1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
Dismiss Notice
Vote for us!

Remember to vote for ZEJ at our Top RP Sites page! You can vote only once daily, so make sure to do so and help us reach the top!

I had the best idea

Discussion in 'Suggestions' started by Keileon, May 17, 2016.

  1. Statplay wiki

    relevant chatlog:
    [03:16:30] Keileon I don't know why I did this
    [03:16:34] Keileon I just felt like it
    [03:16:36] Keileon http://pastebin.com/eGHWpue1
    [03:16:39] Keileon (eebit)
    [03:16:57] Keileon I might also have missed a looooot of things
    [03:17:48] fryborg [Jake] Oooooooh
    [03:21:37] fryborg [Guard Dog of Hades] Oh, that's really interesting. I was going to do something like this eventually (except in the form of full article-type deals) but seeing a summary form is nice. I wonder if we could develop and put this somewhere on ZEJ
    [03:22:45] Keileon What if statplay wiki
    [03:23:38] fryborg [Jake] holy moly
    [03:23:48] fryborg [Jake] and that's all I have to say about that
    [03:24:09] Keileon I can see it working
    [03:24:36] fryborg [Jake] I can too, but it'd be a lot of work aha
    [03:24:49] Keileon Possibly worth it
    [03:25:50] fryborg [Guard Dog of Hades] I'm not exactly sure what we could get out of a Wiki for Statplaying. As far as covering terms and teaching basics we have a tutorial and a GDoc or two
    [03:26:00] fryborg [Jake] Oh, I agree. It'd definitely be worth it to have an actively-evolving compendium of our knowledge and metagame. Having that all laid out in Wiki format is extremely tantalizing. But I'm not sure I'm ready to undertake something like that after the Stat Tutorial lol
    [03:26:23] fryborg [Jake] It definitely does need to be revised and expanded upon for more-than-entry level knowledge
    [03:26:25] Keileon Keeping it on hand as a reference for new people who've already done a tutorial?
    [03:27:03] fryborg [Jake] Would be a good topic of discussion for when more people are alive
    [03:27:06] fryborg [Jake] Or for the forums
    [03:27:16] Keileon If nothing else it could be a reference for quick rulings
    [03:27:23] fryborg [Jake] Quite
    [03:27:55] fryborg [Jake] I'm sure Shadow would appreciate us having the ability to look up these things without having to consult him heh

    @Shadow @Eebit @Silver @CerberusLycan @Ziolang @Flimzy @CodasterTheDisaster @"Irouk Inverse" @whoever else

    @"Nebulon Ranger" because idk if we can have multiple wikis

  2. It's just another mediawiki install, why wouldn't it be possible?
  3. It's interesting but I don't know how much I can help. If I knew anything about the meta my characters wouldn't be so shit.
  4. Same.
  5. As everyone can see I was part of the above chatlog. But I do think that expanding on my brief thoughts from 4:30am might be worth doing.

    I think that having a Wiki to elucidate our wisdom of the endlessly-evolving statistical system might be worth our while. It'd be a great resource for newcomers to get a handle on the medium, and it would serve to expound (and supersede) the details presented in the Statplaying Tutorial. Even now I feel like there are a lot of things that I could've explained better in there.


    I worry a lot about the nature of the medium. Given the way the Manaverse Wiki is going, the burden of "fleshing out" the major, overarching concepts falls upon a very small subset of the larger group that is working on the Wiki. And I would be wary of starting a Statistical Roleplaying Wiki on the same terms. I do feel that the community generally has a better handle on the concepts presented in statplaying than they do the "foundational concepts" of the Manaverse, but I can't help but worry that the majority of people sitting on the information - even so much as a shred of it - will sit idle, feeling as though they have "nothing to contribute." And that, to me, is one of the biggest hurdles for us to get over with both this hypothetical Wiki and the one we currently have.

    I'm certainly interested in building up a resource that goes beyond the basics. @CerberusLycan was talking about producing a series of "How to Be a Better Statplayer" articles, which I am definitely keen on reading -- the evolution of the "statistical metagame" is truly fascinating to me, and I do love the nature of the Wiki format. I would be happy to contribute to a Statistical Roleplaying Wiki. We do have a solid base, and I welcome any discourse surrounding the expansion of the meta, the explanation of concepts presented by the medium, etc. But I think it'd take a big push to get it up and running, and I'm not sure people would be... committed to the idea.

    Couldn't hurt to try.

    I suspect that what Kuda was wondering was more along the lines of whether it'd be possible to have a second one on our server -- that it wouldn't be too much to ask for you to host a second one.

    Ah, mate, don't sell yourself so short. Your characters are generally quite clever in terms of mechanics. It's more that you sometimes tunnel too far in on one certain facet or focus on trying to make them vastly overpowered such that they need to be shucked back in terms of power. It's a delicate balance that all of us are still trying to find. I do think that your insight would certainly be welcome, even invaluable to the process of constructing a Wiki. In fact, many unique contributions that are constantly churned and refined by each other are what make the format of the Wiki so beautiful.

    Besides that, it's not necessarily just going to be focused on the metagame -- it could go further and explain all concepts, from the most simple, ubiquitous things like "what is a de-/buff," or "what is a Cell", to broader/more vague things like "what are the fundamental archetypes of statplaying" or "what is the metagame." And in the end, it'll be a learning experience for all of us, bumping against each other and developing a more concrete understanding -- together -- of what statplaying is.
  6. As I expressed in the chatlog, I'm not sure how much actual use a Statplaying Wiki would see. When you compare even its best prospective uses to the downsides of actually making it-- it might end up a dead-end project, another mostly-empty Wiki linked to ZEJ, that just ends up confusing people looking for information both as to what its saying and ultimately as to where they should be going for statistical information; not to mention the relative efforts required of people to make it in the first place-- it doesn't seem useful right now. We have the Inflictionary, a tutorial, an MP Formula GDoc, and no real lack of actual Statistical Profiles to draw on. I believe that almost anything someone could suggest for the Wiki can at least be found in sprouting on ZEJ-- we should work on completing those before turning to the idea of a Wiki. Deeper explanations of the metagame might be all that would be unique to the Wiki, but as @Eebit mentioned, I've been meaning to address that for a while, and a Wiki might not be the best place for that anyway. A deeper knowledge of the metagame is something that, in some aspects, can't always be taught, since it's so complicated and abstract, and writing on it objectively as a Wiki requires might just end being confusing. Statplaying is ultimately much like a game, I think, in that a stronger grasp of its metagame will most easily come by playing and practicing the game itself. Even if you read articles which tell you objectively how the metagame functions, that doesn't mean you understand it. And in that case, the articles-- the Wiki-- really wouldn't be useful.

    All of that said, I personally would try and contribute to a Statplaying Wiki if there was demand for it. I really don't think we need it right now, however.
  7. If you don't do something because you think it *might* fail, you're never going to get anything done. :p

    I'd be willing to give it a push if we get it set up. I'm a lot more confident with my knowledge of statplaying than I am with my knowledge of the foundations of the Manaverse- as, I'm sure, a lot of people are.
  8. I was saying that it might not be worth doing even if it ends up being successful. On this note, we have a half-completed Statplaying Glossary that would perform the majority of the job a Statplaying Wiki might in the first place, so if you're eager to share your statplaying knowledge, why not help develop that? In the worst case scenario, those completed entries would provide good bases for their corresponding Wiki articles, and in the best case, working on them will make us realize we don't need to buy the shiny new toy that is another Wiki.
  9. Why have a bunch of scattered forum threads and Gdocs, even kept together with a resources megathread, when we can keep everything neat and tidy and together on a wiki?
  10. I think it would be best to fill out the resources we have that way moving them to a Wiki is just a matter of copy and paste with some reformatting rather than staring at an empty Wiki trying to patch things together. A Wiki would be super useful to have, but not if it's gonna be empty and/or full of holes.

Share This Page