Talk:Act One/Approval: Difference between revisions
Latest comment: 15 August by 97.126.88.200 in topic Tables?
(→Tables?: Reply) |
(→Tables?: Reply) |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
:Yes, I understand. I am working on revamping the presentation of this and I appreciate the feedback. I thought it would be easier to view but I see that it having the opposite effect. Please feel free to message me on here or discord with any additional feedback. [[User:Jamazing|Jamazing]] ([[User talk:Jamazing|talk]]) 14:36, 13 August 2024 (CEST) | :Yes, I understand. I am working on revamping the presentation of this and I appreciate the feedback. I thought it would be easier to view but I see that it having the opposite effect. Please feel free to message me on here or discord with any additional feedback. [[User:Jamazing|Jamazing]] ([[User talk:Jamazing|talk]]) 14:36, 13 August 2024 (CEST) | ||
::That's fair, it was not entirely a negative change but felt less functionally usable in the moment. I did appreciate how the tables outlined Pass/Fail approval outcomes, which I see you have moved back into the indented style. I could see use of something like [ +1 / -1 ] to indicate Pass/Fail in that order for a simple one line option. Or [ +1 / -- ] or [ -- / -5 ], etc. | |||
::Potentially a subdued image (low opacity?) with a double dash [ -- ] could provide confirmation of no change as opposed to an untested option. I think I agree with Arikel's comment above on not needing to see no approval change, though. Thanks for all your work organizing this content. [[Special:Contributions/97.126.88.200|97.126.88.200]] 07:31, 15 August 2024 (CEST) | |||
Revision as of 07:31, 15 August 2024
Organizing tables
I'd like to suggest you put necessary conditions (like class base, DC rolls, etc., if any) in a separate column. Also, IMO lines that are total zero about any Approval/Disapproval are just clogging tables. Finally, I'd propose to join efforts, because I've been working on filling in character Approval pages for almost two months now. We can check or correct each other on these What do you think? Arikel (talk) 16:20, 6 August 2024 (CEST)
- Hello, I do agree with the suggestions in regards to the conditions being in a separate column. The zero approval choices are definitely an issue but I also wanted to document every choice. I would not be opposed to reworking it by adding maybe a disclaimer stating that any dialogue choice that does not appear will gain you zero net approval.
- I think joining efforts would be a great idea. As I started diving this mechanic, I realized that it can be very daunting with how many branches and dialogue triggers that there can be. Jamazing (talk) 23:50, 10 August 2024 (CEST)
Tables?
The tabular format is honestly overwhelming to read/parse and makes it very difficult to understand how dialogue branches into further choices. Is there a better way to display this information? I'm not sure tables is the way to go. 97.126.88.200 08:28, 13 August 2024 (CEST)
- Yes, I understand. I am working on revamping the presentation of this and I appreciate the feedback. I thought it would be easier to view but I see that it having the opposite effect. Please feel free to message me on here or discord with any additional feedback. Jamazing (talk) 14:36, 13 August 2024 (CEST)
- That's fair, it was not entirely a negative change but felt less functionally usable in the moment. I did appreciate how the tables outlined Pass/Fail approval outcomes, which I see you have moved back into the indented style. I could see use of something like [ +1 / -1 ] to indicate Pass/Fail in that order for a simple one line option. Or [ +1 / -- ] or [ -- / -5 ], etc.
- Potentially a subdued image (low opacity?) with a double dash [ -- ] could provide confirmation of no change as opposed to an untested option. I think I agree with Arikel's comment above on not needing to see no approval change, though. Thanks for all your work organizing this content. 97.126.88.200 07:31, 15 August 2024 (CEST)