Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18
  1. #1
    Senior Member Beruin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    228
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    0

    Militant Order of CuiraÚcen

    Discussion thread for Militant Order of CuiraÚcen. If you would like to add a comment, click the Post Reply button.
    Last edited by Thelandrin; 09-29-2007 at 06:09 PM. Reason: Corrected link to point to actual page.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Beruin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    228
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    0
    Okay, I just started here, it's my first try with the wiki and there's not much here yet - and some things are still wrong from using other templates/Boilerplates.
    However I really wanted to add a table for non-landed holdings as a template, you know with the headings
    Holding - Level - Province/Ratings - Domain/Ruler
    but I just couldn't get this darn thing to work.

    Please help! (and explain what you did, so I might learn a bit)

    As an afterthought, I really think we need a template for non-landed domains, at least I couldn't find one. However, as should be obvious I know next to nothing about creating wikis, so I definitely can't do this.
    Any takers?
    Last edited by Beruin; 09-28-2007 at 03:05 AM. Reason: Added an afterthought

  3. #3
    Site Moderator Sorontar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    3,942
    Downloads
    23
    Uploads
    1
    The tables that normally indicate holdings for provinces etc use a {{Domain/Begin}} template and a {{Domain/End}} template call. The first template sets the headings and defines the table styles and supposedly uses another style as well (but I can't find that one). The second just closes the table off.

    cf. http://www.birthright.net/brwiki/ind...e:Domain/Begin
    cf. http://www.birthright.net/brwiki/ind...ate:Domain/End

    So if you want to set your own headings you will either have to write your own {{Holdings/Begin}} template or manually cut and paste the relevant stuff from the {{Domain/Begin}} one. For instance:


    {| {{BRWiki: Domain/Table}}
    ! Holding !! Level !! Province/Ratings !! Domain/Ruler
    |-
    ||Joe's Taverns || 2 || Roesone || Ghoried/Joe
    |-
    ||Josie's Haberdashery || 3 || Roesone || Roseone/Josie

    |width=5|
    |}

    See this in action at http://www.birthright.net/brwiki/ind...Wiki:Sandbox/2

    However, people so far have generally just used the domain style, even if it gives information about holdings not related to the organisation/individual being discussed in the article. What is it that you want that this style won't show? Or is it a matter of clarity and relevancy?

    For more help on understanding BRWiki tables, see http://www.birthright.net/brwiki/index.php/Help:Table

    Sorontar

  4. #4
    Senior Member Beruin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    228
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    0
    Thanks Sorontar, that helped. I tried a few things you mentioned, but just couldn't get them to work right. Well, still learning..

    As for the format, I believe this is clearer and it removes unnecessary clutter from the table (i.e. guild holdings for a temple). This makes it clearer, especially for larger non-landed domains stretching over several realms

  5. #5
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    I prefer the clutter. The format used the BoP has too little information. I prefer to use the realm format for all organizations because you can see at a glance who the domain interacts with, not just who has title to the land.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Beruin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    228
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    0
    I should've put " unnecessary clutter" in quotation marks I guess, of course the information is not useless. However, my reasoning for preferring the format for other holdings - used not only in BoP, but also in the atlas and the other regional books - is that it's easier to see the geographical spread of a particular non-landed domain over several realms and to notice where it is strong and where weak.

    That's usually the first information I want to know, whether as player or DM. To then see with whom the domain interacts, I'd consult the relevant realm entries.

    Should we do a poll to keep the format consistent in the wiki or is this not that important?

  7. #7
    Site Moderator AndrewTall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Chelmsford, Essex, England
    Posts
    2,305
    Downloads
    25
    Uploads
    0
    I prefer the clutter, but would suggest highlighting the temple column to show it more clearly. Or given I don't know how to highlight on a wiki table, putting the temple stuff in bold.

    I'd note that the temple may well hold law and / or guilds so a simple column either mixes up holdings or misses out 'non' core holdings for each organisation

  8. #8
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    I do think consistency is important. Each domain should navigate like every other domain.

    I like the idea of being able to see the geographical spread of temples, but I generally find that its just as easy with the standard format as it is with the limited format. As long as the standard format follows a sensible geographic order (rather than being alphabetical or random) its pretty easy to see where a domain has sway.

    I would also like to see maps. I think the perfect map would use the icons from the Gorgon's alliance to denote where and how big a holding is, but I suspect the introduction of Microprose's efforts would prove a stumbling block for the IP issues.

  9. #9
    IMO, a realm table should contain data pertaining to one realm and a domain table should contain data pertaining to one domain.

    They serve two different functions: a realm table shows all of the provinces within a realm and lists the regents who rule the various holdings within that realm. A domain table shows all of the holdings within a domain and lists the rulers of the provinces in which those holdings reside.

    Neither table depicts the 'whole picture' but at least thanks to wiki we can easily cross-reference the two.

  10. #10
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Why should there be two functions for tables of what are two very similar types of organizations?

    To broaden the question, why should the format of a landed domain and a priestly domain, be different, especially if a priestly domain and a guild domain are formated the same?

    I contend that all domains should have the same format, and use the same template. Whether they have provinces is really immaterial to how a domain should be presented.
    Last edited by kgauck; 09-30-2007 at 03:04 AM. Reason: expanded

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Where can I pre-order BirthRight d20 online?
    By Mainboard in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 01-31-2003, 02:58 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ę2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.