User talk:DDOstream



Welcome!
May I extend my warmest welcomes and offer you any help you may need? Thanks for your contributions, mate!


 * ...First, you may want to check out our FAQ page.
 * ...There's a wealth of wiki documentation on the Help page, perhaps some of it may be of use to you.
 * ...Before you upload your screenshots, which we really appreciate, please read our file naming policy.
 * ...With the wiki's most recent update from version 1.19 to 1.23, we now have many new features and abilities.
 * ...There's a really good  over on Wikipedia also, it should help you figure out what's going on if your new to wikis in general.
 * ...Don't forget to change your DDO wiki user preferences.
 * ...We pride ourselves on providing the best and most accurate information possible and are happy to reward our editors with extra privileges for making that happen. The first step in the promotion ladder turns off the CAPTCHA edit tests and you can check out the details  Here.

If you need help with something above and beyond what the links above can provide...
 * ...Someone is most always available! You can drop me a message on my user talk page (which I watch like a hawk), grab my other contact info on my user page, or ask one of the other system operators.

Again, welcome to the wiki - and I can't thank you enough on behalf of the community for your help in making us the best DDO site around. Kobold worker (Contribs&thinsp;•&thinsp;Message&thinsp;•&thinsp;Email ) 08:19, September 22, 2015


 * Hello Kobold worker! I am a DDOstream demo account by . Please check out the stream on http://www.twitch.tv/ddostream where we'll be broadcasting every Tuesday morning - Time and duration to be decided. DDOstream (Contribs • &uArr; top &uArr; • Email ) 08:19, September 22, 2015 (EDT)

Notification!
This is just a notification to say you, good sir (or ma'am), are !!! ShoeMaker (Contribs • Message • Email ) 08:27, December 29, 2015 (EST)

T:Wizardry
Hi, your latest update of T:Wizardry breaks categorization for Magi items (and perhaps others). See Category:Magi_Wizardry_items. Why the change? -- Cru121 (Contribs • Message • Email ) 03:45, June 16, 2016 (EDT)
 * The change is due to the way that Turbine non-retroactively changed wizardry so values are now the old AM/M/roman or the new decimal. I'll update the template again because I still don't like the format of the categorizations. ShoeMaker (Contribs • Message • Email ) 09:57, June 16, 2016 (EDT)

T:Content Out of Service
There's seems to be an unnecessary line break above the box. See https://s19.postimg.org/qwa3bx64z/coos.png -- Cru121 (Contribs • Message • Email ) 07:03, June 16, 2016 (EDT)
 * There doesn't seem to be a line break in the code of the template itself. See http://i64.tinypic.com/2q1cva8.jpg ShoeMaker (Contribs • Message • Email ) 09:23, June 16, 2016 (EDT)
 * Commenting out the line break helped, at least in my browser, so yay! :) -- Cru121 (Contribs • Message • Email ) 11:43, June 16, 2016 (EDT)

New template for traps and locks
I saw you were creating a new template to keep numbers consistent in the OL/DD tables, and I noticed it had been a while since it got last updated. I didn't want to edit an existing template in case I messed it up so, based off the one you started, I created a template at JDDRoll and test calls can be seen at the bottom of my user page. Hope this helps. JonDDavies (Contribs • Message • Email ) 09:47, September 5, 2016 (EDT)
 * I don't understand what the purpose of T:JDDRoll is. First, if it is a sandbox template to suggest improvements, it should either be on T:Roll result/sandbox or T:Roll result/JonDDavies or U:JonDDavies/Roll result or even U:JonDDavis/sandbox.  Second, I see no real difference when looking at  side-by-side. In fact the "official" version has much more processing built into it based on the rules to return a better result.  Let me know what you want to accomplish and I'll happily help you (I'm working on a few very large scale projects at the same time right now, so time has been thin (why there has been no wiki talk and will be no wiki talk for a few more weeks while I set things up), but I'll help you with what I can so you can do your work to help the wiki. ). ShoeMaker (Contribs&thinsp;•&thinsp;Message&thinsp;•&thinsp;Email ) 10:57, September 5, 2016 (EDT)
 * The point of JDDRoll was to tidy up the if statements which appear in Roll Result. The removal of the two formulas was deliberate because those should be used in the "suspected DC range" column, not the "Roll result" column.  Also, one of the formulas was wrong anyway.  I did it as a separate template because, as I already explained, I didn't want to mess up someone else's hard work whilst I was attempting to tidy up the coding.  As all I appear to have done is waste my time, I won't bother in future. JonDDavies (Contribs • Message • Email ) 12:22, September 5, 2016 (EDT)
 * Roll result and suspected DC range are going to be merged into one, that's the whole point of the new templates. Putting your ideas on a separate page is fine, but it should be a subpage in your userspace or of the existing template for consistency. Time spent working on a project and learning is never time wasted. ShoeMaker (Contribs&thinsp;•&thinsp;Message&thinsp;•&thinsp;Email ) 17:07, September 5, 2016 (EDT)

Test section to show talk page notice on DDOwiki Talk this morning!
Welcome!! Thanks for your hard work editing DDOwiki!!!

T:Enhancement bonus
I noticed that you changed Legendary Wild Flame (and a few other pages) from: to: in your recent stream using  .
 * Spellcasting Implement +29

The reason I had it as it was originally is because   gives the wrong Implement bonus of +45 (the actual item is +29). I could find no way of getting these values using the template and instead opted for "coding them in" by hand. Is this something that can changed in the template itself, or should we continue to use  Spellcasting Implement +29  instead of the template for weapons with implement bonuses that don't match with T:Enhancement bonus? &rArr; Clemeit (Contribs • Message • Email ) 16:34, April 18, 2018 (EDT)
 * T:Enhancement bonus needs to be fixed. Pages with Implement bonuses should use the correct template and not be manually bypassed or things will break when the template is fixed.  It's fine.  &#x1f45f;&thinsp;ShoeMaker (Contribs&thinsp;•&thinsp;Message&thinsp;•&thinsp;Email )&thinsp;&#x1f45f; 20:44, April 18, 2018 (EDT)
 * Solid, thanks dude. &rArr; Clemeit (Contribs • Message • Email ) 21:23, April 18, 2018 (EDT)
 * This has actually now been "fixed" - see Talk:Implement Bonus for details. &rArr; DDOstream (Contribs • &uArr; top &uArr; • Email ) 09:33, April 25, 2018 (EDT)

level 20 heroic quests
Dear DDOstream, dreaming dark and tod are heroic quests in all aspects. Rules for epic quests do not apply to them. Heroic characters can enter them. Epic Ward does not apply to them. DDO has some level 20 quests which are heroic and some that are epic. -- &rArr; Cru121 (Contribs • Message • Email ) 11:48, July 4, 2018 (EDT)
 * We'll be doing away with manual separation for heroic, epic, and legendary quests in the near future. It's a moot point. &rArr; DDOstream (Contribs • &uArr; top &uArr; • Email ) 11:51, July 4, 2018 (EDT)

please update, test, and document templates first, then update item pages
T:Stunning does not support bonus type. Maybe first update the templates to support the extra parameters. Then test your changes via examples on the template page. Update the usage. And then you can consider migrating items to use the new template. Thanks. -- &rArr; Cru121 (Contribs • Message • Email ) 11:47, October 3, 2018 (EDT) Just please don't leave the wiki in worse state than it was before your edits. Don't make other people work to restore the functionality that you accidentally destroy. That is all. Thanks. &rArr; Cru121 (Contribs • Message • Email ) 13:16, October 3, 2018 (EDT)
 * I'm sorry, where did I indicate that Stunning accepted a bonus type? I don't see it in Stunning  anywhere.  Thanks! &rArr; DDOstream (Contribs • &uArr; top &uArr; • Email ) 11:51, October 3, 2018 (EDT)
 * You are attempting to use the parameter, for example in Item:Mythic_Bone_Crusher.-- &rArr; Cru121 (Contribs • Message • Email ) 11:55, October 3, 2018 (EDT)
 * , ... I just removed the "Tactics". &rArr; DDOstream (Contribs • &uArr; top &uArr; • Email ) 12:10, October 3, 2018 (EDT)
 * The wiki is in a better state than before my edit because a meta template was eliminated. It's okay if you don't want to admit you made a mistake, that is fine.  LOL  &#x1f45f;&thinsp;ShoeMaker (Contribs&thinsp;•&thinsp;Message&thinsp;•&thinsp;Email )&thinsp;&#x1f45f; 18:43, October 3, 2018 (EDT)

cosmetic template changes
Hi, I would actually prefer if the cosmetic category pages worked the other way around. Like a gallery basically. Just display the images, and name/location can only appear in a popup. Just my humble opinion. -- &rArr; Cru121 (Contribs • Message • Email ) 11:39, October 17, 2018 (EDT)
 * Check the Discord. Someone complained the page was WAY too long.  I don't have an opinion of how it looks, just trying to condense it as much as I could as requested.  It might be better viewed as a gallery than a table, but would take quite a bit of work to redo the DPL query to make that work. &rArr; DDOstream (Contribs • &uArr; top &uArr; • Email ) 11:42, October 17, 2018 (EDT)

epic field and minlevel in named items templates
There are some problems the "epic" field in the named items templates. I'm aware it is suppose to be used with the old shard/seal/scroll upgradable items, to indicate, in the upgraded item, the item it upgraded from, but: my sugestion (since i can't edit those templates myself) is to just remove it from the minlevel calculations, and edit the 6 or 7 templates to clearly indicate what the field is for (or rename it, but that is alot more work) &rArr; Vilhena (Contribs • Message • Email ) 14:29, November 9, 2018 (EST) i think the last edition of made this even worse. now all items without the "epic" field (and there are alot of those) show up with minlevel 20 and (for some of the types) without the entry in the Category by min level &rArr; Vilhena (Contribs • Message • Email ) 15:31, November 9, 2018 (EST)
 * when you have any value other than "no" the item is no longer placed in the Category:items by min level ( is not displayed in - that was the reason for my last edit on that page, but i missed the fact that i messed up the location by just removing the field). this doesn't happen for all the types of named items ( is correct)
 * even if the field is empty (but left there without the "no"), the minimum level goes to 20
 * well, and the field has a dubious name, and since it isn't quite described what it is suppose to have in the various template files (jewelry/clothing/armor/weapons/shield/rune arms), there are multiple items where it is used as "there is an epic version of this item named xxx" or "there is a non-epic version of this item called yyy" (for non shard/seal/scroll items) or simply "yes", messing up the minimum level of the item (and the location)
 * I believe I have corrected all of the issues here. It was kind of a wall of text and hard to follow for me, so please let me know if you find any further issues (posting on my talk page would be quicker for response or even better to @ ping me on our .  Thanks.  &#x1f45f;&thinsp;ShoeMaker (Contribs&thinsp;•&thinsp;Message&thinsp;•&thinsp;Email )&thinsp;&#x1f45f; 20:21, November 9, 2018 (EST)

Tabs
Thanks for the help with the user page. I'm afraid I don't always fully understand this language so forgive me if I mess things up occasionally. Just out of interest, what problems (if any) could that potentially have caused? &rArr; PurpleSerpent (Contribs • Message • Email ) 10:45, July 15, 2020 (EDT)
 * To clarify: I mean not numbering the tabs correctly here. &rArr; PurpleSerpent (Contribs • Message • Email ) 10:45, July 15, 2020 (EDT)
 * No worries at all! Doesn't cause any "problems", it's only a cosmetic/appearance thing. The number of the tab makes it so the tab look different for the other to show which one is currently active (more than just the fact the link for that tab goes away and it becomes bold text)  &rArr; DDOstream (Contribs • &uArr; top &uArr; • Email ) 10:50, July 15, 2020 (EDT)

About Dreadcursed Defender
You reverted my edit for i:Dreadcursed Defender with saying there is race = iron defender, but please reconsider if there's such information in the actual page. -- &rArr; Targal (Contribs • Message • Email ) 11:58, July 15, 2020 (EDT) https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/328529122332508160/733065395795132487/unknown.png
 * Huh? Seems to be working to me. Pop in the  and let's discuss it. (Note: I normally only use this account once per week on Wednesday morning for DDOwiki Talk on .) :) &rArr; DDOstream (Contribs • &uArr; top &uArr; • Email ) 16:58, July 15, 2020 (EDT)
 * It was weirdly shown as None to me, but It is now fine. I have no idea why it happened. -- &rArr; Targal (Contribs • Message • Email ) 17:49, July 16, 2020 (EDT)
 * Probably just caching? &#x1f45f;&thinsp;ShoeMaker (Contribs&thinsp;•&thinsp;Message&thinsp;•&thinsp;Email )&thinsp;&#x1f45f; 01:44, July 17, 2020 (EDT)

Blessing of Grand Edit
You said: " We're going to leave it as such unless you have it on good authority they are not duplicated. Thanks" which is baffling as we do have it on the ultimate authority that it is unknown if the stones are duplicates, Cordovan spoke to the matter specifically and said only that the tos MAY have be violated. On his off day he took the time to post and modify that thread, but went out of his way to say MAY, he chose not to say that it IS or WAS, that is SSG's good authority giving it to us very clearly. All that is 100% clear is that there is an agenda of some editors to rush to judgement even after SSG's own community contact avoided saying it was duping. May I also point out that beyond the use of the word and link Duplicate, the new edit removes the valuable warning to players that was particularly helpful to newer players who may not have the practical experience to draw the right conclusion from the relatively arbitrary use of the work and link rather than having it spelt out. What is the purpose of this WIKI? to educate and advise players, and new players to the best of our abilities? or to make assumptions and conclusions based on supposition and the personal prejudice of particular editors that belong to the 'club'? If it is the latter may I suggest you rename it "Some DDo stuff we know" rather that DDoWiki because it will not be a wiki anymore but rather the playground of an entitled few. — previous unsigned Please sign posts using ~    comment by Passingthru (&thinsp;c&thinsp;&#124; &thinsp;e&thinsp;&#124; &thinsp;d&thinsp; &#124;&thinsp;r&thinsp; &#124;&thinsp;b&thinsp; ) &#32; at 19:51, September 9, 2020 (UTC)
 * Unless you have it documented from someone with an official capacity at SSG has said that these stones 100% are not duplicated, then they will be assumed to have been. I'll note that the exact words of Cordovan on the matter are this:  .  That was the final word on it which negates your point of his choice to use the word may earlier in the comment as he did in fact say IS.  I believe you are correct that someone has an agenda here, but I believe that someone to be you.  Thanks. The warning you presented was worded as if it was the official position of SSG, and it is not.  The official words/position of SSG are documented on the page itself and people can deduce what they want from it.   &#x1f45f;&thinsp;ShoeMaker (Contribs&thinsp;•&thinsp;Message&thinsp;•&thinsp;Email )&thinsp;&#x1f45f; 16:42, September 9, 2020 (EDT)