Chaos

I would like to announce that my senior thesis (a 95,000 words chunk of a novel) has been finished. Also, sleep is glorious!. Five days until graduation!

Oh my god what is this I don't even

Happy birthday Kuri Shardweaver/Mosh!

Crap, I think you're right. I hope I emailed CraftyGames about that particular typo... Well either way, it's definitely Leras, and so it should be lerasium.

I'm editing the topic title to "lerasium." It is actually lerasium according to the final Table of Allomantic Metals and there's just a vast deal of misinformation people have on it (it doesn't help that there's a draft of the Table of Allomantic Metals floating around the internet which has it mistakenly "larasium".) You have to realize spelling isn't Brandon's strong suit In any case, I'm going to start editing people to "lerasium."

"Soon"

Maybe. What would be in an individual power's infobox? A problem with that would be that not all magics have distinct powers like Surges or Allomantic abilites.

Yeah, we won't put much information about those other magics. What do you mean by this?

Sure, I get ya. Now that I look at articles like AonDor and Awakening, a magic infobox would be rather good. So I'm thinking we have Name: Allomancy, Awakening, etc. Related to: Shard or Shards. The template would need to be able to accept multiple Shards if necessary, like for Feruchemy. In theory, this could be used for Splinter-based magics. Also, I don't like "Powered By" because Feruchemy is powered by the body, but it is related to both Preservation and Ruin. Focus Other prerequisites: This is kind of vague, but for Awakening I'd include "Breath, Color", for Allomancy, "Snapping, Genetic ability" or something. Does that make sense? Type: End-Positive, etc. and any other categorizations we discover later. Found On: Insert Shardworld name. Okay, so I guess that's basically the same as what you did, Windrunner Obviously any of these slots can be placed as Unknown. In fact, we may want to remove "Type", possibly. It's easy for the Metallic Arts, AonDor, and Surgebinding (the latter of two I believe are end-positive), but Awakening could be argued both end-positive and end-neutral. Additionally, there may be other categorizations we don't know about. So if we do keep Type in, if there is any reasonable doubt for what Type something is, we put Unknown or Undetermined.

A Places infobox would be good. A magic infobox would be good, though I don't agree with some of those categorizations with Allomancy. I say hold off on the magic one for a bit, because we're going to need to be very careful to be consistent. For example, Allomancy is "Accessed through", technically, metal. And I believe "form-based" refers to shape-based focuses, like Aons.

Psh, we probably just broadcast too many thoughts during our staff meeting

Awesome You da man, Joe.

Love it. I would like to announce that what Eerongal coded for us is amazing, amazing. You'll see it next month

I'm not sure if there's a great deal of benefit for having an Alethi infobox. Is it really that hard to type in "Alethi" into the usual Character Infobox template? I just think that it doesn't gain us a lot and it makes things more annoying to edit, if we need to edit the main Character Infobox, like we are now.

All excellent ideas! We will definitely implement these awards. ...after Monday, when I can breathe again after classes. But these will happen, very soon. We've discussed the theory awards. Something like these will happen (also Windrunner, way to read our minds. Again.)

Short answer, yes we should use fan art when available. As of now cite where we got it. We will come up with a more robust system later.

Yeah it's largely because Joe just doesn't have an image parameter in the Character Infobox template. I'm not totally sure you can just add in extra rows unless you edit the template itself. Definitely would be cool to see this. And also, Joe is definitely the man for templating things I just sort of hack his stuff.

I keep thinking of things I want to work on for 17th Shard but I can't since my book needs to be turned in Monday! GAHHHHHHH

Agreed. And I don't at all doubt that it is a better solution for you, however I would take to task the comment that "the iTunes model is better". Better means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. The beauty of choice is that everyone can find solutions that work best for them. I don't think any software is "better" objectively; instead, it's all subjective in what a user wants out of their software, and people have their own needs. There's no right or wrong way. Well. Let me backpedal. I think we can all agree IE6 is the worst thing ever, and there are plenty of objectively better pieces of software than that But knowing what is objectively bad is different from, like, saying what is objectively "right" for someone. I think there are relatively few instances where the majority can agree that something is total crap, though. So while I despise iTunes totally and completely, that doesn't mean it's bad for everyone. IE6 though, man. Jeez.