QA - ALFA Dungeon Master's Compendium

indio · Post by **indio** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 5:08 am

I figure the best way to help now is to document everything and put together the manual. It makes sense for me to (although cipher will ultimately decide) given I don't have the technical foo most of you have, and it means that when it comes time to test, I know for sure that everything has been covered.

This is something I've thrown together to keep track what we're doing. I only started today, so don't expect to see anything thorough. It's necessarily a work in progress, serving both as tracking device and as a layered manual writing exercise.

Let me know what you think. I can output the data into a Windows Help File, or PDF. Personally I think the web output is best, and that's what I've used for now.

LATEST VERSION
http://www.thesavagefrontier.net/Uploads/DMC003/

ç i p h é r · Post by **ç i p h é r** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 7:32 am

I think that's terrific Indio! I was hoping we'd have an ALFA wiki sooner rather than later with which we'd organize and tie everything together (similar to the DLA ccg), but I've seen neither hair nor hide from Haltoc and not a word more about the wiki he proposed when he took over.

So, as we finalize our base mod documentation, your "compendium" looks like a great format to store it all in. We can then archive the base mod forum stickies to clear the clutter for each phase. Hopefully, we can migrate the end result onsite once Haltoc can weigh in. Having it all organized will be a big boon whatever direction we eventually choose to go with it.

indio · Post by **indio** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:04 am

Excellent.

indio · Post by **indio** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:06 am

EDIT

This is an update incorporating the contents of Basemod - Contents.

It does not yet include Basemod - Technical, a major part.

I could use some advice on the layout at this stage. All I've done is pasted what appeared to be the consensus post from respective threads into the applicable category. Obviously it could be formatted to high heaven. Before I tackle the next installment (and rework the existing), some functionality review would be helpful.

Donrath · Post by **Donrath** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:20 pm

This looks great indio.
Far easier to gather the info now than try and piece it together afterwards.

Don

indio · Post by **indio** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:37 pm

Thanks Don. I appreciate that very much.

ç i p h é r · Post by **ç i p h é r** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 4:27 pm

Doh! I just realized the links are different (the link in your main post isn't the same as the one further down), so here I've been scratching my head wondering what's changed...

Anyway, I agree with Donrath, though belatedly. It looks great and is FAR FAR easier to wade through than any forum would ever be.

Looking forward to the next installment.

P.S. I think the formatting is fine.

indio · Post by **indio** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:20 pm

SEE FIRST POST

The link has changed, again

ç i p h é r · Post by **ç i p h é r** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 11:58 pm

On your note in the script naming conventions, I resolved the prefix issue by just adding a "Var Prefix :" label in the header (see conventions thread). Seemed like the most practical way to get it in there. Works for everyone? We should explain how it's formulated as well.

One thing I think we should elaborate on are the actual subtypes. That's a finite list we would do well to explain clearly.

Not sure what else changed besides that. Layout looks promising.

indio · Post by **indio** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 12:30 am

Gotcha.

The bulk of the work needs to be done to the doc. As it stands, I've simply dumped and formatted locked thread summaries into it. I'll begin tackling fleshing each category out and begin working with you on how the categories and subcategories can be better worked.

ç i p h é r · Post by **ç i p h é r** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 1:20 am

I'll offer as much up front direction as I can but let me know if there is any specific guidance you require. I presume the content will be going into the Technical section. Organizationally, we should leverage the high level diagram you put together (remember that ol' thing?

), which was the basis for the repository as well.

So:

1. Core Systems

Architecture & General Systems
Movement & Encumbrance
Drugs, Curses, and Sickness
Environment & Weather
Diminishing Returns
Pick Pocketing
Loot Notification
Resurrection
Death
Healing (Herbs, Medicines, Potions)
Knockout and Nonlethal Damage
No Stack
Portaling
Resting
Bleeding
NPC/Mob AI
Omega Wand & Emote Ball
Spawns, Patrols, & Encounters

2. Game Systems

Travel System
Moveable Placeables
Shops & Merchants
Animal Empathy & Handling
Reputation, Quest, & Rumor System
Weapon Breakage & Armor Damage
Special Materials

3. General Scripts

Chests
Conversations
Doors

I think we'll likely move things around between core and game systems until we're satisfied with what goes where. It's a minor matter at this stage really.

indio · Post by **indio** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 1:45 am

Thanks.

"Organizationally, we should leverage the high level diagram you put together"

What does leverage mean in this context? Sounds like fun.

ç i p h é r · Post by **ç i p h é r** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:49 pm

It means use it as a guide. I referred to ACR content as "core systems" and global scripts as "general scripts". Everything in the BM is global but the collection of scripts that do not fit into core or game systems seemed suitably characterized as "general". Minor revisions to what's in your diagram in any case.

FYI, I believe the process forward is to put forth the compilation of features we have thus far, get some guidance from Admin as to priority or cutbacks (given recent Obsidian announcements), and then delegate the work accordingly. I realize some people are already working on things on the list or off it as that's what they want to do and how they wish to spend their time. I would nevertheless like to see that work integrated into the base mod when ready, but it will still be subject to review and standards which I suspect is already expected.

It would be ideal if such behind-the-scenes works already conformed to our stated standards and even better if they were stored in our global repository while in progress. That would ensure the work is never lost and could be built upon if abandoned by the author.

ç i p h é r · Post by **ç i p h é r** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 11:44 pm

*nudge*

Any progress, Indio?

indio · Post by **indio** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 12:20 am

I posted the update on Apr 24 with a new link