Talk:Spells

• TODO: Make individual pages for each spell.
• TODO: Make a template for spell infoboxes (I can't figure out how that works...)

Weakman54 (talk) 08:12, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

As opposed to creating a template for spell infoboxes, I have uploaded images of spell infoboxes from in game, screenshots. You can view these for any spell you've collected (and used?) by pressing escape and clicking progress, then hovering over each spell. I did so for each spell that I have collected on that page thus far. Flabort (talk) 22:14, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Actually, I like how you've done the new infoboxes, so I'm keeping up the pattern with new pages I make. Feel free to edit the pages I made or however you'd like to do it. Flabort (talk) 17:29, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Organizing of spells

Hey guys, I'm kinda new to this wiki stuff so take it with a grain of salt, but I feel that for now the page is a bit cluttered. Spells from one familly are all over the place (like Acid Trail and Fire Trail). So I figured I'll get to it and try to organize it a bit with a big table - simillar to what Gungeon did with guns.

With this, we could have a quick overview of different spells in the game with additional info being added to specific pages. Also, I thought of not going 100% with alphabetical order and grouping simillar spells together (like Firebolt, Large Firebolt and Giant Firebolt in order). Also, we could get different sections and subsections for different types of spells. As in:

   - Modifiers
       -- Trails
       -- Arcs
       -- Formations

What do you guys think? Gloore (talk) 18:31, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm all in favor of the table solution. I would suggest adding a colum for the spell icons. The separate spell pages could then be used for strategies and more in-depth descriptions of the spells. It might be reasonable - after the spell infobox template is used - to remove the screenshots of the infoboxes and use the spell icon as the image in the inoboxes. That should help with accessibility and make it easier to search for things. --Arthan the one (talk) 08:11, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

I don't think we need another column for icons - we could just add them above the name. But for now, we either have to cut them out from screenshots or wait for data miners to extract them. Either way, it's a pain to do! For infoboxes, yeah, the spell icon is really needed, BUT I would leave the tables from the game in a gallery of some sorts - they look real nice! Also, thank you for formatting the rest of the spells! Although, I would replace the "Description" column with "Effect" column - as some descriptions don't tell anything, see Chunk of Soil. ~ Gloore (talk) 12:35, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Adding icon to the name: that seems fine, i just wanted them to be more recognizable.
Description to Effect: that's a good idea, the descriptions were really just a starting point as i haven't seen quite a few of the spells in detail.
Having the original Screens from the game around is handy for checking for "translation errors", so that seems fine, too.
--Arthan the one (talk) 13:13, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Ack my baby - Actually, this looks really nice, and while it's gonna be more work to add spells as they're found (due to having to add rows and fill out information etc), it's really useful with information at a glance and all sorts of potential. I do object to having certain projectiles and static projectiles in the materials section - that section was created specifically for spells with "Material" as their type, such as the cement spell or "Sea of X". Mist of Spirits and Raincloud, for example, I think should be in Projectiles.

So while seeing such a large edit all at once on something I spent a lot of time on for the past few days is jarring, I approve; mostly. Flabort (talk) 20:46, 29 September 2019 (UTC)