting/categories/SRD namespace

With regard to this discussion, on the page SRD:Green Dragon, where it says

[[Category:Creature]]

it should say

[[Category:Creature|{{subst:BASEPAGENAME}}]]

This can be replicated for all categories on all pages in the SRD namespace. --Superiority 06:15, 20 April 2009 (MDT)

Additionally, you should also add sorting for some of the protected templates that use categories, like this one (those categories also need to be wrapped in <includeonly></includeonly> tags). The process for templates is the same as for articles, except you would not use {{subst:BASEPAGENAME}}, just {{BASEPAGENAME}}. --Superiority 06:37, 20 April 2009 (MDT)

Script

What libraries, if any, are you using to run your script/bot? If you have something based on Perl's WWW::Mechanize, do you mind sharing it? I've been waiting for api.php to allow for editing but it seems progress there has stalled, so I should probably rewrite my pending bots to use something else. Surgo 20:12, 22 April 2009 (MDT)

User:Dmilewski/Wikibot -- There you go. I only edit in the bottom subroutine. It needs some love, but it WORKS, which is why I don't edit it.

Stop

when you are changing all the SRD Endhaven stuff, you are spelling supplement wrong--Morlock Night 21:32, 22 April 2009 (MDT)

Firstly, put it at the bottom of the talk page. Secondly, they're patrolled edits and are for a purpose, if you don't want to look at them; just press the Hide Patrolled Edits link. --TK-Squared 22:32, 22 April 2009 (MDT)

Also, he's not doing anything involving supplements at all -- the edit summary is wrong. There's no problem. Surgo 22:50, 22 April 2009 (MDT)

I forgot to change that value in the script. *sigh* I always forget to do that.--Dmilewski 04:18, 23 April 2009 (MDT)

RPG

Just a short question: The [[Role-playing game]] page, do you think it would be useful to link it to something else for categorization? It seems a handy page and its a shame it can't be put to more use. --Ganteka 20:00, 14 July 2009 (MDT)

Personally, I think we should RIP Wikipedia, then apply categories. Do what you want. I have no good suggestions on categories. Maybe a [Term] or [Jargon] category? --Dmilewski 18:24, 15 July 2009 (MDT)

We have a spot for Terms on the User Creature Glossary, we just don't have any terms yet. Though, that would imply it was specific to 3.5e, which yeah... I guess nevermind for now. If I figure anything out that works, I'll implement it. For now, it isn't a big deal. --Ganteka 14:31, 16 July 2009 (MDT)

Sewer Rats Campaign Setting

Not to sound like I'm attacking the setting, as it is quite good and obviously a lot of work has been put into it, but I really don't think this should be rated a five. The main reason being that its presentation is just terrible, I've seen a number of settings about equivalent to this be rated 4 or even 3 because they were set up like this one is. So until this can be changed I'm strongly urging that this setting be made a 4/5. I'm hoping to hear back about this, or see the rating changed... or both. :) Anyways, hopefully this issue can be resolved and the setting can be brought back up to 5/5 standards, because it's definitely deserving of it otherwise. :)--Vrail 18:32, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Description of Grand Fantasia

　　BSEditor: Grand Fantasia is a free-to-play massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) set in an expansive and carefully crafted fantasy world. Grand Fantasia Gold offers players a variety of innovative and engaging features, including: character and sprite customization, a branching class system, sprite crafting, an incredible menagerie of mounts, player-versus-player (PvP) combat, team-based battlefields, challenging dungeons, epic region and world bosses, a player statue feature, in-game bulletin boards, auction houses, a player romance system, robust guild management and communication tools, and a host of quests (solo, party, and guild) that will entertain gamers of all play styles.

　　Features:

　　- Explore the magical world of Saphael

　　Level up your character as you progress through the various quests in each region. Gather some friends and Grand Fantasia Gold attempt to conquer some of the challenging instanced dungeons.

　　- Branching Class Trees

　　Begin your adventure as a Novice and quickly gain the option of branching into 1 of 4 classes. Select specialization classes at level 5, 15, and 30 to ultimately choose from a total of 8 character classes. Further customization is available through the Alternate Advancement System!

　　- Customizable Sprite Companion

　　Create your very own sprite to travel with you. This companion can harvest raw materials for you and Grand Fantasia Gold even craft weapons and armor!

　　- Player Mounts

　　Famous heroes don’t walk; they ride in style. Choose from numerous mounts, each with unique requirements so players of all types can gain them.

　　- Auction House

　　Located in the major cities, Auction Houses serve as a central hub for item sales. Sellers post items for sale and Cheap Grand Fantasia Gold don’t have to be tied down while doing so. Buyers have a central place to look and don’t need to scour player merchant stalls.

Publications

I know you uploaded most if not all of the publications for 3.5e into the wiki, and I was wondering if you had any issues with me add stuff (from the books) to those pages?-- Irykyl 09:59, 7 February 2012 (MST)

Irykyl does not mean the actual non-OGC content, but instead adding things like Complete Divine has. --Green Dragon 10:31, 7 February 2012 (MST)

Right. I have only updated Dragon Magic and Races of the Wild so far, although I have plans on working on others.-- Irykyl 10:35, 7 February 2012 (MST)

Homebrew Feats Page

I would like your advice on a project I have undertaken. The 3.5e Feats page is quite badly categorized. I have created a suggested homepage and made links for it and everything. now all i need is for someone to check my work, improve my coding, stuff like that. I was wondering if you might be interested in helping me out a bit. The suggested page is [[Suggested Homebrew Feats page|here]]. There is a discussion here. Most of the time I will not be able to respond immediately to any suggestions or questions, but I will respond as quickly as I can. --Salasay Δ 10:59, 15 January 2013 (MST)

Request for Adminship

You are being reevaluated for adminship: Requests for Adminship/Dmilewski. Since I doubt that you will respond to this message by the time of your nomination, I would like to say that D&D Wiki is very grateful for your assistance and should you decide to return your work will always be appreciated. --Green Dragon (talk) 09:04, 9 August 2014 (MDT)

Your work as an administrator was appreciated, and we would like to see you fulfill that role if you feel it is something you want to pursue. The option is always available for your expertise. Thanks again. --Green Dragon (talk) 15:01, 16 August 2014 (MDT)