Template talk:Critter at a Glance

Disease

I was just updating Ghoul and noticed there was no Disease field. I am going to just combine it with the Poison field for the following reasons:

• The At A Glance list is already pretty cluttered, in my opinion.
• The number of critters that poison or disease is small enough that it's more efficient to combine them.
• To avoid having to go back and update all the critters (like is having to be done now with the Poison field now)

Information about the poison or disease the creature causes should be in the In Depth field anyway, so that should be sufficient I think. --Grindinghalt 22:12, 25 March 2007 (CDT)

Upon further thought, should there even be a poison field? Currently there are just two critters in the poison category, and only the ghoul so far that causes disease. Would it be better to just merge the poison and disease into Special Attacks, and elaborate in the In Depth section? I think so.

--Grindinghalt 22:36, 25 March 2007 (CDT)

I agree, I've been meaning to get rid of some of the extraneous categories within the bestiary as well. Such as does not have boxes, does not have gems, etc etc.--Naeya (talk) 22:42, 25 March 2007 (CDT)

I've removed the poison field. Most of the creatures hadn't been updated since the field was put in anyway and it was just causing page errors. The good news is that the data wasn't lost on those that had been updated in the field comes back in the future. --Grindinghalt 02:23, 26 March 2007 (CDT)

Images

I added a field for the image file so that it appears inside the At a Glance box. This gives much more room for content and makes it easier to format. But I can't get rid of the extra line (<p><br/></p>) that the wiki is putting above the descriptions. Please look at Giant Black Leucro and Jackal to see what I'm talking about. Still need to figure out how to best arrange the rest of the content now that we have all this open space. --Grindinghalt 05:17, 26 March 2007 (CDT)

Good work, I like the image in the box. Husband and I played a bit with the floating of the boxes. Take a look, they're on the left side now. I like the layout, but you are right, there is a ton of open space. At one time, I had the description somewhat sandwiched between the At at Glance and Skinning boxes at the top. The balance would be off now that the At a Glance box is quite long. That and no all critters have a skinning box... so. Let me know what you come up with.--Naeya (talk) 07:34, 26 March 2007 (CDT)

Yeah it looked ok for most pages sandwiched, but sometimes the images are too small or too large and it causes formatting issues. This way the image is always 200px wide, and will make the critter pages look much more uniform. I may put the image at the bottom of the at a glance box, or hard cap its height. I'll fiddle with it some more. --Grindinghalt 12:24, 26 March 2007 (CDT)

How about this Test creature page layout --Grindinghalt 15:12, 26 March 2007 (CDT)

That actually looks pretty good. It flows, and even for some critters with no skinning info, it shouldn't as sparce. Nicely done.--Naeya (talk) 15:17, 26 March 2007 (CDT)

Skill caps

Would it be useful to add data indicating the max rank critters will teach? Probably would want fields for shield, armour, weapons, evasion, parry, and MO if it's done. Admittedly, collecting such information acurately would be slow, but easy enough to get ball park values: if a critter teaches, you've got a minimum value, and if it doesn't, you've a max.

Da Next Pope (talk) 12:47, 19 April 2007 (CDT)