User talk:Ideasmith

Welcome to D&D Wiki!

Welcome!

Hello Ideasmith, and welcome to D&D Wiki. I hope you have been enjoying this site, and I hope you have been finding the information here on D&D Wiki useful. I am an admin (and, actually, the owner as well) here on D&D Wiki along with a couple other people who make up "The Face" of D&D Wiki. An entire list of admins can be found here.

Questions

If you have any question about D&D Wiki, D&D, formatting on D&D Wiki, what day today is, or whatever, an admin will, many times, give the best answer. Please feel free to ask any admin any question (ask me a question!).

Formatting

Formatting on D&D Wiki (or any wiki for that matter) can be very difficult, and if you need help a good place to start is Help:Editing on Wikipedia (or even their Introduction page). This will explain the basic wiki formatting and should provide quite a few useful links that explain more specific areas of wiki formatting. Again, if you have any questions about formatting on D&D Wiki please ask them as, I imagine, anybody will be more than happy to help you get them answered.

Community

A strong and welcoming community exists on D&D Wiki, and I am sure you will find it rather nice. Most discussions take place on content talk pages, however please feel free to walk into The Tavern (our local chat room) and talk to some fellow D&D Wikians. Anyway, on D&D Wiki, possibly since discussions are never deleted, people try to be nice. This means please follow Wikipedia's guidelines on Civility and Etiquette when discussing anything. And, if an argument does arise, please use Wikipedia's Dispute Resolution to make sure everyone comes out happy. Also, on a pretty different note, to ensure people know who posted what, please sign your name after a post with four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the signature icon. This will automatically produce your name and the date. Anyway, I hope you come to love the close-knit D&D Wiki community and welcome again, you are now a D&D Wikian. --Green Dragon 10:48, 20 October 2008 (MDT)

Merging

While I don't really understand the point of a class which just turns into another class whenever, I can say that all four variants out there are similar enough where it may be wise to compress them into one. If I understand your pattern of making a 'fighter type', 'skill type', 'magic type', etc sort of progression, what I suggest is the following.

Lowest HD you have. All poor saves. Poor BAB. The usual "metamorphasis" things they all share. The spell list (though I must say spells make it better than any other unfledged type).

Then, as a class feature, say "Pick a type. If you're a fighter, you get Good BAB, good fort, and d10s, and 2+Int, leave everything else the same." "For skill type you get medium BAB, good reflex... etc etc etc."

This will save on safe and prevent what is more or less four roughly identical classes. It's been done before, I highly suggest it. -- Eiji 19:45, 1 July 2009 (MDT)

Just added the Partial Metamorphosis class feature to the unfledged. Does that handle your concerns?--Ideasmith 14:21, 2 July 2009 (MDT)

short answer? No.

longer answer? Absolutely not.

Compelte answer? They need to be one class, plain and simple, no negotiation. To explain, I to work to make sure the move to merge them was done, because the alternative was putting all four of them up for deletion. That's how bad the situation of these classes are. Most everyone thinks the very concept of these classes is worthless, but I think that maybe, if you look from a really skewed angle, someone somewhere might use it. I'm about the only one on your side in that. But four classes using the exact same -already- shakey concept? There is just no justification for that. This way, you have a chance to keep -something- alive. You've even got the choice of merging them however you want (though that would probably be because no one cares enough to do that kind of work on these classes themselves). To give yousome help, there are two ways you can do this: one, you remove all content from three of the pages and just stick with one of the existing pages, or two, create a new page and remove all content from all four existing ones. We'll take care of the rest. --TheWarforgedArtificer 14:55, 2 July 2009 (MDT)

If, after determining that my replacement for the apprentice wizard, rookie,and tyro classes wasn't more objectionable than the classes it replaces, I then removed them, would that handle your concerns? I would much rather remove them after I am sure of the replacement.--Ideasmith 16:52, 2 July 2009 (MDT)

??? are you saying you're planning to replace three of them with entirely new classes? If so, then yes, that would work. --TheWarforgedArtificer 18:16, 2 July 2009 (MDT)

No, I'm saying that I'm in the process of replacing three of them with a class feature of the Unfledged class, which is what I thought you asked me to do. --Ideasmith 18:40, 2 July 2009 (MDT)

...Uh, no. we're -telling- you that, one way or another, at least three of these pages will not exist eventually. You get to choose which one stays. --TheWarforgedArtificer 18:56, 2 July 2009 (MDT)

I still want to know the answer, so I will ask again: Is the Unfledged class feature 'partial metamorphosis', which I designed as a replacement for the apprentice caster, rookie, and tyro classes, acceptable to the group you are speaking for. --Ideasmith 20:20, 2 July 2009 (MDT)

I'm...not exactly sure what you're asking. What do you mean, "is the unfledged feature an aceptable replacement for the other three classes"? --TheWarforgedArtificer 20:53, 2 July 2009 (MDT)

Whoa whoa whoa. I'm not sure why TheWarforgedArtificer is coming off so aggressive here, and especially saying stuff like "we're -telling- you that, one way or another, at least three of these pages will not exist eventually" -- something that has no "we" and is also not in any way his call to make. Surgo 23:10, 2 July 2009 (MDT)

I apologize for failing to notice that the person who replied to my question concerning the class feature was not the person who suggested the class feature. --Ideasmith 13:48, 6 July 2009 (MDT)

And that would be me (resets the indent). Actually what you did wasn't quite what I was going for, so lemme try to explain this better. The four classes are as is, too similar. It's kind of like having two classes which are basically Fighter, with one being 2+Int and d10, another 4+Int and d8, an other minor differences.

Thus I was proposing that rather make four classes with little differences in BAB and skills and HD, you simply have a single class. The class would give you the power to modify it into the four other original classes, but instead of taking four pages, it only takes one, see?

If you need my aid in doing this I'll try. I'll stop here and see if you got this part first though. -- Eiji 15:28, 6 July 2009 (MDT)

I don't see any difference between what you are asking for and what I have done.

What you seem to be asking for is a class which combines the disadvantages of the four classes, with a class feature which gives it the abilities of any one of the four classes.

As far as I can tell, the unfledged was already a class which combines the disadvantages of the four classes, and partial metamorphosis is a class feature which gives it the abilities of any one of the other three classes.--Ideasmith 16:21, 6 July 2009 (MDT)

How does what I have now differ from what you are asking for?--Ideasmith 19:06, 6 July 2009 (MDT)