| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 13: |
Line 13: |
| ::::Dispositions should be in Mechanics -- learning is only for obtaining the ability in the first place, not in activating it. | | ::::Dispositions should be in Mechanics -- learning is only for obtaining the ability in the first place, not in activating it. |
| ::::If the combo exists of exactly those pieces, then it should link to them. If it's just a replacement for those pieces, it should have a see also.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 20:39, 16 December 2015 (UTC) | | ::::If the combo exists of exactly those pieces, then it should link to them. If it's just a replacement for those pieces, it should have a see also.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 20:39, 16 December 2015 (UTC) |
| Except they're not similar to commands; they're not like the menu commands from core games or deck commands. The word "command" implies an input (from the player) is needed, which isn't true here. It's mostly a nitpicked issue but we should refer to them as attacks, which is the best description of what they are. Also, I think the dispositions should be covered under obtainment. How to find and equip the ability is more relevant to obtainment than the mechanics of the actual attack itself. {{User:TheFifteenthMember/Sig1}} 21:25, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
| |
| ::::::Find is not the same as equip. If the only thing preventing the use of a skill is the Disposition, which can be changed at will (more or less), then it should be in Mechanics. (Also, if we don't include Disposition in the obtainment of Abilities from the Ability Link, why should we include it here?)
| |
| ::::::I would propose "skill" if you need a word for it. It's a decent catch-all. --{{User:Neumannz/SigTemplate}} 22:48, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
| |
| :::::::Although I agree that calling them "commands" may not be 100% correct, it may be easier to call them that, as almost all magic attacks are the same as the magic commands, and some of the pages for those end with "(Command)", which causes inconsistency if we're also getting pages that end with "(Skill)". And if they're not commands, should they be on those pages?
| |
| :::::::I made a template which can be used in the Mechanics section to display when a Dream Eater can use a certain attack [[User talk:TheSilentHero/Tester|here]]. What do you think?
| |
| :::::::Also, we should definitely include Dispositions in Ability Link obtainment. {{User:TheSilentHero/Sig}} 13:37, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
| |
| ::::::::We could include Dispositions if the Ability is locked to that Disposition, but otherwise it just becomes a mess.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 14:34, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
| |
| :Checking the game now. They are called commands in the Flick Rush menu. {{User:TheSilentHero/Sig}} 14:37, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
| |
| ::In addition, "command" doesn't necessarily mean the player is controlling it -- the way the series has used it so far, it would include basically any "active" ability, including the ally action abilities, sleights, or boss attacks. The Command system, similar to what is used in Crisis Core, would basically include anything the characters ''do'' -- or, somewhat cynically, anything we can make a gif of. I think we'd be best served by using (command) as a parser for active abilities, and reserve (ability) for passives.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 15:20, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
| |
| {{TheSilentHero|time=11:39, 20 December 2015 (UTC)|roy=So we now have established the following things:
| |
| *Attacks should be called commands.
| |
| *Combo attacks and the individual attacks should have separate pages, and combo attacks should link to the individual attacks.
| |
| That still leaves the following:
| |
| *For category: should the attacks be called attack commands/magic commands or something like Dream Eater commands, or just commands?
| |
| *Does anyone have any objections to using the table for showing the dispositions in the Mechanics section?}}
| |
| {{TheFifteenthMember|time={{User:TheFifteenthMember/Sig1}} 00:46, 21 December 2015 (UTC)|default=As far as I know, ally action abilities, sleights, or boss attacks have never been commands. Ally action abilities are exactly that, action abilities. Sleights aren't commands, they're part of the card system. And boss attacks are pretty much in the same situation as DE attacks. So far, the series have used commands to let the player use any type of technique. I've never seen commands be associated with party members and they barely exist in CoM's card system. In my opinion, pages for active abilities should be titled with "(technique)", an all-encompassing term that covers commands, action abilities, cards, sleights and attacks.
| |
|
| |
| Specific to this case, I accept Dream Eater attacks being commands after TSH's evidence. Concerning categories, the attacks are grouped by different icons in the stats menu so there could be many types of Dream Eater commands, just like how there's different deck commands.}}
| |
| {{KrytenKoro|What I meant was that the things the series has called "commands" would imply that those others would be included -- it's fundamentally the same system as sleights, choosing to activate a preprogrammed technique rather than having to do combos like in a fighting game; however, bosses in BbS, etc., definitely have commands with cooldown time, etc. I don't see the need to add a new parser, "Technique", when they've been consistently using "command" for what is recognizably the same thing in the last few games. It's a lot like [[Serenity]] -- the Japanese material generally calls them "Commands" or a variation on "techniques" (since CoM, in fact), while the English material goes through a variety of names. It's still the same system.
| |
|
| |
| As far as categorization, do the icons for the Dream Eater commands signify type or element? I can't remember. If they don't signify type, then we can't really make a claim on it, and we'd have to go with "Dream Eater commands" for each one, including ones that Sora/Riku can also use. If they do, then they don't need a separate category.}}
| |
| {{TheSilentHero|time=15:55, 21 December 2015 (UTC)|robin=In-game they have icons for elements (Attack commands show the same icon in the stat menu, but the actual element in FR menu.) The Ultimania uses black text for attack commands and green text for magic commands.}}
| |
| {{KrytenKoro|If we have the ultimania for it, that's good enough for me. No need for a new category.}}
| |
| {{TheSilentHero|time=18:48, 23 December 2015 (UTC)|shulk=I've started creating the pages. If there is something that needs to be changed, please let me know in time, so I don't have to go back and change them all again.}}
| |
| {{TheSilentHero|time=14:29, 3 January 2016 (UTC)|gren=More questions: should I create separate (Command) pages for attacks like Drain, since the current page is about the passive ability, and if so, should that page stay as Drain or be moved to Drain (ability)? And what should be done about Elixir? It is an evolved command in Flick Rush, so should it get a separate (Command) page? Technically, the Elixir is an item command in KH3D already, so I don't know if it's necessary.}}
| |
| {{TheFifteenthMember|time={{User:TheFifteenthMember/Sig1}} 15:25, 3 January 2016 (UTC)|default=I'd say yes to separate Drive pages, but no to a separate Elixir page.}}
| |
| {{TheSilentHero|time=17:40, 7 January 2016 (UTC)|roy=So, should the current pages for attacks like Drain be moved to Drain (ability), while Drain will be a disambig page, or should it stay as it is?}}
| |
| {{KrytenKoro|Isn't the command version essentially the same as the passive version? I don't see a good reason to cover them as split pages, since the quick summary would be the same -- an ability that drains HP from the target and rewards it to the user.
| |
|
| |
| I don't really think we should split things with the same names unless they are clearly different concepts, like Diamond Dust the ability and Diamond Dust the physical object.}}
| |
