Talk:Buff spells

This is a topic that surely many people can contribute to! If you don't see us editing within several hours, feel free to jump right in! If you have specific visions or re-organizations in mind, we'd appreciate you posting them here first. Happy editing! DAID (talk) 09:41, 6 February 2015 (CST)

Evarin's scroll guide might be a big help, I've tried to keep it up to date. VANKRASN39 (talk) 10:05, 6 February 2015 (CST)

We'll definitely think about scrolls in the final version. The basic concept of this page, however, is what spells characters can easily expect to get from others or themselves. Stay tuned! DAID (talk) 12:53, 6 February 2015 (CST)

I was thinking more of the organization of the guide and the easy access to spell info :) VANKRASN39 (talk) 15:51, 7 February 2015 (CST)

Would you consider these spells appropriate for inclusion in this article? Elemental Blade (411), Minor Elemental Edge (902), Bless Item (304) Mark (talk) 15:23, 7 February 2015 (CST)

That's a tough call! The former two seem slightly more suitable where as the latter one not as much. I think when Sarah and I were shooting ideas around, I had drawn the line at defining a "buff spell" as one cast at a character. Granted, these spells kind of vary in their mileage in that respect. Symbol of Blessing is used on an item, where as Bless can be cast at a character. In any case, we'd surely need to Consecrate (1604) to the list as well. Definitely on the fence about this one from the outset, but more because it's a grey line than because I'm sure which way it should be! Especially for beginning players, Minor Elemental Edge sort of feels like something people should know about, for example! DAID (talk) 04:31, 13 February 2015 (CST)

I definitely agree with DAID that those are sort of a grey area. In a sense, they could be buff spells because they help you accomplish your task more efficiently (or at all, if you're a non-sonic weapon user hunting undead) even if they don't fit how we've defined buff spells in this article so far. It's something where we could either leave them out (as we have), create a new section for those spells or we could add a blurb in the introduction (or somewhere else) about them and not go into much detail.

I can definitely see reasons that they could be included here, but I also worry that there might be some additional details (especially for elemental edging, which has a level requirement and blessing, which can be done in more than one way) which might be a bit beyond the scope of this article. It's definitely something to consider and if a lot of people think they should be included here then it's totally reasonable. SARAH3 (talk) 10:44, 13 February 2015 (CST)

Best Approach to Transclusion

Another question that came up, I believe Scribes made the comment on the officials when Sarah first began a discussion there about this type of page. He suggested it would be useful to have that information also included to other profession-specific pages, etc. I attempted my first transclusion, which certainly worked. However, I'm not sure if that's the route we'd like to go. There are quite a number of ways to go about the transclusion. Since it was a test, the way I did it first was to make a new page for Minor Spiritual buff spells and then transclude it to the section here (and then potentially to the A_beginner's_guide_to_playing_a_sorcerer). Another way would be to keep things here as they already are, and then transclude with a hash to the section. Yet another way would be to stuff these things into each spell circle page, and transclude from that origin. I think we definitely want to stream this information around to a few pages, circle-by-circle, as is appropriate. But, what I don't know yet, is the best place for the origin, etc. Halp halp with some feedback so we can make the most sane structure! DAID (talk) 04:55, 13 February 2015 (CST)

Thanks for working that out! I think that I sort of like this approach you took here. I fiddled around with some of the information I'd put at the top of the MnS section and I think that this way, it works quite well. On this page, it's good to tell people which professions use the spell circle, but on the particular profession pages, it seems a bit superfluous or like something that should be customized. For example, on the sorc page you could have a line like "In addition to sorcerers, clerics, empaths, rangers and paladins also have access to the Minor Spiritual spell circle." so young sorcs know who to ask for these spells if they don't know them and on the ranger page, we can swap the sorc and ranger (etc). I don't think that would work with transcluding the entire section (at least not if we want to keep the information we present on this page here too). SARAH3 (talk) 05:50, 13 February 2015 (CST)