Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

The YSDC Wiki - Editors wanted


  • Please log in to reply
235 replies to this topic

#41 Danial

Danial

    Knight of the Outer Void

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 354 posts
  • LocationGold Coast, Australia

Posted 10 September 2015 - 01:09 AM

If anyone has time to take a quick look and offer suggestions, I'm all ears.

 

All looks good to me. As an aside, when I first heard of Mansions of Madness, I confused it with the 1987 video game, Maniac Mansion, so was expecting some kind of connection haha




Log in to remove this video.

#42 Meyer

Meyer

    Master

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 30 posts

Posted 10 September 2015 - 03:35 AM

Thanks, Danial...

 

Ironically, I meant to start on this sooner, but got side-tracked painting the miniatures from Fantasy Flight's "Mansions of Madness" board games.

 

That Dunwich Horror sure is creepy....



#43 leonardolad

leonardolad

    Keeper of the Silver Gate

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 65 posts
  • LocationSão José dos Campos, Brasil

Posted 10 September 2015 - 03:54 PM

If anyone has time to take a quick look and offer suggestions, I'm all ears.

 

Looks good! I liked the idea of putting some of the Keepers Information in the Keeper comments.

Maybe add some categories on it would be good.


Edited by leonardolad, 10 September 2015 - 04:01 PM.


#44 Danial

Danial

    Knight of the Outer Void

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 354 posts
  • LocationGold Coast, Australia

Posted 13 September 2015 - 04:23 AM

I had a mega editing session yesterday (added every missing tome from the rulebook) and just wanted to share a tip I discovered along the way:

 

When adding Category links, if the title of the page starts with "The", such as "The Fog of War", you should add {{DEFAULTSORT:Name of Page}} just above them so that in the Category lists it will be sorted under the correct letter rather than under "T" where it would have otherwise been. e.g.:

{{DEFAULTSORT:Fog of War}}
[[Category:CoC:Scenarios]]
[[Category:CoC:1910s scenarios‏‎]]
[[Category:CoC:Ghoul scenarios‏‎]]
[[Category:CoC:Investigators are military]]
[[Category:CoC:Scenarios set in France‏‎]]
[[Category:CoC:War scenarios‏‎]]
[[Category:CoC:World War I scenarios‏‎]]

Edited by Danial, 13 September 2015 - 04:28 AM.


#45 yronimoswhateley

yronimoswhateley

    Lesser Servitor

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,164 posts
  • LocationDunwich, Maryland

Posted 13 September 2015 - 06:26 PM

Great Scott!  You've really been busy, Danial.  Great catch!  :-)


"I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time." - Blaise Pascal


#46 Shimmin Beg

Shimmin Beg

    Breakfast Clubber

  • Patron+
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,216 posts

Posted 13 September 2015 - 08:59 PM

I had a mega editing session yesterday (added every missing tome from the rulebook) and just wanted to share a tip I discovered along the way:

...snip...

 

I should probably have mentioned that, sorry!

 

Great job on the tomes - clearing red links makes things much nicer, and of course it's easier to be sure you're putting in links to the right things if they turn blue!



#47 leonardolad

leonardolad

    Keeper of the Silver Gate

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 65 posts
  • LocationSão José dos Campos, Brasil

Posted 14 September 2015 - 07:19 PM

Really nice job with the tomes. I just made the links to them in the Cthulhuian Pseudobiblia part in the Cthulhu Mythos page.



#48 Danial

Danial

    Knight of the Outer Void

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 354 posts
  • LocationGold Coast, Australia

Posted 14 September 2015 - 09:55 PM

Thanks, guys. Now that I know the pages are there, I've also been fixing any bad links I come across. For instance, I saw a red link to "De Vermis Mysteriis" and realized it was because it was spelled, "De Vermiis Mysteriis", so did a quick fix. One had me stumped as to why it was red for ages though, and after re-reading the title a dozen times, it turned out that it used a ’ instead of a '.

I've also added quite a few redirect pages because the links (and search) are ridiculously case-sensitive

Edited by Danial, 14 September 2015 - 09:58 PM.


#49 Meyer

Meyer

    Master

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 30 posts

Posted 14 September 2015 - 11:16 PM

Thanks to yronimouswhateley, Danial, and the rest for all the suggestions and resources.  I'm finishing up the Mansions of Madness scenarios and will next move on to Return to Dunwich (unless someone else would prefer to work on that one).

 

I did a bit of clean-up too - searched the wiki and changed the various spellings and capitalization problems for Formless Spawn to ensure it is its own single, consistent entry.  It's a "red" un-created page which I'll create shortly.  The inconsistencies I noticed was that pages had "red" links for "Formless Spawn", "Formless spawn", "Formless Spawn of Tsathoggua", "Tsathoggua's Formless Spawn", "Cthulhu's Formless Spawn", etc.

 

Cool work on the Tomes, Danial.  Should I assume that any Tome mentioned in an official scenario should be created as an individual entry?  In Mansions of Madness, there are some that are better known, but others that are specifically tied to that scenario.  My impulse is...if it has Mythos stats or Spells, it should be added to the wiki (after all, who knows where these books and journals will end up after the scenario ends?).



#50 Danial

Danial

    Knight of the Outer Void

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 354 posts
  • LocationGold Coast, Australia

Posted 14 September 2015 - 11:57 PM

I did a bit of clean-up too - searched the wiki and changed the various spellings and capitalization problems for Formless Spawn to ensure it is its own single, consistent entry.  It's a "red" un-created page which I'll create shortly.  The inconsistencies I noticed was that pages had "red" links for "Formless Spawn", "Formless spawn", "Formless Spawn of Tsathoggua", "Tsathoggua's Formless Spawn", "Cthulhu's Formless Spawn", etc.

 

Unfortunately, naming conventions will always be the bane in a Wiki such as this. Even the books themselves have different names for the same thing. For instance, in the Keeper's Companion, there's a tome called "Azathoth and Other Horrors" (which is the name Lovecraft himself used). However, in the 7e rulebook, this same tome is called "Azathoth and Others". I'm no Wiki expert, but my personal approach is to create redirect pages, because even though you can correct the existing pages, the next person who comes along might use a different name than the "standard one" for a new link, so having redirects is kind of like a "catch-all".

 

 

Cool work on the Tomes, Danial.  Should I assume that any Tome mentioned in an official scenario should be created as an individual entry?  In Mansions of Madness, there are some that are better known, but others that are specifically tied to that scenario.  My impulse is...if it has Mythos stats or Spells, it should be added to the wiki (after all, who knows where these books and journals will end up after the scenario ends?).

 

 

If there's a write-up on it, sure, add it in. I added "The Book of Dagon" from Escape from Innmouth because it had a small description, but if a tome is simply mentioned by name, there's no real point because there would be nothing on the page :)

 

As a side-note, I left out all the RPG elements from the tomes I added (things such as sanity cost and time to read). I don't know if this is "the done thing", but I just felt that the pages should be more about the item themselves than the "game system".


Edited by Danial, 14 September 2015 - 11:57 PM.


#51 Meyer

Meyer

    Master

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 30 posts

Posted 15 September 2015 - 12:02 AM

As a side-note, I left out all the RPG elements from the tomes I added (things such as sanity cost and time to read). I don't know if this is "the done thing", but I just felt that the pages should be more about the item themselves than the "game system".

 

Ahh...I think you answered my second question while I was still typing it!

 

Sounds like a good philosophy. 


Edited by Meyer, 15 September 2015 - 12:02 AM.


#52 Danial

Danial

    Knight of the Outer Void

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 354 posts
  • LocationGold Coast, Australia

Posted 15 September 2015 - 12:02 AM

The creature pages I've seen appear to be copy-and-pastes of Wikipedia pages, which is probably why there are no stats. As for new additions, I would personally leave the stats out, but I don't know what the official stand is on the matter. I just think that if you're on these forums, you'd already have a copy of the rulebook, and if it's a creature that's not in there, then you should probably just buy the Malleus Monstrorum :P



#53 yronimoswhateley

yronimoswhateley

    Lesser Servitor

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,164 posts
  • LocationDunwich, Maryland

Posted 15 September 2015 - 12:14 AM

I've been inclined to leave the stats out, just to keep myself distanced from Chaosium's copyright, and to rely on Lovecraft's (presumably now public-domain) original descriptions as much as possible, but that's just been for my own part:  I don't know where the fine line is, either.

 

I've actually added a page where I've collected non-Occult rare books mentioned by Lovecraft and others (there were a few, with rather sinister-sounding names and descriptions, that revealed themselves to be rather fascinating books on writing in code) - I figure that these books will probably not turn up frequently enough to need their own individual pages.

 

I'm not sure whether to do the same with the non-Mythos (real-life) occult books, as these thematically have more in common with Mythos Tomes than they do with muggle books.  Should these each get their own pages?  Or, should I collect these together on an Occult rare book page, and just use redirects to point at that page?


Edited by yronimoswhateley, 15 September 2015 - 12:16 AM.

"I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time." - Blaise Pascal


#54 Meyer

Meyer

    Master

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 30 posts

Posted 15 September 2015 - 01:41 AM

Still keeping that philosophy in mind, I'm thinking it might not be a bad idea to include Sanity Loss and Study Time for Tomes.  But then, if you include those you might as well include Mythos Knowledge too.  And the danger of the slippery slope of just copying all the info in full.

 

Hmmm.....

 

But it would be nice to have a Wiki "Bookshelf" for scenario creators with Categories like Tomes:Yig, Tomes:Egypt, etc. which authors could peruse and see what they might want to include instead of making up their own, and being able to gauge the "power" of the Tomes against one another.

 

"Well now, let's see...Yig is involved, plus cobras and mummies.  What might Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell have in their library that could be of use?"

 

 

I did create a page for Formless Spawn and decided to add the Sanity Loss for encountering the creature, but not any other stats.



#55 yronimoswhateley

yronimoswhateley

    Lesser Servitor

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,164 posts
  • LocationDunwich, Maryland

Posted 15 September 2015 - 02:17 AM

I think the bookshelf categories sound like a great idea. 

 

I recently had an opportunity to check out the Trail of Cthulhu RPG, and something I noticed in that book that I really like is the way that mythos monsters and deities are given not just one description, but several conflicting descriptions, usually taken from Lovecraft's infamously deliberately self-contradictory stories, and the keeper is left to choose the one that suits the campaign, adventure, or any given unreliable narrator the best.  To paraphrase, "Leng?  It's a place in Central Asia... or in the Antarctic, or in the Dreamlands, or on another world... or all of the above (or none of the above!), or [insert Derleth's version here] or [insert Clark Ashton Smith's version here], you decide....."  It suggests the "Telephone Game" of oral traditions passed down from one insane cultist with a flimsy grasp on reality to another.  That's something I might start working into mythos elements when I get around to fleshing them out, two or more different versions of the tome/monster/deity/whatever, which can suggest different and (hopefully) surprising ways of using those "generic" old standard Mythos goodies in refreshing new ways.


"I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time." - Blaise Pascal


#56 Meyer

Meyer

    Master

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 30 posts

Posted 15 September 2015 - 05:05 AM

I recently had an opportunity to check out the Trail of Cthulhu RPG, and something I noticed in that book that I really like is the way that mythos monsters and deities are given not just one description, but several conflicting descriptions, usually taken from Lovecraft's infamously deliberately self-contradictory stories, and the keeper is left to choose the one that suits the campaign, adventure, or any given unreliable narrator the best.  ....  That's something I might start working into mythos elements when I get around to fleshing them out, two or more different versions of the tome/monster/deity/whatever, which can suggest different and (hopefully) surprising ways of using those "generic" old standard Mythos goodies in refreshing new ways.

 

I agree that the Trail of Cthulhu descriptions are terrific and do a great job invoking the "Unknowable Cosmic Horror" atmosphere.

 

However, should Trail be blended into CoC in the Wiki descriptions?  Might get a bit confusing.  Maybe better to add something like a "for other options" or "for Trail of Cthulhu descriptions" follow this link?  Or at least put alternate descriptions under a separate heading on the page?



#57 yronimoswhateley

yronimoswhateley

    Lesser Servitor

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,164 posts
  • LocationDunwich, Maryland

Posted 15 September 2015 - 05:31 AM

That's what I was envisioning:  separate headings, presented as differing opinions/theories among scholars.

 

 

Edit to add:  I decided to put all the historical "real-world" occult books on the same page together, with redirects.  I'm pretty sure they'll be easy to break up later on if it comes down to it.

I've also moved the Miskatonic University Orne Library (with its lengthy and no doubt incomplete list of rare books) onto its own page, as it's outgrown the Miskatonic University page, and "Miskatonic University Library" redirects there too:


Edited by yronimoswhateley, 15 September 2015 - 05:37 AM.

"I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time." - Blaise Pascal


#58 The_Tatterdemalion_King

The_Tatterdemalion_King

    Lesser Independent

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,483 posts

Posted 15 September 2015 - 06:18 AM

I agree that the Trail of Cthulhu descriptions are terrific and do a great job invoking the "Unknowable Cosmic Horror" atmosphere.

 

However, should Trail be blended into CoC in the Wiki descriptions?  Might get a bit confusing.  Maybe better to add something like a "for other options" or "for Trail of Cthulhu descriptions" follow this link?  Or at least put alternate descriptions under a separate heading on the page?

 

Short answer: No, because then you're just reproducing book text on the wiki. 


Portfolio at www.chrishuth.com • Clients include Chaosium Inc, Sixtystone Press, Pelgrane Press and Sentinel Hill Press

#59 yronimoswhateley

yronimoswhateley

    Lesser Servitor

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,164 posts
  • LocationDunwich, Maryland

Posted 15 September 2015 - 04:08 PM

Nobody needs to reproduce the ToC book text on the Wiki, and that's certainly not what I was getting at - what I'm thinking of can be achieved by describing the different ways Lovecraft handled specific elements, Derleth's "elemental" version of it, the unique ways that films might handle a similar idea, references to unusual takes to CoC scenarios, etc., summarized as if they were competing theories by different scholars. 

 

Consider, for example, the "Proposed Solutions" section of the Wikipedia article on the mysterious disappearance of the Mary Celeste crew (some people think it was the the result of foul play, others the work of natural phenomena...):  Wikpedia itself is full of similar examples.

 

What got me thinking of it was seeing the versions of Mythos elements used in many of the scenarios I've been adding to the Wiki, with some takes on things like certain monsters being somewhat eccentric. I enjoy seeing the offbeat versions of monsters and the way they keep you guessing, ToC plays nicely to that, and I think it's more in the spirit of what Lovecraft was aiming at than a well-defined, authoritative take on where a monster comes from and can do, what a "deity" really is, what a rarely-seen tome in the Dreamlands contains, and so on... I think this is implied in the Call of Cthulhu game books and probably in many of the wiki articles already (I haven't seen more than a few at the moment, I'll look over them in more detail when I'm ready to cross the Creatures/Monsters/Races/Deities entries bridge), but I'm visualizing something a little more explicit.


"I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time." - Blaise Pascal


#60 Danial

Danial

    Knight of the Outer Void

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 354 posts
  • LocationGold Coast, Australia

Posted 16 September 2015 - 12:17 AM

I have a question RE supplement entries that I don't know where to ask about, so I'll just ask here as it seems to have become a general wiki post now :)

 

I've noticed on older supplement articles that the "Content" section is often a direct copy of the "Back Cover Text" section. Is there a reason for this? It seems redundant to me. To my thinking, a "Content" section should be more like the index of the book, laying out all the sections it contains. What's everyone's thinking on this?