User talk:CompleCCity

Re: The Trials of Durance
Hey, and thank you for fixing the formatting on the Trials of Durance page! I didn't know how, and I felt bad for just dumping the text there without fixing it properly because I wanted to get back to playing, haha

About this passage:


 * "...and to your surprise, there is a female figure behind him. You are about to call out a warning, when you realize it is the Magran statue where you met Durance at the Fork...


 * Yet... she seemed almost... alive for a moment... her cast shadow seemed as if it was moving, cloaked, then it is still, frozen with the night at its back.


 * [Player character] - [Examine the staff.]

it showed up as part of the vision after I rested (in the map before Twin Elms, IIRC). I think I know what you mean; the first time you meet Durance in Magran's Fork, you also have the option to examine his staff. But this was different because it showed up as part of the vision rather than Durance's usual conversation options. Here's a video of someone playing through it (7:42 mark): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgZarr573QU&t=7m42s - Evesolstice (talk) 00:06, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

RE: Welcome!
Hello, and thanks for both the welcome and the prettying the articles a bit!

I'll be sure to add boxes and stuff for future pages, as well as fill more in the ones I made. I just have to get in to the functions and formatting here. Will try to make/update pages for quests as I play, so I really ought to have started this a while ago. If my submissions aren't up to standards, feel free to call me out on it.

PS: Hope this is the correct way to respons to a PM(?)

Oter2k (talk) 14:37, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Deadfire Pack items
Hi, I've completed an article about Belt of the Royal Deadfire Cannoneer and noticed that automatically generated table has not update properly. After updating "First appeared in" property and Item Infobox I've manged to partially fix that, but: Are You capable of fixing this issues?
 * I belive that Deadfire Pack items should appear after the White March
 * the tag does not show up next to item name

WikiKaczor (talk) 12:04, 8 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the delay.
 * As Pangaearocks has started creating new item infoboxes that support the wiki's switch from SMW to Cargo, it's only a matter of time that these table templates will be deprecated. So I think it's a waste of time to put more work and energy into those, only to achieve this small effect of displaying some index and getting a sepcific sort order.
 * To be able to fix this, as you asked, I indeed would have to put a little more time into that coding, create new variables, play around with parameters … I already had tought about this, and took a look, but please excuse me – the effort, at least for my person as no experienced coder, doesn't justify the effect, especially when knowing that in a short time it will even have become redundant.
 * That's okay for you?
 * -- UserCCCSig.png  -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 12:53, 12 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Absolutely. I've added the missing tag, but haven't found any elegant solution to the sorting problem. Renaming properties seems to be accepted workaround, but I can't help feeling it will prove disastrous for all this tangled templates. Nevertheless, I totally agree that the effect is so insignificant that any further investigation is pointless. I'm new to SMW and kinda hoped it would be easy. Thanks for Your reply and sorry for the all the fuss.


 * WikiKaczor (talk) 23:11, 12 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Again I have to apologize for my late answer. SMW's gone now, most of your issues fixed. Currently tables, such as belts, are sorted alphabetically, not by first appearance. I don't know if we will implement this in the future as a second option (would need an additional column), perhaps we first wait until the release of, to be sure about differences between item handling of the two games.
 * Hope to see you back sometime. :) -- UserCCCSig.png  -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 12:54, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Altered links: Cargo?
I'm curious about what "conflicts with Cargo: altered links won't be displayed in tables anymore" means, and would like to know more. I grasp that my edit with | was an altered link, but what is "Cargo"? Is it some kind of system powering the wiki? More importantly, is the take away that I should never use altered links in info-tables - and is there somewhere else I should avoid them? — AnorZaken (talk) 20:37, 21 January 2018 (UTC)


 * "Some kind of system powering the wiki" – there are people who definitely would approve of this! :D


 * Okay… this wiki has been moved from data query tables, using Semantic Media Wiki, to the Cargo system instead over the course of the past half year. Most notably Pangaearocks has taken care about this, while most of the old work of establishing SMW was done by FurloSK. Gamepedia, however, prefers the Cargo extension. If you want some deeper insight, take a look at the following links, or ask Tagaziel, who has taken lessons in this. I'm (for now) just a user with (yet) no real coding knowledge about it, though that might change in the future.
 * Cargo on Gamepedia Help
 * Semantic MediaWiki on MediaWiki


 * What I can tell you is that symbols such as the pipe, which ! translates to, breaks the data queries of cargo templates so that the tables aren't compiled correctly, because it counts as separator. In the given case it lead to a listing of involved NPCs with a bullet point list of four, but one empty (looked in the table like this: • Marshal Forwyn • • Lord Gathbin • Emery).
 * Unfortunately this doesn't allow nice displaying of links in infoboxes, until some solution is found – which would need complex coding of replacer algorithms … or some update in the extension.
 * But I don't think there's more for you to regard: simply don't use  or the equivalent template in infoboxes, and done. :)


 * Might I ask you where you're from? You're no native English speaker, are you? -- UserCCCSig.png  -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 21:35, 21 January 2018 (UTC)


 * This was very informational, thank you! :D (I will look into this more later, as soon as I don't have a dead-line looming over my head...)
 * Your assumptions are correct; I'm not a native English speaker - I'm from Sweden. I do sincerely hope I'm not butchering the language, I do try my best, but I'm sure I've made a few unsightly blunders all the same. >__< AnorZaken (talk) 23:53, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Clandestine Cargo
About that clarification of Role-playing tips... I disagree with you! :P § Now before I go on, my purpose is not to bash you - but I might come of as harsh or strict - I apologize in advance if you perceive me like that!

Thanks for fixing some mistakes I made, but you've also unfortunately reintroduced a problem (in the first sentence) that I was trying to fix with my edits. (The beginning of your new sentence is in fact identical to the one before my first edit.)

The problem I was trying to fix, in this part: "If you haven't gotten the relics buying animancer's name from Imatl, ..." is that the flow of the english language can make you misread it as: you getting relics, by means of buying [an] animancer's name. No wait - that doesn't make sense, so you do a double take on it, and realize it's "relics-buying", not "relics buying".

If a sentence is structured such that you might need a double take, then the sentence is in need of a restructure. That's why I changed it to "If you didn't get the name of the animancer buying relics from Imatl, ..." because this gives the sentence the following structure: Something you didn't acquire → what did you not acquire: a name → name of what: an animancer → which animancer: the one buying relics from Imatl. In other words the sentence has a natural flow of information. (Although it can be misinterpreted as getting the name of some animancer by means of buying relics from Imatl, and does have another flaw which I will get to later.) Contrast this to the other sentence: Something you haven't obtained → relics (?) → from buying → buying what: animancer's name, no that can't be right! ← take a step back: relics-buying → relics-buying what: animancer → what haven't we obtained from this animancer: their name → "...from Imatl" (source of potential past acquisition). It's a lot more complicated and so in effect it's less clear. (However in all fairness, depending on a persons native tongue this structure might feel natural.)

Also as a side-note, "gotten" (obtained) is not used often in British English (BrE uses "got" for both possession and other uses - but recommends using other constructions altogether, whereas AmE uses "got" mainly for possession and "have/has to" usage, and "gotten" for other meanings). This is nitpicking, but it is one of the reasons I changed it to "didn't get" since it works in both AmE and BrE. (Past Perfect vs Emphatic Simple Past tense.) I would recommend to at least use another word instead of "gotten" - in this case it means "obtained", so we would be better off simply using "obtained" instead: "If you haven't obtained the ..."

Lastly there is still a problem with this part "and arrived in Brackenbury and at the Sanitarium," - it is missing at least one word somewhere - but you are not to blame, because the old sentence wasn't any better, hehe. :P ("Once arrived in Brackenbury and at the Sanitarium" ... yeah, this is wrong too, oops!)

I would like to suggest (well, strongly advocate if I'm to be honest) this new edit below, but would like to give you an opportunity to give your feedback on it first, because I thought it might be rude of me to simply replace your latest revision without discussion:

"If you didn't obtain the name, from Imatl, of the animancer buying relics from him, i.e. by not paying him for the final piece, then instead of going directly to Nans – the relics buyer Imatl would have mentioned had you paid him - you can make it more realistic by searching for the buyer: Many of the animancers at the Sanitarium, including Nedyn just outside in Brackenbury, offer a dialog option for asking if they are the person who buys relics."

Motivations for my choice of wording:
 * I choose "didn't" instead of "haven't" here because if you didn't do it before, then you've missed that opportunity; there is no option of doing it later. Use of "haven't" on the other hand is more common when something can still be done, as in "haven't yet".
 * I clarified that both of these are correct: you get the name from Imatl AND the animancer buys relics from Imatl. In my old wording both of these interpretations were possible, but I realize that it wasn't obvious that both of these interpretations were correct - and thus there existed a possible source of confusion.
 * I clarified that the purpose of this suggestion is increased realism - by means of a search. (Since the name of the buyer, acquired by the reader from the wiki, is not in any way inferable from in-game information acquired up to this point.)
 * I clarified that the mentioned locations had not so much to do with your travels, or timing of arrival at any of them - it is simply a set of locations where animancers with a relic related dialog option can be found.
 * Less is more: the "one-time option" part was confusing, but more importantly it didn't add any information that was vital to the point. In fact it would be perfectly fine as a separate note / point of its own: "The dialog option for asking animancers if they buy relics will remain even after completing the quest - but will disappear once used.". (I have a vague recollection of this being true in an old patch, but I'm not sure if it's still true so might need verification.)

AnorZaken (talk) 23:43, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Oh, wow! Welcome to discussions about linguistics, vol. II! :D

Okay, first things first:
 * I didn't perceive you as "harsh" or something.
 * I've edited your post, though usually this shouldn't be done – editing other users' talk page entries, and reformatted your references so that they may properly appear and be connected to this discussion, even when the page gets expanded.
 * I don't use indentation for my reply, but refer to something that has gotten ) common use on talk pages here: separating large blocks by lines.
 * I love discussions about language. And I'm no native speaker, neither, being from Germany.

Second: backstory and certain aspects
 * If you had taken a look into that article's history, you would have noticed that that specific section had completely and in all its glorious wording (don't take this serious!) sprung from my own mind. That's probably the explanation for why you see so many similarities to the wording from before your edit. ;)
 * Indeed, from my German point of view that first sentence's structure does feel natural, and if I'd ever come across an English sentence like this that is to read as your "flaw", your "double take" interpretation, I probably wouldn't understand it. But if you say so, then I have to respect that if "you might need a double take, then the sentence is in need of a restructure".
 * And, indeed again, my very first interpretation of your rephrasing was "the name of the animancer [who's] buying relics from Imatl", instead of "If you haven't gotten [from Imatl] the relics buying animancer's name […]".
 * Where might there – "arrived in Brackenbury and at the Sanitarium" – a word be missing? And which one? I don't get this. (And of course the "old" sentence wasn't better, being from the same author. ;) "Once arrived at the district and eventually having found the building …" "Having" perhaps?

Okay, as much as I like elaborate discussions and appreciate your even approach to discuss this with me before simply reverting my edit – I have (as an admin) more things to attend to here, so I beg your pardon for cutting things short now and not going into detail about each and every single topic from your great post. I quote your new proposal, then tell you why I don't like it, finally giving an alternative. Okay? "If you didn't obtain the name, from Imatl, of the animancer buying relics from him, i.e. by not paying him for the final piece, then instead of going directly to Nans – the relics buyer Imatl would have mentioned had you paid him - you can make it more realistic by searching for the buyer: Many of the animancers at the Sanitarium, including Nedyn just outside in Brackenbury, offer a dialog option for asking if they are the person who buys relics."
 * If you didn't obtain the name, parenthesis 1, of the animancer buying relics fromrepitition himrelated to parenthesis 1, parenthesis 2, then … – much too long, too many commas, too convoluted
 * […] to Nans – the relics buyer Imatl would have mentioned had you paid him […] – wasn't better before, admitted, but also is some form of repitition
 * you can make it more realistic – I simply don't like this, can't tell you why exactly; I think, it's "can make"
 * including Nedyn just outside in Brackenbury – "outside in"? what was wrong without mentioning BB here? ah, yup, you removed that …

What about this? "If you didn't get [stronger reflects the circumstances than 'obtain'] Imatl's contact['s name], due to your greed, your only hints result from an earlier talk with him, and are 'animancer', 'she', 'study' and 'Brackenbury'. [That's from 'Do you have any idea what your animancer friend wants with this relic?' – 'She was always tinkering with these things back when we were young. I used to think she was the fool, retiring to some dusty study in Brackenbury, but after that horror on the boat, I'm thinking she made the wiser choice.'] Which all will eventually lead you to the Brackenbury Sanitarium. Instead of now following the above walkthrough and heading directly to Nans, nearly each animancer here, starting with Nedyn just outside and not necessarily ending in the basement's laboratories, can be once asked if they are the person who buys relics. This option remains, even after Nans has been discovered as the contact and the quest been solved. [Not sure about the times and grammar in this last part.]" Without annotations: "If you didn't get Imatl's contact, due to your greed, your only hints result from an earlier talk with him, and are 'animancer', 'she', 'study' and 'Brackenbury'. Which all will eventually lead you to the Brackenbury Sanitarium. Instead of now following the above walkthrough and heading directly to Nans, nearly each animancer here, starting with Nedyn just outside and not necessarily ending in the basement's laboratories, can be once asked if they are the person who buys relics. This option remains, even after Nans has been identified as the contact and the quest been solved."

Hm… Somehow I now eliminated the original topic's main theme, "you might want to talk to Nans last", and hid it somewhere deep within the sentence. Yeah, feel free to offer further improvements! :)

In some later or an alternative version of the article, this could – partially – be integrated into the walkthrough, making two paths out of it … --  -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 18:45, 22 January 2018 (UTC)


 * About your desired verification: I added that section in the course of my walkthrough on 14 Dec, 2016, with the then current game version 3.05. There have only been minor updates to the main campaign since then. As far as I remember my path: I stole from Imatl, which let him loose his balance and fall to the ground, then say "[…] you'll get nothing else from me." My visit to the sanitarium after this scene was my first there. I didn't leave the location in between.
 * -- UserCCCSig.png  -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 18:56, 22 January 2018 (UTC)