User talk:Qetuth: Difference between revisions
(→Too many bestiary categories!: new section) |
>Qetuth |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
You're being a bit overzealous with categorization here. There's no actual reason to have a category listing the monsters for each and every zone—eg., [[:Category:Monsters in The Ledge]] and [[:Category:Monsters in The Flooded Depths]]—when one can simply go to the page for [[The Ledge]] or [[The Flooded Depths]] and see a complete listing of the mobs in that zone. That said, the monster type categories actually serve a purpose. Keep those, but get rid of the monsters-by-zone categories. —[[User:Vinifera7|Vini]] ([[User talk:Vinifera7|t]]|[[Special:Contributions/Vinifera7|c]]) 11:32, 12 November 2013 (UTC) | You're being a bit overzealous with categorization here. There's no actual reason to have a category listing the monsters for each and every zone—eg., [[:Category:Monsters in The Ledge]] and [[:Category:Monsters in The Flooded Depths]]—when one can simply go to the page for [[The Ledge]] or [[The Flooded Depths]] and see a complete listing of the mobs in that zone. That said, the monster type categories actually serve a purpose. Keep those, but get rid of the monsters-by-zone categories. —[[User:Vinifera7|Vini]] ([[User talk:Vinifera7|t]]|[[Special:Contributions/Vinifera7|c]]) 11:32, 12 November 2013 (UTC) | ||
:Errr, good point. Sorry. --[[User:Qetuth|Q]][[User:Qetuth|etuth]]-([[User talk: Qetuth|talk]]) 11:35, 12 November 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 11:35, 12 November 2013
Passive node locations
I don't recommend putting in the locations of basic passive nodes, as you did with Aura Effect. Not only is this information liable to become outdated very quickly, but it's extremely tedious for people to update, which means it won't get updated. —Vini (t|c) 15:22, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
- Well, with official release I'm secretly hoping for a lot fewer changes to the tree, maybe annually or so... But you're right. And it obviously wouldn't work for say Life or Strength. Do you think a simple count of those with 2-6 nodes, and nearby notables in a related passives section, would be okay? --Qetuth-(talk) 22:36, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Too many bestiary categories!
You're being a bit overzealous with categorization here. There's no actual reason to have a category listing the monsters for each and every zone—eg., Category:Monsters in The Ledge and Category:Monsters in The Flooded Depths—when one can simply go to the page for The Ledge or The Flooded Depths and see a complete listing of the mobs in that zone. That said, the monster type categories actually serve a purpose. Keep those, but get rid of the monsters-by-zone categories. —Vini (t|c) 11:32, 12 November 2013 (UTC)