Template talk:HumClassSpellChart

HCSC vs D3/4
First I want to say I do appreciate having this template it did certainly help add some sanity and order to the possible way(s) of listing spells/skill for human classes.

But I do have some questions/gripes/complaints/suggestions in regards to applying this template to the later Disgaea's specifically D3/D4. From here on out when I say skill I mean: Spells, Unique Skills etc

1.) SP Costs: In D3/D4 for most skill SP costs are highly dependent on the current boosted level of the skill. For me this raises the question: 'what to put in the 'SP' column for these skills?' For the class page that I edited (D4: Medic) I put '--' and a side note saying that SP does depend on skill level. I had considered putting '??' but to me that seemed a bit lazy and implies that I don't know (but I do know...). Edit: After pondering this for a while I will list the base SP cost (level 1 skill SP cost). This leads me to suggest that the 'SP' column be renamed 'Base SP Cost' or something.

Side Note: have discovered in the game-guide I used the formula (formulas?) for calculating the current SP cost from current boosted skill level, but that may be a bit complex to implement in these tables...

2.) Range and/or Description: My personal preference would be to have these as two separate columns, if you look at Medic under the unique skills section to me the 'Range and/or Description' looks a bit cluttered as I put both Range and Description there (and effect for the one skill, since that effect was not available in the effects template, (side question: can the effects template be edited by noobs/users/editors like me?)).

3.) Column heading order: Again another personal preference thing, I don't think 'Lvl' should be the first column in the table, I would suggest putting it as the last column and having 'Name' first. This would look nicer you know since the 'Name' column items are colored and 'Lvl' items are not.

Now I don't know how much effort goes into creating/editing a template or how much work after, so if it is too much trouble you can consider this the ravings of a crazy person as the template is good it does what is supposed to and I can certainly live with it.

BetaDragon (talk) 00:34, April 28, 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for writing this out.
 * I built the HCSC template, based vaguely on DMAC (which existed, written by a previous editor, but under a different name), crossed with the information that was available and required for display from Disgaea 1 (which happened to be the same as D2). Aaaand I either assumed that the later games would structure everything the same, and/or if they did not, I would just cross that bridge when I came to it. Well now I'm here. Time to figure it out.
 * 1 - the SP cost. As far as I have seen, the 'SP' cost we've been displaying in charts is for level 1, and a player would just have to know that 'later ranks will just cost more'. To that end, it is not, to my point of view, necessary to try to track/calculate/display the SP costs for later ranks of spells (in no small part because I'm not sure that formula is available for D1/2, and it would be a pain to try to track that down. If we had editors with that kind of time, there's a ton of class stats we could sure use first).
 * I'm going to vote against renaming the SP column to anything that requires more characters, because that will stretch the column in unpleasant ways. (It's annoying enough that the 'Power' column header is so much wider than the text it displays; why do this to more columns?) It's a low-value type of data, so lets just have the column be as small as possible, so we can spend screen-space on something more important.
 * 2 - Range/Desc being one column: I....... regret doing that. Original DMAC (before I put in the dual-display, so, DMAC for D1&2) did not have a separate column for these things (I don't know how much you know about 'anonymous parameters,' but at the time when I was standardizing templates to handle cross-game displays, I didn't have the coding skill required to deal with adding a column to a template that was using anon-parameters), and the first uses for HCSC were for Mages and Clerics, where 'range is dependent on spell level' anyway, and what 'description' can be had for their spells? Assuming 'description' is something like "1 - Single target 2 squares away from user", that sort of data also doesn't apply to humanoid spells, you know? At least, at the very beginning, that's what it looked like, like having those be separate was not going to be useful. That was... incorrect.
 * Ok, a side note: I probably haven't written this into any documentation outside of the second half of DMAC, but there's a difference between 'description' and 'flavor text'. Description is, "describe in words the way the spell hits, in context of, how many enemies does it hit, what's the pattern, where in relation to the user" (which is why it's not terribly helpful for humanoid spells, you see? Since the higher levels of spells have the patterns with greater quantity of targets.) Flavor text is, "In the game, when you select the skill and it tells you something like, 'The Netherworld's Number One Powahh!', that's flavor text." We had no flavor text stored anywhere for anything that wasn't a weapon, for D1&2; it never occurred to me that this could be something that might theoretically 'need' to go into a chart.
 * So, I built the chart based on the information I had at the time, and now, it's just all... needs changing, but...
 * If I were to change the template now (where 'now' means 'since I have all kinds of additional info about what ought to be displayed'), I would make 'range', 'description', and 'flavor text' be their own fields. Own parameters, own columns. Why have I not done this yet? Short version: manpower. Until you've been here recently, helping, functionally it's just been OA and I (with the super-occasional drop-in); his irl is somewhat busy and I've been ignoring mine (*cough*). Its not that difficult to edit a template, generally speaking; even something like adding a whole column is mostly 'copy-paste something 40 times'. But it's a lot of page-editing to make all the pages that use the template get caught up with having the correct values in the correct parameters. Because more even than HCSC, range/desc/ftxt splitting needs to happen to DMAC-first-half, and THAT... is... oh gosh, I can't even think about doing that all by myself. I mean, editing all the pages. Because I agree, R/D/Ftxt are separate things, and should be displayed separately. I thought I could get away with not doing that, and... I regret, now, thinking that. X D.
 * Editing SED - While I'm fairly certain that I semi-protected SED (which prevents IP-only users and brand-new accounts from making edits), the pertinent answer to your question is 'yes, you can edit it.' I'll go poke the documentation file and explain how it works.
 * 3 - column order. Overall, I agree with the 'colored column being second looks... different.' I was never able to put the level column anywhere to the right of the Name column and not have it break the 'flow' of the information. It used to be column 2, so probably I'll just have to deal with the part where that feels intrusive and put it back that way.
 * So, it's not a question of "is it difficult to change the template," because the answer to that is "almost positive, no." The question is, "how many sets of hands are willing to go to all the pages that use the template and change the parameters so everything displays correctly?" So I'll change the template now, so going forwards from now, things will be correct; and hopefully... over time, all the other pages will get edited to match. And/or I'll throw it on the to-do pile and see who, if anyone, picks that project up X D.
 * SannaSK (talk) 13:51, April 28, 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for addressing these concerns of mine.
 * 1. Did not consider the column width issue so yep makes sense to keep as is.
 * 2. By trade I'm a software dev and I can honestly say I have no idea what 'anonymous parameters' are but I now have a sudden urge to find out. I did assume that about the 'description' and 'flavor text' thing but I pretended to ignore that out of laziness, (sometimes (read: rarely) the 'flavor text' gives a half decent 'description'). So not sure if both 'description' and 'flavor text' columns are needed... as long as range & description are separated I would be happy.
 * Yeah that is what I was afraid of, the whole creating more editing work thing... I am sure there are more important issues to be resolved around here.
 * Side Question: Would doing these proposed changes to the template break existing usages of the templates?
 * BetaDragon (talk) 21:46, April 28, 2015 (UTC)
 * I wish I'd kept better track of the resources I used to learn all this wikicode. Even with crazy amounts of googling, it took me forever to come across something explaining 'named vs anonymous parameters'. Seriously, one of the larger lightbulbs that went on in my head was finally understanding all that. Short version: anonymous parameters don't have the 'name=' part, but only the data. Look at Template:DisgaeaMonsterAbilityChart, the top half has anon and the bottom half is named.
 * At first I thought only weapons had flavor text. Then I realized there's a lot of things that have flavor text(/unit help). It's on my short-term to-do list to make anything we display at least have space to display said ftxt, and the very-very-long-term to-do to actually fill all those blanks in. If we're separating Range and Desc, may as well have a column for Ftxt (for some definitions of 'may as well' that may intersect horribly with screen width and table layout...)
 * Check out my edit to Necromancer - Range is intended to be only 'how many squares away can the target be and still be hit by this spell/ability,' and description is 'how many squares and what pattern do they hit'. So, you see why the overlap has happened in the past?
 * Would...changes...break existing usages...? - ummm... If I do what I would consider to be a bad coding practice, 'no'. If I do what I consider to be good coding practice, "not 'break' per se, but all pages would have to be edited to make sure the parameters are correctly named and the correct data is in the correct parameter."
 * Check out User:SannaSK/Sandbox - I mocked up a couple ways to add more columns to the table, which ran me into screen width issues; yes I use Oasis but I also have a 24" monitor, and smaller-width screens tend to cause Oasis to not play nice with wide tables. It's ridic annoying and Wikia has no plans to alleviate the problem. I have not seen any way to allow for left-right scrolling of tables, so too-wide tables tend to just get their right bits truncated. So I dual-row'd some parts, so... see how it looks. Imma poke OA and send him over here too. I'm a bit partial to the Test2 version, but Test(1) is probably better for dealing with the super-narrow-ness of tablets and stuff (pro point). Con point, having SED under Level/Power/SP/Height stretches those columns and wastes space; another con, having that much width on SED is not really useful most of the time (wasted space). Test2, pro, the L/E/P/S/H columns are able to be as narrow as they can be; con, it feels like there's more vertical wasted space because, even with font-minuses on Descr and Ftxt, they're still just going to be tall. Either way, this sort of change is just going to make the chart be really really tall (now imagine the chart in Mage_(Disgaea) being two or three times its current height).
 * And by the time I think to myself, 'well, just drop the ftxt column,' everything sort of shuffles itself back into how it is now: Range&Descrip in one parameter/column. The only reason Medic charts feel odd is because (for the D4:APR Uniques) what ought to be in SED is currently living in R&D, and the rest of it can get cinched down a bit (i could put a font-minus on the R&D column, for example).
 * So ok, time for me to shut up. What do you think about what's in the Sandbox?
 * SannaSK (talk) 16:38, April 29, 2015 (UTC)

You people talk a lot. OK, from what I can gather: The Range/Description thing, what we've been doing is basically using the line brake code  to put both in the same column. I don't know how adding a second column of about the same length would work, and more importantly, if it'd work in Oasis (where, if I recall, the current template just barely fits in as it is). However, the test templates proposed both solve that problem by...putting Range and Description on top of each other. OK. I personally like the Effect being below the actual stat data, so go with the first one. (but please, if we need to fix the templates already implemented, take some initative in doing that yourself. I've had people on other wikis make these radical reinvention of templates...and then didn't fix the code on the pages, leaving "broken" templates for months before someone got around to it. I'm already dreading going back to just adding stats for the D3 pages, I don't want another task on top of it. ._.)--Otherarrow (talk) 19:58, April 29, 2015 (UTC)


 * "anonymous parameters don't have the 'name=' part, but only the data" - yup that is more or less what I discovered in my googling, still a lot of learning on some of this stuff to do, lol.
 * "Check out my edit to Necromancer" - ah ok that makes sense with Range/Description also I like the other edits too for readability sake.
 * "Check out User:SannaSK/Sandbox" - I do like Test2 better, but I did not even realize width so maybe Test is better. Both are improvements imho.
 * "You people talk a lot" - yeah, I can get a little obsessive about things (disgaea) sometimes.
 * "using the line brake code  " - I can't beleive I didn't think of that wasn't in the pages I was using for reference but then I probably chose bad examples.
 * "I've had people on other wikis make these radical reinvention of templates..." - yeah sorry to hear that and I don't want to be one of those guys, and I can't guarantee that I will be able to fix all the already implemented templates, but I do intend to try if these changes are made.
 * But then again maybe not changing the template could be the better option and I just do a better job filling in the current template by using  and better Range/Description's.
 * Yeah sorry about this didn't mean to be the new guy coming in demanding all these changes, lol.
 * BetaDragon (talk) 22:06, April 29, 2015 (UTC)
 * Nah, don't worry about it. Like, a month ago or so, SannaSK was in the exact same position. New people with new ideas that lead to improvements, not complaining at all.
 * Well, at least you are willing to lend a hand in fixing things. Sorry for being a grump, I didn't mean to distrust you there. ^^;;
 * So, wait, are we going to make Range and Description separate, or use the line break? I think them originally being together was a side effect of us not having descriptions for a lot of skills (and I think monster skills in particular tend to describe range in their descriptions, at least in D1). I do remember noting that, for magic, descriptions were redundant, as the skill effect literally said the same thing. Sorry if I am restating questions you already talked over though.--Otherarrow (talk) 22:53, April 29, 2015 (UTC)
 * (Technically I wrote all this before BD posted at 22:06 and OA replied, but reading what yall said, I don't think it changes what I say. TLDR Look at Sandbox/Test3 example.)
 * He says 'you people talk a lot' like he doesn't actually mean 'Sanna why do you talk so much' : p.
 * However, the test templates proposed both solve that problem by...putting Range and Description on top of each other. - Soooooort of. Range and Descr are still next to each other, and both of them are over a cell for flavor text. Doing that doubled-row thing is what makes each row be so tall and take up so much space.
 * Here's the one thing I dislike most about Effects being on row two: For every page like Celestial Host (Disgaea) or Mage (Disgaea) or Knight, where the contents of Effects are more than about 5 or 8 characters, there's so many more pages like Ninja (Disgaea 2), Mascot, Scout, where the Effects column can be quite narrow. On the other hand: if we have doubled-row for Range/Descr/Ftxt, why not have doubled row for Effects? For pages where the effects are not long, then, it will just be small...ish. Hit up User:SannaSK/Sandbox again, I copied in the Ninja-D2 param-block.
 * (half an hour or so later...) Actually.... please do look at that Sandbox. I was typing a bunch of 'maybe I can do it such-and-such a way,' and then I just went and made a 3rd template. A template is worth a thousand words, I guess. So look down by Template:Test3. There is some wasted space in the columns on the left half, when the right half gets kind of full with description and ftxt, but... if there's no Ftxt, there's no extra space, and if there is ftxt, then the space is justified. So, I think I like this the most; it just looks so much less... cluttered than the 'doubled-rows' ones.
 * I don't think I got this part out of my mouth properly before: even if all this change goes through, the previously-implemented param-blocks... when a user looks at a page with the 'old' param-block, they won't see some ugly half-formed chart. All the 'name, lvl, sp, etc' part will be the same, and the chart will look fine; just the cells/parameters for 'range, descr, ftxt' won't be displayed until they get edited to be correct. There'll just be white space there. To me, that's not a 'broken' template, just a parameter block in need of updating. But maybe that is your definition of 'broken', so... there's that.
 * So.... I like Test3. Pro: less visually annoying than the other two. Not much more of a con than the others: yes, I/BD/somebody will have to go through and update all the old parameter blocks. Best thing that can be said about that: it's not terribly difficult, just slightly man-hour-intensive.
 * Ok, throwing this back out again for comments/feedback.
 * SannaSK (talk) 23:51, April 29, 2015 (UTC)
 * Uh, OK then! The third template looks like the best one yet, and I don't have any complaints. My one problem is still with the description and the effects for Magic spells being redundant, but I dunno how we can fix it, and it's a minor issue. Sorry for the trouble.--Otherarrow (talk) 00:02, April 30, 2015 (UTC)
 * It's not trouble : p we're trying to hammer this out. It's all process X D. I'm not surprised I have to let my brain chew on things for a while before I get an idea of how to make it work. (see also: fire/wind/ice resistance & Magichange in TierStats.)
 * 'Effect' (SED), 'Range', 'Description', and 'Flavor Text' are all, in the end, separate things. SED is 'what fuels the attack (atk/int) and what type/kind/brand of damage does it do (fire; poison; stuff like this)'. Range is 'how far away from the Caster/User is the Target of the spell/ability'. Flavor text is 'those couple of lines written in-game, when you select the spell/ability.' Description is... So like, Blade Rush (i mean, that's a weapon skill, it wouldn't be in HCSC in the first place; but it's just an example). Range could be '1' or '1-3'. Description could be 'a 1x3 line directly in front of the user'. Seraph's skill Armageddeon, Range would be '6 (Free)', Description would be 'all 8 squares surrounding the target space'. Newly_Married_Queen 'Splash', Range '5 (Free)', Description 'X-pattern.'
 * Regarding the spells like 'Fire', 'Mega Fire' etc, where the AOE pattern grows when the spell levels up - I haven't looked at what is on Spell/Weapon Mastery, but it strikes me that that page (or something like it) should explain the whole 'pattern growth' thing, and just get linked to for any spell where that applies. So on 'Mage (disgaea)' for example, Range would be '1-7' and Description would include a link to 'spell' (probably I'd get something formulaic to copy-paste, similar to Female_Healer_(Disgaea)).
 * So, pertinent questions:


 * 1. Do I redo HCSC: Yes/No.
 * 2. Do I make it look like Test3, or do we still want to hammer out any kinks?
 * 3. BetaDragon, are you sufficiently committed to going through http://disgaea.wikia.com/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:HumClassSpellChart and redoing the parameters? (I'll write up a Style Guide. I like Style Guides, lol.)
 * I really hope the answer to that third one is 'yes', haha X D SannaSK (talk) 00:42, April 30, 2015 (UTC)


 * I do like test3 the best so far, looks good mobile too. Ok cool, hmmmm you have a point about description being redundant with magic spells (unless you use 'description' to note class tier requirements like I have done on Medic and Necromancer), also as far as I'm aware most (maybe all) magic has no flavour text. So maybe for magic spells current template is fine. But then you get to human class (unique) skills and then description becomes relevant again because of unusual effects/aoe and almost all unique skills have flavour text.


 * I thought of maybe suggesting two templates a HumanSpellTemplate that is the current template (with maybe column order change) and a HumanSkillTemplate that is test3. But then again why not just have a template that kind of fits both which is (test3) and just leave blank the sections that are not relevant for the spell/skill in question


 * So to answer your questions as far as I’m concerned.
 * 1) Yes, see above
 * 2) Test3 is nice, I like it seems like a fair compromise
 * 3) That's honestly a shorter list than what I was expecting, so yep if you make a style guide I'll do that, but it may take a while. lol
 * BetaDragon (talk) 01:46, April 30, 2015 (UTC)
 * Alright. Consensus is achieved (at least, I'm interpreting OA's last comment as sufficiently consensus-y). Tomorrow I will redo HCSC to look like Test3 and write up a Style Guide / fix the doc file, and probably change over one page, just to make sure it all works and stuff. Then BetaDragon has a project X D.
 * I believe I can code things so that we don't need separate templates, not even a split template like DMAC. When it comes down to it, it's going to be some #if-based formatting in a single cell in the table. And yes, the description field will still end up being a catch-everything-else field (ie Mage (Disgaea)).
 * I fired up D:HOD just now and checked some spells (mage and priest); flavor text "exists," but it's not 'true flavor', in the same way that, for example, weapon skills have some sort of funny/snarky/whatever little thing that it says. It's just stuff like 'damages enemies with the power of wind (level 1)'. So for mage/priest, just don't fill in the 'ftxt' parameter, and then the template won't display anything. I'll type this up better tomorrow. Sleep tiems.
 * Yay progress! SannaSK (talk) 02:18, April 30, 2015 (UTC)
 * Thurs AM - HCSC v2.3 is live. The doc file probably looks the same, but give it a re-read since I did add stuff to it. Let me know if anything is unclear and I'll fix it. Other than that, hit up the what-links-here as you have time. b^_^!
 * Progress! SannaSK (talk) 15:59, April 30, 2015 (UTC)
 * Your examples from your Sandbox did not have the Range component in them except for '??' so only seeing it now while I'm editing the pages that link to it...
 * I imagine having the 'R:' to signify range is to save space/width, but would changing 'R:' to 'Rng:' make it too large/wide?
 * BetaDragon (talk) 21:30, May 1, 2015 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean. I wasn't super-happy with the 'R:', so I'll fiddle it, see if it looks better. SannaSK (talk) 22:09, May 1, 2015 (UTC)
 * ^_^ cool looks better
 * BetaDragon (talk) 22:34, May 1, 2015 (UTC)