Talk: Wizard spells

What significance do the asterisks by some of the spells hold? It's pretty stupid to put them there without offering an explanation DiabloStorm2004 (talk) 01:22, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Not entirely sure, but I suspect it may be related to not being able to choose them when levelling up. Some you can still choose, but not sure what else it might be about. That said, I'm in the process of updating the spell pages, and putting in code to auto-generate those tables of spells, which means this page will look a little different in the near future. Once that job is complete, those asterisks will be gone, and the information about spells will be updated with the most recent version of the game. —Pangaearocks (talk) 01:40, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

The last paragraph of the description section gives the explanation: "Spells marked with an asterisk are unique. They cannot be selected when leveling up, and must be learned from grimoires." -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 13:07, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Spells by Grimoires‎

Pangaearocks Your latest revision broke a lot of the spell icon images and you completely deleted the information regarding which spells are contained in what grimoires, try to find a way to merge both. DiabloStorm2004 (talk) 12:59, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

This is part of the migration to Cargo to reduce storing the same information in 2-5 places, and has the blessing of the Gamepedia staff. See for instance https://help.gamepedia.com/Extension:Semantic_MediaWiki. Eventually that same information about which spells are in which grimoire will be taken from the grimoires themselves, via Cargo queries. For now, however, the information about spells have been updated and corrected, so don't undo the revision. Otherwise I'd need to protect the page instead, which really shouldn't be necessary. Pangaearocks (talk) 13:35, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

I think you're overreacting a little here, Pangaearocks. DiabloStorm2004 is right with their desire that existing and important information shouldn't be removed from pages. I, too, would prefer you find a solution to re-integrate the grimoires' information into the tables before changing them. If you need assistance in this, feel free to ask me. I guess, there would be an easy and fast way for this, even if only temporarily. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 14:03, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

I personally have edited and use this page to the effect that it was, having the grimoires listed by the spells themselves, there should be a new column for this information instead of removing it outright. Nowhere in your link, or anywhere on any wiki does anybody stand behind removal of useful information. DiabloStorm2004 (talk) 14:05, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

I agree that grimoire data should be available in some form, though the transition to Cargo is really needed to avoid maintenance overhead exploding to unmanageable proportions. I'm working on a compromise solution right now, stand by. Tagaziel (talk) 14:08, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Tagaziel. -DiabloStorm2004 (talk) 14:14, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Don't mention it, I'm just the janitor. Pangea, well, he's converting the entire wiki's SMW to Cargo, which is... An incredibly tall order. Tagaziel (talk) 14:21, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

List of spells found in grimoires is the current page, I'll probably try and refine it. Tagaziel (talk) 14:24, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Sometimes I do wonder why I bothered to start that massive task, with resistance everywhere, even from fellow admins. Quite incredible, but whatever. It is what it is. The relevant information is in each grimoire, such as Faded_Grimoire. Presumably much of that is outdated/not updated, like many other pages (hence why I'm migrating to Cargo, so we can update the information in once place instead of 5), and this information will eventually be used in each spell page as well. It's simply a very big task to do this on the entire wiki, so it will take time. However, if you want to prepare the ground for the future in terms of correct grimoire information, feel free to update the various grimoire pages :) —Pangaearocks (talk) 14:30, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'm not really sure how you don't see the inconvenience of only listing the spells on the individual grimoire pages instead of having it all in one spot as it was, Pangaearocks. The only resistance I can speak of here is when you decided to delete useful information. Is this your job? Because as I am but a lowly user of the wiki, (ignoring the page Tagaziel just created) having to open a million individual grimoire tabs instead of having the information all on one page is an annoyance rather than helpful.

The resistance, "even from fellow admins", Pangaearocks is talking about, was meant for me, unfortunately. Though I don't understand where I show resistance to that change – the only thing I want is to keep existing information and integrate it into the changes, rather than eliminate it until a certain point of time in an uncertain future, when it maybe will implemented in some other way …

And I totally agree with your point of view in this, DiabloStorm2004: the current workaround is no valid solution.

What isn't helpful at all is complaining about the presumed out-of-date-state of the whole wiki and how large and difficult a task that is, not to mention "bothering".

So what about a new field in the ability/spell template which reads "Grimoire" and lists all grimoires the spell is contained in? And referencing this field in the tables? As I have been told, I only would mess things up here and would do more mistakes than useful stuff, I don't dare to edit the appropriate templates, yet, but at least this seems an idea. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cCContributions -- 16:27, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

I've started a solo playthrough again a little over 2 weeks ago, as far as I can tell so far, this out-of-date thing doesn't apply here. DiabloStorm2004 (talk) 17:01, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

If you meant the spell pages, then those aren't outdated, because I've been fixing all ability/spell pages over the last couple of weeks. Grimoire pages may not have all the spells contained in them, but if they do, that is great, because it will make the job of migrating those pages easier. Pangaearocks (talk) 17:34, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Good to know, then. As I said, it's a temporary solution before the entire table is migrated to cargo and will show automatically, rather than being hardcoded and necessitating a dozen changes every time the Fatebinder of Balance makes a change. Tagaziel (talk) 17:28, 26 November 2017 (UTC)