Talk:3.5e Monsters

Properties

blah blah nav blah blah properties blah blah. sometimes i feel like I'm saying the same things over and over again...

Thing 1 - Templates need to be pulled from this list. They have their own section in the monster manual, they get their own section on our wiki too. We have two options for templates and creatures:

1. Do like we do with classes, and keep them under the same section of 3.5e homebrew, but give them separate pages within the creatures section. So navigation would look like 3.5e homebrew -> creatures -> templates and 3.5e homebrew -> creatures -> monster writeups.
2. Give them both their own entry on the 3.5e homebrew page. Navigation would look like 3.5e homebrew -> monsters and 3.5e homebrew -> templates.

I prefer option 1, and if I don't get any strong opinions the other way that's what I'll do.

On layout, the table actually isn't bad as is. It gives you a page which may include several sub-monsters, and actually gives you each of the sub-monsters' names and CRs as well as a description of the entire entry. That's pretty good actually, since it lets you find individual creatures who are part of a larger page. About the only thing I'd add to the tables is a Type (and maybe subtype, though I'm inclined to skip it for space reasons) and Environment column.

On properties, we have individual names, summary, CRs, types, subtypes, environment... we could toss in ECL and LA for those writeups that double as races. We can also do size, but I'm not sure that would be a useful search item or what else to add if not that. Thoughts appreciated. - TarkisFlux 01:16, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Template:3.5e Creatures Breadcrumb

Back to Main Page → 3.5e Homebrew → Templates

I prefer to keep the page called 3.5e Creatures rather than Monsters for the main reason that all the articles are (3.5e Creature). Monsters kinda has a connotation of well, being monstrous. If type and subtype could be added to the table, it would be cool. Environment might be more for data browsing than the main listing. Same for size. Handy for browsing entries, but probably not needed for the main table listing. --Ganteka Future 20:24, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Easy enough Gan. Are you opposed to naming the over-page 3.5e Monster Manual (or something similar), with sub-pages for creatures and templates?

Also, is there a preference between displaying multiple creatures from the same entry on different lines as opposed to the same line separated by commas? The current ask table does the former (and is my preference), while my placeholder table at the bottom does the latter (and makes it harder to read I think). - TarkisFlux 01:20, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

On a Separate (but related) Note

The Glossary needs a new home. It contained pages like 3.5e Creature Abilities, Terms (which I don't think we ever had), new Types and Subtypes, Conditions and... I think that's it for glossary article categories. Anyways, it was originally under the creature page heading. Any ideas where it should go now other than directly linked from the 3.5e Homebrew page? --Ganteka Future 20:24, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Do you mean the SRD glossary, or is this something else I haven't seen yet? - TarkisFlux 20:29, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Familiar Catagory

Would it be possible to have a catagory which makes a creature down as being suitable for a familiar, animal companion, or paladin mount? I think, for those searching for such things, that would be a useful benefit. What say you? -- Eiji Hyrule 19:23, February 24, 2010 (UTC)

Go ahead, just make sure you include the relevant rules for using the monster as that in each page that has such a category. Surgo 19:38, February 24, 2010 (UTC)

Reorganization by type?

Is it possible for someone (I'd try to do it) reorganize this page by monster TYPE or monster CATEGORY? Like instead of having all the dragons in different places on the list, to just consolidate them to 1 portion of the list so that someone who wants to pick through the list just for dragons can find what he was looking for faster instead of having to Control-F search or tab-search the whole list? Just wondering if that can be done. Sure would make this list look neater and nicer, too. So, instead of reading "super duper dragon blah blah blah" how about we instead reorganize the table into something like "Dragon, super duper", or "Dragon, less-than-stellar" (for example)? It would make much more sense in terms of order. --ProphetPX 06:12, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

See those little black up & down arrows on the right side of each column? Those are the sortable tabs. Click those. They resort the listings instantly on the page based on the tab you click. They sort alphabetically either way (depending on how many times you click it). --Ganteka Future 06:15, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Also, if you're feeling up to it, you can always make a custom semantic search (like you see on the left sidebar under Navigation). Here's an example for finding dragons: [1] --Ganteka Future 06:34, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Dead/Old Link

The entry for "Artathi, Letathen" on here is dead or not linked properly. The original page got deleted and moved a few times so this may be why. Since it is sorted from a database query, there is no way I can fix the link for it from here :( Please forward the link to this right page for it: Publication:Mythic_Races_(3e)/Artathi/Letathen Thanks. --ProphetPX 06:14, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Pages with queries are refreshed periodically by the server. Admins can refresh them manually when needed. Optionally, you can always just try refreshing your page in your browser. I Didn't see the red link when I checked, so you might want to try that. --Ganteka Future 06:34, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Forgot to mention, but worth pointing out that the Artathi won't show up in this listing. It's not 3.5e and it's not Homebrew. --Ganteka Future 06:37, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Further Results & Query Formatting Goofs

So like, there's an overflow here. The limit is set to 9999, but clearly it overflows anyways. "Further results..." leads to a semantic search results page of course, but the formatting is goofed and I am unsure on how to get it looking right (may require the creation of a template). Not sure how to solve this (after trying for like 20 minutes), but bringing it up since reading entries further down the alphabet is hideous because of that. Also, is it worthwhile to have a navigation page for homebrew monsters by CR (like we do for SRD ones)? I have one set up for myself at the moment, actually, in a sandbox (see it here: User:Ganteka_Future/DrawingBoard10). Making more work for people, as usual. --Ganteka Future (talk) 00:49, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Maximum returned limits got changed server side after Eiji's article count and associated navbox started breaking things. I think it's down to 500 or so now, and we can't exceed that on pages even if we try with the query parameter.

The formatting of all further results pages is screwed up when you use the table row template (or something similar) to format your results. It's still using the template to format the results, but without the table header on the custom page. The solution is to move away from the table row template setup, but that breaks the Type [Subtype] thing we have going on because we can't combine fields like that anymore. Still, nothing for it I guess. I'll sort it shortly.

And a by CR page would be a nice addition/replacement I think. You'll want to use the alternate table setup though (which I haven't done on the page yet), in case of overflow and for consistent formatting and blah blah. Let me get the big one here sorted first... - Tarkisflux ^Talk 01:40, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Ugh, I forgot how the default listing dealt with multiple property values. Splitting by CR and just avoiding the maximum is a prettier solution, so I'm just going to grab your sandbox and use that instead. Thanks Gan! - Tarkisflux ^Talk 01:50, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Pokémon In The Main Navigation

Yeah, can we like, move the pokémon entries into their own category or something since they're basically only going to get used as a subset/campaign specific thing? It might be fairly easy as many appear to have a Pokemon d20 category already. Bringing this up since there may be objections. --Ganteka Future (talk) 07:15, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes please. I never understood why the creator was so opposed to a pokemon subtype that would have IDed these creatures if you wanted to reference them in items, find them, or avoid them. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 07:44, 6 December 2015 (UTC)