- v50 information can now be added to pages in the main namespace. v0.47 information can still be found in the DF2014 namespace. See here for more details on the new versioning policy.
- Use this page to report any issues related to the migration.
Difference between revisions of "Template talk:Skill"
LegacyCWAL (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
I'm not sure I really see the point of the "specialty" section. Right now people are mostly using it to repeat the name of the skill. The alternative is to say what the skill is used for, so a Miner's specialty would be "mining", and a woodcutter's would be "cutting wood". However, that same information comes from the "tasks" section, so I think the "specialty" section is redundant either way. I suggest having it removed (Plus, that would solve the "speciality" vs. "specialty" thing). --[[User:Pigbuster|Pigbuster]] 17:20, 2 December 2007 (EST) | I'm not sure I really see the point of the "specialty" section. Right now people are mostly using it to repeat the name of the skill. The alternative is to say what the skill is used for, so a Miner's specialty would be "mining", and a woodcutter's would be "cutting wood". However, that same information comes from the "tasks" section, so I think the "specialty" section is redundant either way. I suggest having it removed (Plus, that would solve the "speciality" vs. "specialty" thing). --[[User:Pigbuster|Pigbuster]] 17:20, 2 December 2007 (EST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Flash forward to the present, and changing it to "specialty" wasn't all that difficult; additionally, it was used to denote the "profession" name of a dwarf dominant in said skill (e.g. labor "Farming (Fields)" uses skill "Grower" and the dwarf is called a "Planter"). --[[User:Quietust|Quietust]] 20:43, 19 May 2010 (UTC) | ||
== Color incontinuities == | == Color incontinuities == | ||
| Line 16: | Line 18: | ||
::Currently, there are two problems with this. First, they are not consistent, with [[Fisherdwarf]] and [[Bone carver]] being the in-game colors. Second, I think that both look just fine (the craftsdwarf blue is even used on the other two fishery worker skills). So do you think that at least those two sets should be changed to the in-game colors? --[[User:LegacyCWAL|LegacyCWAL]] 18:11, 17 March 2009 (UTC) | ::Currently, there are two problems with this. First, they are not consistent, with [[Fisherdwarf]] and [[Bone carver]] being the in-game colors. Second, I think that both look just fine (the craftsdwarf blue is even used on the other two fishery worker skills). So do you think that at least those two sets should be changed to the in-game colors? --[[User:LegacyCWAL|LegacyCWAL]] 18:11, 17 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :::A year later, they all use the in-game colors now. --[[User:Quietust|Quietust]] 20:43, 19 May 2010 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 20:43, 19 May 2010
Great template... but perhaps you might want to put the item types and/or requirements to do some tasks. For instance, to make glass you need sand, etc.Schm0 13:09, 23 November 2007 (EST)
Changing "speciality" to "specialty" means changing every page that uses the template - and both spellings are correct. If you really need to change it, you can change just the displayed name in the table and not the field name in the template (then the skill pages will just show the alternate spelling without needing to be updated) Coelocanth 17:49, 26 November 2007 (EST)
I'm not sure I really see the point of the "specialty" section. Right now people are mostly using it to repeat the name of the skill. The alternative is to say what the skill is used for, so a Miner's specialty would be "mining", and a woodcutter's would be "cutting wood". However, that same information comes from the "tasks" section, so I think the "specialty" section is redundant either way. I suggest having it removed (Plus, that would solve the "speciality" vs. "specialty" thing). --Pigbuster 17:20, 2 December 2007 (EST)
Flash forward to the present, and changing it to "specialty" wasn't all that difficult; additionally, it was used to denote the "profession" name of a dwarf dominant in said skill (e.g. labor "Farming (Fields)" uses skill "Grower" and the dwarf is called a "Planter"). --Quietust 20:43, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Color incontinuities
Can anyone provide a logical reason why the colors used in the boxes aren't the same used in-game for the dwarf's color? --GreyMaria 01:04, 14 November 2008 (EST)
- Because it's easier on the eyes, while still being completely recognizable as the corresponding in-game color? On the old wiki, I did the skill experience table in game-native colors [1], but it looked awful, and it was subsequently tweaked to something a lot better[2]. But I do agree that if we are to use less jarring colors, we should do so consistently.--Maximus 04:23, 14 November 2008 (EST)
- Currently, there are two problems with this. First, they are not consistent, with Fisherdwarf and Bone carver being the in-game colors. Second, I think that both look just fine (the craftsdwarf blue is even used on the other two fishery worker skills). So do you think that at least those two sets should be changed to the in-game colors? --LegacyCWAL 18:11, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
- A year later, they all use the in-game colors now. --Quietust 20:43, 19 May 2010 (UTC)