Forums: Helping Hand > Zakharan Kits

Use the following template for a nicely presented post:

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

Greetings all. I want to get everyone's opinion on the use of the various Zakharan kits in association with classes within the infobox. All of the Al-Qadim sourcebooks seem to heavily favor tagging characters by their kit as opposed to their class, so I was wondering if it would be appropriate to do this within the infobox by giving preference to the kit and having the class in parenthesis beside the kit. Example: Askar (Fighter) 5 ... meaning the character is a 5th level Askar and having the (Fighter) lets anyone unfamiliar with Zakharan kits know what class they are looking at. I'd love to hear all of the mighty Admins thoughts on this.
Artemas (talk) 19:44, July 9, 2015 (UTC)

I thought we settled this in Category talk:Kits, or did I miss something? We said that Nasir el-Mamadin was a good example for how to handle a kit. You put the 2nd edition class, in this case Fighter, in the class table, and add the kit name in parentheses after the class name. (You can now make the kit name a link.) You still need to add two more categories by hand, in this case Category:Mamluks and Category:Mamluks (2e). We did not agree on categories like Category:Mamluks of 6th level (2e) which duplicates the Category:Fighters of 6th level (2e). If you want to list Mamluks by level, then we can discuss that here.

Oh, and Mr. Hm-boye needs to be changed to "Fighter" because Warrior is the base class, not the actual class.

Moviesign (talk) 20:34, July 9, 2015 (UTC)

I knew we talked about this... awesome, yes thank you, Movie... personally, I am against "kits by level"... a 6th level holy slayer is the same as 6th level thief and most of these kits would just be in Zakhara :)
- Darkwynters (talk) 00:19, July 10, 2015 (UTC)

If we don't list kits by level, what do you want to do with guys like Jandather who is a member of Category:Evokers (2e) (which is fine, but he's not also a member of Category:Wizards (2e), which I think he should be) and Category:Evokers of 5th level (2e)? Should we be switching them to a class of "Wizard (Evoker)" also? Note that the Evoker link is just a redirect to Wizard. It would be more meaningful if we had an Evoker article.)
Moviesign (talk) 14:28, July 10, 2015 (UTC)

This is kind of what I was asking for all of the Zakharan characters and it was recommended that I have it show up as Class (Kit). So Jandather should be Wizard (Evoker) and would only show up in the "Wizards of X Level" cat, right?
Artemas (talk) 14:41, July 10, 2015 (UTC)

Movie, you read my mind... yes, I think all specialist wizards... are wizards... a diviner is still a wizard... so I vote yes, on making anything specialized or kit to be: Wizard (Diviner)!
- Darkwynters (talk) 15:15, July 10, 2015 (UTC)

Are we not keeping Category:Mamluks (2e) as a subcat of Category:Fighters (2e)? I think this is ok, I just didn't think Category:Mamluks of 6th level (2e) was right because it duplicated Category:Fighters of 6th level (2e).
Moviesign (talk) 20:37, July 10, 2015 (UTC)

The page Mamluk is still connected to Category:Warriors (2e), but the category Category:Mamluks (2e) is linked to Category:Warrior kits, which is then linked to Category:Warriors (2e)... cleans up all the multiple connections for the categories. Unless, you disagree.
- Darkwynters (talk) 20:47, July 10, 2015 (UTC)

Well, I kinda liked seeing all the "Name (2e)" under Category:Warriors (2e), but now you have to expand Warrior kits to see them. It my thing about symmetry, don't you know ;) You are the category master, so do what you think best.
Moviesign (talk) 21:21, July 10, 2015 (UTC)

Hmmm, easy to change back... let's see what BadCat thinks :)
- Darkwynters (talk) 21:48, July 10, 2015 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.