Fwurg

[Mercury]

We just added a first beta-version of the checktaker tool to the Jedi forum! This should help speed rp up a bit.

It is usable by Jedi in the Jedi forum only, so don't be surprised if it is missing. The tool writes out a check for you and calculates the total of your check - if you add other conditions (such as circumstance bonuses or penalties) you can recalculate the check by clicking recalculate while the cursor is in your check.

Please let us know if this is workable, if you would like to see more features (or less), if you like the layout and if you understand / do not understand how certain features work, etc!

Note: to make room for the checktaker, we removed some of the smileys. If they are sorely missed, we can re-add them later.

[Mercury]

Example check:

((Check: 9 = 5 Force Level + 4 Strength -- This is a check!))

And there you have it.

[Stuiter]

((Check: undefined = 5 Force Level + 1 Force Jump + 1 Stealth +? assistance -- + 1 assistance?))

I like the undefined.
Put people migth forgot to recalculate, so maybe this should be done automatically

[Brend]

Shebi Ajava deftly tumbles past the two laser trip wires, snatching up the lightsaber she dropped earlier. ((Check: 10 = 5 Force Level + 4 Fitness + 1 Acrobatics -- ))

Note the useless "--".

Me being simple of mind, I tried leaving out the [notes] part...

If I leave out the [notes] I get: ((Check: 10[/check].

This becomes even more annoying when you have more checks:

The first action that requires a check. [check]5 Force Level + 4 Fitness + 1 Acrobatics[total]10[/check]
The second action that requires a check! [check]5 Force Level + 4 Vision [total]9 = 5 Force Level + 4 Fitness + 1 Acrobatics -- Don't think this is the intended behaviour...))


On the colouring I can only say: You are a crackpot, but you do make the forum more colourful.

But really, what is wrong with ((Check: 10 = Force Level 5 + Fitness 4 + Acrobatics 1 -- some note goes here)). I understand your desire (as a storyteller, mainly) to have a clear and readable check. But from a player perspective I'd rather not have every action followed by an attention-grabbing bright green number.

Add to that the fact that the notes aren't clearly different from normal (in character) text : ((Check: 10 = 5 Force Level + 4 Fitness + 1 Acrobatics -- some notes go here)). Some more normal text follows. While it is true that we don't really have checks in mid-sentence (or even mid-paragraph), I think that the normal ((OOC: ooc convention)) is perfectly capable of capturing the fact that the check is out of character; even if it occurs in a weird spot.

And now, for some nitpicking: Why are the numbers and things suddenly reversed? Shebi Ajava doesn't have 5 force levels. She has one force level, rated 5: Force Level 5. The some holds for other things...

But other than that, it's really cool! Keep up the new feature ideas!

[Brend]

During a discussion in our living room, we came up with some alternatives (we being mvdenk, Elmer and me). This post lists those alternatives we think are an improvement over the current styling.

1) The current styling:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amit. Quad non sequitur blork. ((Check: 10 = 5 Force Level + 4 Fitness + 1 Acrobatics -- Toet))

Everyone agreed that the numbers should really be after the labels (i.e. Force Level 5 instead of 5 Force Level), regardless of other styling choices.

2) In [ooc] style, with numbers after the labels:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amit. Quad non sequitur blork. ((Check: 10 = Force Level 5 + Fitness 4 + Acrobatics 1 -- some note goes here))

3) Recoloured [ooc] style. This offers immediate recognition of check, without intruding on the in character text, or undue attention grabbing.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amit. Quad non sequitur blork. ((Check: 10 = Force Level 5 + Fitness 4 + Acrobatics 1 -- some note goes here))

4) As 3, but removed the 'Check':

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amit. Quad non sequitur blork. ((10 = Force Level 5 + Fitness 4 + Acrobatics 1 -- some note goes here))

5) As 4, but result moved to the end to have a more natural flow of the sum.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amit. Quad non sequitur blork. ((Force Level 5 + Fitness 4 + Acrobatics 1 = 10 -- some note goes here))

In the end, after much discussion about how the brain skips the text, Brend and Elmer favoured 3, mvdenk favoured 5.

An argument in favour of either 3 or 5 (or 4, for that matter) over the current styling is the fact that the check is unobtrusive while you can still find them quickly by scanning the text for the blue hue. This should satisfy both people that want the check to be as ignorable as possible, while also making the check findable for those that just want to review the checks before writing a new post (i.e. storytellers).

[Chriz]

I am in favor of 3 as well. The word "check" is easy to scan for when you are looking for it and the check result first is useful when you want to know the previous result later on. If you read it the first time you read the whole line anyway to see what the character is doing, when you read it the second time you already know what the character was doing and you only check what his score was.

[Elmer]

The problem with the green is: It is sooooooo green. When I read the green check, I see a giant green number, with some text around it. Like: "Hey number, nice company of letters you have gathered around you." The focus is way off.

I like Brends proposal number 3, because it is still different from the ooc text, but not a giant laser targeting the eye. You can easily read the character text without being distracted.

Also I do like 3 over 4 or 5 because in this case more is better. In 3 there is first the blue to trigger the mind when you scan the text quickly. The '((Check' is a cue that it is a check and you can skip it if you are not interested or read it if you are. In this case the mind gets both triggered by the colour of the text, and the form of the text, making the recognition still pretty easy.

[mvdenk]

The reason that I would prefer 5 over 3 is that my mind already triggers at the pattern ((Force level... etc and I am a great advocate of "saying as much as possible in as few as possible words."

But then again has proposal 3 only one extra word, so it doesn't matter that much. Either way are both options better than the current one, as already argued by Brend and Elmer.

Furthermore, I think that it is a pity that the tool is restricted to the jedi forum only. I can not think of a reason to do this.

Other than the layout of the check I am of course quite happy with this new tool.

[Mercury]

I have adapted most of the option 3 css - the changing of the number order is a separate process I will get to later.

[Brend]

I've helped out Mercury by changing the boldness (I left the result bold) and the replacing the parenthesis around the sum with an equation sign.

@Mercury: I assumed you just didn't get to it yet; if there was some reasoning behind the styling, please elaborate ^_^

[Mercury]

I mostly missed those in my haste to fix it. Thanks for the catch!

[Stuiter]

The only problem now is having more than 5 skills. He does not show the rest.

[Brend]

It's working perfectly fine for me.

The problem was in your wiki page. You copied Darones Rei's Mechanical Engineering skill block without adjusting it for your own jedi:

Code: Select all

<data !skill_known #Mechical Engineer>
Character_ref : Darones Rei
Skill_rule    : Mechanical Engineer Skill
Level    : 1
</data>


As you can see, this block states that Darones Rei has the Mechanical Engineering Skill at level 1. Not only does this NOT give T'Sal this skill, it actually gives it to Darones again...

I fixed this for you by making it:

Code: Select all

<data !skill_known #Mechical Engineer>
Character_ref : [[]]
Skill_rule    : Mechanical Engineer Skill
Level    : 1
</data>


Note how the character name is replaced with [[]], this means 'the current page' so it will always refer to the correct character, even after copy-paste actions.

Does this clear things up?

[Stuiter]

Thanks