Explorable locations and quests

[Scarbrow]

Let's see if we can reach a consensus here, or at least some suggestions.

The original discussion is here (http://sryth.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:Psychoadept#Irongard), following several changes to Irongard (http://sryth.wikia.com/index.php?title=Irongard&curid=6937&diff=29374&oldid=27440) and Exploring Thorn Isle (http://sryth.wikia.com/index.php?title=Quest:Exploring_Thorn_Isle&curid=6947&diff=29400&oldid=29091), including the creation of Quest:The Haunted Tower of Thorn Isle (http://sryth.wikia.com/wiki/Quest:The_Haunted_Tower_of_Thorn_Isle).

The question is: How should we treat explorable locations which contain quests? Are they quests by themselves or should we create another category for them? It is preferable to keep it all in the same page, like it was (http://sryth.wikia.com/index.php?title=Quest:Exploring_Thorn_Isle&oldid=29369), or is it better now, split on two pages? Or a third option?

Let's hear those ideas

[shadowblack]

I think the term "quest" has become a bit too broad. Currently it includes formal adventures, some special encounters, various limited-time events, explorable areas...

My opinion is that Explorable locations should be in their own category. If they contain quests, quest-related encounters, or encounters that are very much like quests, then those should made a part of quest pages.

[psychoadept]

Well put. That's similar to my train of thought.

In my mind, a quest is a either a single "formal adventure" (and follow up, as with Westwold or The Wounded Horseman) or a unique set of events/encounters with a specific outcome or set of possible outcomes. (Replayables like Axepath count because there is a definite end point/outcome, Battleground challenges would not because they're open-ended. Multiplayers are a little grey in that respect, but since there's no specific possible outcome for a single character, I would tend not to count them.)

Not that the GM has made any of this easy for us to figure out. :)

[Young Ned]

Okay, so we have quests that contain explorable areas, and explorable areas that contain quests, and it seems we have methods in place or proposed for dealing with both of those. Do we ever have a quest that contains an explorable area that contains another quest? That seems like it would really complicate things, but if it never occurs than we needn't worry about it.

[psychoadept]

I'm not sure what you mean. I think the problem is that we *don't* have a consistent method for dealing with explorable areas. (There is an explorable within an explorable on Saarngard, but I don't think that's been such a problem.)

I was just looking at the page for The Missing Hilt (http://sryth.wikia.com/wiki/Quest:The_Missing_Hilt) which does more or less what I was planning to do with The Haunted Tower of Thorn Isle: step-by-step quest directions, with a link to the explorable page for details.

What would be really nice is if we had a consistent way of describing explorable areas across the board. That's why the idea of a template appeals to me. The ones that are *only* available in conjunction with associated quests (Blizzard in the Hills) might be totally nested within that quest page for simplicity, but the ones that are static (Bentlimb, Fogbough) could be transcluded as appropriate for each quest.

[texlaw1992]

A little off topic, but the mention of Westwold brought to mind how much fun it could be if the GM started a "return" series, somewhat like in D&D:

Return to the Caves of Westwold

Return to Stoneback Hill

and so forth, with a more powered-up adventure to await us.

Obviously he has his hands full, but ... it'd be fun.

[Scarbrow]

The "transcluded" part appeals to me. If we created some way to describe parts of quests that happen inside replayable scenarios, we could then transclude that part (let's name it: the Questploration :p) into both the quest page and the explorable page.

What would that proposed template need to include? Mention features

[psychoadept]

Hmm. Well, if we were doing it encounter-by-encounter, we'd probably want to mark noted locations, and if not noted then whether the encounter could be had more than once.

[psychoadept]

I had a thought.

This is mostly independent of the possibility of creating a way to transclude individual exploration encounters, but what if we (okay, Scarbrow would probably be the one to do this, or I could possibly do it with a lot of research...) added one more property to the questboxes. It would allow you to specify Multiplayer or Replayable (which I guess would include challenges, in this model) or Explorable-type quest, which would make a note and a different color box, the way AG-only makes it a lighter purple? If I understand correctly, it could also be used to auto-populate the appropriate lists.

[Scarbrow]

I had a thought.

This is mostly independent of the possibility of creating a way to transclude individual exploration encounters, but what if we (okay, Scarbrow would probably be the one to do this, or I could possibly do it with a lot of research...) added one more property to the questboxes. It would allow you to specify Multiplayer or Replayable (which I guess would include challenges, in this model) or Explorable-type quest, which would make a note and a different color box, the way AG-only makes it a lighter purple? If I understand correctly, it could also be used to auto-populate the appropriate lists.

Yes, that is not difficult to do. Independent of the other question we were discussing, the possible transclusion

[psychoadept]

If you can set it up, I'm willing to see about going through and getting the relevant pages standardized. I know some pages, including Hall of Ruin and some explorables, don't even have questboxes yet.

[psychoadept]

If you're doing it, maybe we should also have a marker for limited-time quests. What about this color scheme?

Red = multiplayer
Blue = explorable
Green = replayable
Brown or gray = limited time

[Scarbrow]

I've created new templates:

ExplorableSpoilerWarning (http://sryth.wikia.com/wiki/Template:ExplorableSpoilerWarning). I plan to create a ExplorableBox, but I don't have more time today

Route (http://sryth.wikia.com/wiki/Template:Route), a better option (I think) to MapDirections.

Volunteers to apply them are welcome.

[Oldschool]

I'll lend a hand.

And I noticed your work earlier - nice. I like the linear, text format of the Route template, and I think it flows better than the Mapdirections. Besides placement problems they can get rather large at times.

I've a few questions which I'll hold for now till I've got a chance to look at and play with the templates a bit.

[psychoadept]

OS's playing around with the new templates reminded me: In doing the NPC page, I was wondering if there's a way to simplify internal links? The TableRow4 creates the anchors automatically, but then I'm constantly putting in things like [[#Tarungar the Axe|Tarungar the Axe]], which is annoying. Is there or could we make something like {{internal|Tarungar the Axe}}?

Of course, that doesn't solve the problem OS was working on, of trying to link to internal anchors from an external page...

[Oldschool]

OS's playing around with the new templates reminded me: In doing the NPC page, I was wondering if there's a way to simplify internal links? The TableRow4 creates the anchors automatically, but then I'm constantly putting in things like [[#Tarungar the Axe|Tarungar the Axe]], which is annoying. Is there or could we make something like {{internal|Tarungar the Axe}}?

Of course, that doesn't solve the problem OS was working on, of trying to link to internal anchors from an external page...

Just when I thought I was getting used to the linking formats, I decided to start off with a quest that starts in the tents.

Probably operator error, lol. At least I did my bungling testing :rolleyes: in the sandbox so Scar doesn't have to fix it.

And those big bold RED error statements at the bottom when you really screw something up are very noticeable.

Seems the location= automatically links which is handy except for those areas that don't have a specific page. Just so happened I started to use the template in The Dire (Saga) which starts in the tents (which is a section of a page). Can't figure out how to show that location except as the full url.

Tried disabling the linking function but <nowiki> fouls the template and couldn't figure out how to make an internal work with a rename as the piping closes the line off or everything displays in spite of it. Closest I got was an external but a set of brackets show. And they show on a lot of other link formats.

Actually after reading your post PA I'm wodering if an Anchor as with the Row4 template would help that situation? Tried a manual anchor via the anchor template but it didn't work or I had it fouled. Guessing a template within a template doesn't work.

Again I (and a very real possiblity) could be overlooking something simple as I still have trouble keeping the link formatting sorted.

Anyhoo, I've filled the onion sack enough so I'll take it to the Route templates talk page.

[Scarbrow]

New template: Template:In (http://sryth.wikia.com/wiki/Template:In) (just a shorthand). Tested and working, you apply it.
I've removed the autolinking of destination of Route. Now you're free to add a link to the destination or not.
I think we should further discuss how to best present Location and Explorable Location pages, so we may have a standard like we have for Item and Quest pages. Discussion continues on Template_talk:Route (http://sryth.wikia.com/wiki/Template_talk:Route)


EDIT: I've also added parameters to Questbox (http://sryth.wikia.com/wiki/Template:Questbox):

|Saga = <!-- Optional. Name of the saga this quest is a part of. -->
|Prev = <!-- Optional. Previous quest of the saga. Requires Saga -->
|Next = <!-- Optional. Next quest of the saga. Requires Saga -->

Please comment, if they require tweaking, etc

[Oldschool]

Nice Scar (folks take a look at the edit in the post above) I'll take a look later and comment - as I gotta go (should've done gone and went actually :rolleyes:).

Plus I mainly just wanted to use this as a bump as I noticed you modifying your post since edits won't show new.

[Scarbrow]

I'm on a roll! I have a new template for you: QuestWithinExplorable (http://sryth.wikia.com/wiki/Template:QuestWithinExplorable). And a pretty good one, if I may say so.

Tell how do you like it, please, it will be easier to correct it now than later. I plan to make another one for replayables, QuestWithinReplayable (fit for replayables and multiplayers). I'll start testing application once I've finished the ExplorableBox

[Scarbrow]

If that was hard, this is even better:

I give you: ExplorableBox (http://sryth.wikia.com/wiki/Template:ExplorableBox)!

Please comment. It can still use a few tweaks.

[psychoadept]

Awesome work!

The "quest within" has an extra space in the closing onlyinclude tag.

I tested it out on a new quest I made for Phak-Rur, looks great! Does the text somehow get included in the quest, too?

On the ExplorableBox, maybe make it a little bit darker blue? I have to stop and really look to be able to read the title.

[Scarbrow]

To make it appear on the Quest page, you have to transclude the Explorable page into the Quest page. Then, only the parts withing the onlyinclude tags will be shown in the Quest page, and then only what the template chooses to show (in the appropriate Quest page, it should be all the content in the template)

I cannot show that in Phak-Rur because it's a mix of Travel location (with transcluded Quests) and Explorable Location. We would need to split those parts to separate pages, so the Explorable location has between onlyincludes only what is needed to transclude. I'll try to do that later, with The Haunted Tower of Thorn Isle. Meanwhile, you can comment on the Route template talk (http://sryth.wikia.com/wiki/Template_talk:Route), where I'm proposing the new organization.

Quests will transclude Explorable Locations (if applicable). Travel hubs will transclude Quests to show Questboxes. And then the Quest List will transclude the Travel hubs. If we mix that, the results won't be pretty.

[psychoadept]

I think I follow you. Once this is in place, we should probably put a full explanation somewhere that new wiki editors can find it easily.

[Scarbrow]

I've expanded my proposal to a full explanation on the Route talk page (http://sryth.wikia.com/wiki/Template_talk:Route#Usage_Summary)

Please comment. See if you can find loopholes, and what parts could be explained better.

[psychoadept]

I am hoping to resume Scarbrow's work on sorting out quests, explorables, and replayables soon. However, partly because I'm less confident with templates and partly to make it easier on new editors (and therefore also on anyone doing upkeep), I think I'm going to move away from the system of transcluding x into y and y into z, that sort of thing, apart from making sure all locations are transcluded into the Quest List.

What I propose doing is this:
*Giving every explorable area that remains available outside of a specific quest its own page with ExplorableBox (including Hawklor and Talinus).
*Questifying anything that's a single-occurrence or occur-until event in an explorable EXCEPT events that are self-contained (a self-contained event would be finding the ring in the slime ant hive in Trithik, whereas the Dusk Dragon Egg counts as a quest), and including the quest on the travel location page for transclusion.
*Linking quest-related events in explorables to the related quest page with minimal explanation, putting the full details in the quest walkthrough.
*DE-questboxing any replayables and sagas (e.g. Sword of Merzekk) that have ended up with questboxes. The only exception might be The Joust because it's not a true saga, more of a single adventure broken into chapters like the PGs.
*Make quests out of multi-visit but finite replayable events like the goblin blood scroll/hidden lair at Hall of Ruin.
*I can probably create the ExplorableBox that Scar had intended to make by reverse engineering another template, but I'll worry about that once I get everything else sorted out.

Let me know if anyone has objections to this plan, but it seems like this should clarify organization while keeping the most important information easy to find.

Here's a question: should PGs be given questboxes, to be transcluded separately into the Quest List?

[Tetracapillactomist]

I went through the points one by one, considering them (trying to focus on what the end result might look like), and it all seems well thought out and logical (some to the extent of being almost self-evident choices, once you put them into words).

As to the question: I vote yes. From this point of view: they 'deserve' it.

And I welcome the idea of them being found, each, within the Quest List.

(I like the thought of every quest being represented in some relatively uniform/equal way in the Quest List, with only associated colours and other indicators differentiating between them, according to type of quest.

Basically, so that the Quest Box has a uniform, simply organised look, and as close to all quest pages are accessible directly from it, as is possible.)

These ideas make good sense, and all that's left for me to say, is: good thinking, great work, PA, thank you...

[Oldschool2]

Sound logic PA.

I have one question for my own clarificaiton. By "DE-questboxing any sagas (e.g. Sword of Merzekk) that have ended up with questboxes..."

Do you mean to redo them more like the usual sagas? If so, I say yes.

Re: the PG scenarios. Lemme let that ruminate for sure as their length/depth may be an issue. But I'm inclined to say yes.

Since they're already classified as Sagas maybe split them into multiple questboxes by questifying (like that term btw) each Part. Or strip the saga classification and just go with PG.

I'm definitely for questboxing them. To me the real question is how to questbox 'em. One big one or a series of 'em.

Just realized I'm on as OS2 - didn't take long to "violate" that new custom title, jeez... :rolleyes:

[scout1idf]

To be honest, you lost me with the word "transcluding" http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-confused005.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php)

I think words like that are what lead to my down fall for working on the Wiki.

Not to mention, I just don't get the templateshttp://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-violent013.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php).

[Oldschool]

Haven't a clue re: templates myself 'cept how to use them. Then I still often have to crib off an example.

And I still get befuddled by the linking formats. Same with much of the lingo so don't feel bad Scout as I often have to ask or go here for help, http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki

Transcluding (at least my understanding) means linking a page on another and in PA's context I'm guessing he means showing the questbox itself.

And a bit surprised myself at this find, http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/transclusion

[psychoadept]

Wrote this up earlier and then the forum went out again. Anyway, I'm also planning to update the documentation for editors at some point (though I want to be careful what I'm promising - I am often better at planning than execution, lol).

Transclusion does mean including part or all of one page in another. The <onlyinclude> tags define which part of a page to include, which is why they're automatically built in to quest and item pages. The {{Quest:}} and {{Item:}} calls automatically transclude the relevant box. (Basically, if there's a colon in the brackets, it will transclude. If there's not a colon it tries to call a template. That's why if you're transcluding a page in the main namespace you have to lead with a colon.) The only place where we manually transclude things at the moment is the Quest List, which has to be updated whenever there is a new location added.

As for templates, I haven't figured out all the behind-the-scenes syntax yet, but they're mostly a handy way to keep from typing or copying the same code over and over again by setting it up so that you feed only the information that changes into a pre-formatted... well, template. Also handy for number crunching, as we've seen, since it will run the parameters you pass it through whatever formula or logic you set up.