FANDOM


Forums: Helping Hand > Non-Volo Building Ratings

Use the following template for a nicely presented post:

{{Forum post|Write your message here!|~~~~}}

Quality Price
Poor
Fair
Good
Excellent
Cheap
Moderate
Expensive
Background 
On Template talk:Building#Non-Volo Ratings?, Moviesign and I were discussing what to do about sourcebooks that provide "non-Volo" ratings for establishments.
Example 
The Ringed Nose tavern of Keltar is listed in Empires of the Shining Sea as having "Quality/Price: Poor/Cheap." Morgan's Inn in Velen from Lands of Intrigue Book One: Tethyr has "Quality/Price: Good/Moderate."
Discussion 
Moviesign suggested that we might be able to just use Volo's ratings if the scales were the same, but I do not think they are. On the right are listed all the terms used that I could find in the two sourcebooks from which the two examples were provided. Note that one column has three entries and the other four.
Question #1
Shall I add new parameters to {{Building}} for this alternate set of ratings?
Question #2
Should we somehow come up with a way to categorize buildings based on quality and price?
~ Lhynard (talk) 00:20, May 3, 2015 (UTC)
anyone?
~ Lhynard (talk) 19:06, May 16, 2015 (UTC)


Since the terms don't map to Volo's scale, it would be easiest to add a single parameter called quality/price and let the users type "Good/Moderate" for its value. I don't see any good reason to make them consult a table to get a number for each rating and then have the template translate those numbers back into words. The other acceptable alternative is two parameters, quality and price that the template formats in the same fashion. It's hardly necessary, but would make it easier for the template to standardize the case where one parameter is specified and other is not. Have you seen any examples where only one of the two ratings have been given? So for question #1, I'd say yes to one of the two solutions I just mentioned.

Question #2 is a bit deeper. If we categorize them by price and quality, how do we reconcile Volo-rated establishments and non-Volo-rated establishments? It would be nice to use {{Category intersection}} to find "All inns of moderate price in Cormyr" and other similar queries, but with two (or more) different rating systems this breaks down. We'd have to standardize things before this could become useful.

Moviesign (talk) 00:34, May 17, 2015 (UTC)


I missed this the first time around. Forgotten Realms Adventures, pages 70 & 71, has the same systems and outlines what the ratings mean. It also gives a system for how well-stocked shops are (full, partial, poor).

An additional parameter or two or three would be useful. When I made cities from the FRA, I just tried to translate these ratings into descriptions.

But I think categorising by them would be a step too far, and don't see the need. And with two or more ratings systems in use, categorising or standardising them would be impossible. Volo's is very subjective, according to Volo's tastes. :)

— BadCatMan (talk) 04:02, May 17, 2015 (UTC)


Okay, for this one, I am in favor of adding three new optional parameters, price, quality, and stock level. The documentation would specify that the values to use for these fields would be as described on pages 70–71 of the FRA. Please vote or make suggestions.
Moviesign (talk) 01:34, May 30, 2015 (UTC)


Works for me.

Ah, in FRA at least, stock levels of equipment shops are only given for the city as a whole, not for individual stores. So these may be neglected in the Building template. Only price and quality are necessary.

— BadCatMan (talk) 02:01, May 30, 2015 (UTC)


OK, I'm happy with this. Movie, do you want to make the template changes? or shall I?
~ Lhynard (talk) 04:01, June 3, 2015 (UTC)


Thanks for the reminder, I was going to do this right after BCM's post and got distracted. It was a simple change, but feel free to check my work. I switched the order to put quality first, not 100% sure that is always the case, but I'm assuming it is usually listed that way. Please fix if otherwise.
Moviesign (talk) 13:46, June 3, 2015 (UTC)


That's the right order FRA. Works for me, thanks!
— BadCatMan (talk) 09:33, June 4, 2015 (UTC)


I added mine. Thanks!
~ Lhynard (talk) 15:21, June 6, 2015 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.