The RPGnet Gaming Index [Archive]

ShannonA

07-20-2006, 05:43 PM

Folks,

Here's some status on the RPGnet Gaming Index.

First of all, I wrote an article today on some of the issues with this sort of collaborative, community project. You may be interested in taking a gander:
http://www.skotos.net/articles/TTnT_/TTnT_193.phtml

Second, the Index has grown to an impressive size, with over 2300 entries in it, or about 2500 when you count editions. We're up to about 2/3rds of the size of the classic Heroic Worlds. However, new entries have slowed down a bit after peaking last Thursday or Friday.

So, take some time now and then, and add entries. I'd love to break 5000 by the end of summer!

Though new input to the database is a bit down, actual usage is up. We were getting about 7,500 hits a day a week ago, and are getting 10,000 hits a day now. When you reference a product you're familiar with, be sure to mark your rating and any comments, as that's going to make the index even more useful as it goes on.

I've been making just minor tweaks to the Index for the last couple of weeks. My next topic is going to be to clean up editions a bit, allowing some stuff like ratings and authors per edition, but that might be next week before I hit it.

I'm going to stick this thread and leave it open. If you have any comments or discussions on the index, go ahead and have them here.

Kiero

07-20-2006, 05:47 PM

Minor question about the index, is it only for print games? I went on there and couldn't see anything on Wushu, thought about adding it, but couldn't see any other PDF-only games.

C.W.Richeson

07-20-2006, 05:53 PM

Nice article, it clearly identifies the problems i've encountered with entering information into the Gaming Index so far. I really like the Gaming Index and think its a kick butt project.

ShannonA

07-20-2006, 05:59 PM

Minor question about the index, is it only for print games? I went on there and couldn't see anything on Wushu, thought about adding it, but couldn't see any other PDF-only games.

For data entry:
First page is general info, second page is edition-specific info.

You'll see a PDF-only checkbox on the second page, so yes, enter it.

C.W.Richeson

07-20-2006, 06:20 PM

One thing I would really like would be if the categories presented in Product Category were better explained. I think I understand what all the groups are, but there is a lot of overlap between them and it can be difficult for me to classify a book. My largest current bit of confusion is what constitutes a stat book. So far i've been assuming a Monster Manual is an example of a stat book, but I could imagine an entire book of Feats for d20 being a stat book as well.

Perhaps i've missed the description somewhere?

ShannonA

07-20-2006, 07:13 PM

When I created the "Stat Book" category, I was mainly thinking of a book that was a catalog and a listing of some type. A monster manual, an equipment guide, a literal NPC stat book, etc.

I'd probably classify a book of feats as an "other rulebook", but as usual I'm up for discussion and refinement of the terminology.

(I guess the difference for me is that a stat book doesn't necessarily have new rules ...)

Esarel

07-21-2006, 05:09 AM

Out of curiosity, is there a way to view all the books I have marked as owned? I ask because I was thinking about adding comments, and rating the newer ones, but I don't want to type in each name again. (I don't have that big a collection, but I think it would be a useful feature in general.)

ShannonA

07-21-2006, 09:43 AM

I haven't developed it well yet, but this does the trick currently:
http://index.rpg.net/display-collection.phtml?user=Esarel

Esarel

07-21-2006, 09:50 AM

Cool, thanks. I'll have to go through it later.

ShannonA

07-24-2006, 10:49 PM

I'm making a general call for the entry into the Index of RPGs by Greg Stafford and RPGs published by Wizards of the Coast.

Next week we have some related articles going up (an interview with Greg on Tuesday the 1st and a history of Wizards of the Coast on Thursday the 3rd), and so it'd be great to have those areas as complete as possible before then, so if you can contribute, please do.

For Greg, the index is 80+% there. I personally made sure that RuneQuest, Nephilim, Stormbringer, Elric!, and most auxilliary Chaosium products are complete, at least on the official publications. Greg's entries that are probably missing include: any Call of Cthulhu work he did, some third-party, fan Glorantha supplements, and any work he did for companies other than Chaosium. I don't think there's a lot, and most of it is probably going to be in those fan publications.

For Wizards, I think we've got a great scattering of books, and I have no clue how complete it is. I know some early books related to The Primal Order, Talislanta, and SLA Industries are missing. I have no idea how complete the post-2000 books are, but there are quite a lot of them. For D&D note that the products didn't officially become Wizards of the Coast until they took off the TSR trademark, with the release of D&D3 in 2000.

Thanks for your support!

ShannonA

07-24-2006, 11:08 PM

Here's our current listing of Greg Stafford books, which totals 73:
http://index.rpg.net/display-search.phtml?key=author&value=Greg+Stafford&sort=publisher,stock&type=checklist

And here's a Wizards listing, 154 results:
http://index.rpg.net/display-search.phtml?key=publisher&value=Wizards+of+the+Coast&sort=system,systemversion&type=checklist

ShannonA

07-25-2006, 05:15 PM

I added a browse-by-letter function, which was requested long ago.

http://index.rpg.net/browse.phtml

ShannonA

07-28-2006, 11:57 AM

Made some minor updates to the content system so that the 'type' display is now more useful.

ShannonA

08-10-2006, 06:59 PM

The "Browse the Index" page now has a very extensive set of controls to let you list the best/newest/worst games of various categories.

http://index.rpg.net/browse.phtml

It's shortly going to entirely replace the old "View Gaming Index Stats" page.

owe for the flesh

08-11-2006, 07:51 PM

I added all the WotC Talislanta stuff you were missing.

I have a couple of questions. First, I noticed on some of the In Nomine books that several writers went by 2 different pen names on different books. Is there any way to cross-reference Genevieve R. Cogman as being the same person as G. R. Cogman?

Secondly, when I enter a dual-statted book, it shows up in the index as two seperate editions. Given the volume of dual-statted stuff being churnned out 2002-2005, this may clog the index somewhat. Is there a way to show that this is, in fact, one book?

owe for the flesh

08-11-2006, 08:03 PM

And two more questions on top of those: Chaosium has a line of Cthulhu Mythos fiction reprint books; can these be considered game fiction?

Is there a way to see everyone comments on the entries yet, or is that still being worked on?

edit: never mind this second question, I figured it out myself.

owe for the flesh

08-11-2006, 10:01 PM

Never mind about my first question: It was answered in the article you linked to. Read, read, read the thread before you post, I guess.

That said, I uploaded a bunch of books tonight, but for the summaries I mainly used blurb copy from either the back cover or the company website, and it has suddenly occurred to me that this might not be kosher. Should I edit the entries once they get added, or would this practice be okay?

C.W.Richeson

08-11-2006, 10:07 PM

I do that at times, though I make a note like "From the back of the book: " and then list the text in quotation marks. Mine have always been approved like that.

Never mind about my first question: It was answered in the article you linked to. Read, read, read the thread before you post, I guess.

That said, I uploaded a bunch of books tonight, but more the summaries I mainly used blurb copy from either the back cover or the company website, and it has suddenly occurred to me that this might not be kosher. Should I edit the entries once they get added, or would this practice be okay?

ShannonA

08-13-2006, 12:34 PM

oftf:
Thanks for all the great stuff you've been inputting into the database.

Similar names will eventually get aliased, but pointing them out here speeds up the process. I've synced all the Cogman entries.

Back cover text is fine, and especially useful if highlighted as such. Original text explaining the supplement in a non-marketing way is even better, but I mainly say that to suggest that if you know something more about a book that just has back cover text it's totally OK to change it.

I haven't decided totally where to draw the line for Gaming Fiction. Clearly fiction about an original RPG world is gaming fiction (Dragonlance). I'm pretty sure that fiction about a non-original RPG world also published by an RPG publisher is gaming ficiton (Cthulhu Mythos). Beyond that, things get really fuzzy. But, generally, feel free to put those Chaosium Cthulhu books in.

For the dual-statted books we'll have a better answer long-term, but for now enter them as editions. I think there's going to be a simple way to convert the edition to a "dual-stat" entry down the road. (And internal to the database, they'll be about the same thing.)

owe for the flesh

08-13-2006, 03:20 PM

oftf:
Thanks for all the great stuff you've been inputting into the database.

Similar names will eventually get aliased, but pointing them out here speeds up the process. I've synced all the Cogman entries.

Thanks! Couple others from the same line are Joanna Hart/Jo Hart, Emily Dresner/Emily Dresner-Thornber, and R. Sean Borgstrom/Rebecca Borgstrom.

ShannonA

08-13-2006, 04:05 PM

Any idea whether "Jo Hart" or "Joanna Hart" is more common? They're in the database twice each currently.

Got the others; thanks.

owe for the flesh

08-13-2006, 04:15 PM

Any idea whether "Jo Hart" or "Joanna Hart" is more common? They're in the database twice each currently.

"Joanna Hart" is on the more recent titles, so I assume that's the preferred name.

I don't know of any publications she has worked on other than those four, however. Anyone else have any info?

ShannonA

08-13-2006, 05:28 PM

"More recent" is a criteria I use too, so I've selected that one; thanks.

owe for the flesh

08-13-2006, 06:15 PM

A request: I submitted Nightbane and then added Nightspawn as a new edition, because I wanted the main entry to carry the current title. However, because the system is not distinguished, Nightspawn is listed second. Could we reverse the editions to show that Nightspawn was released first?

ShannonA

08-13-2006, 10:27 PM

It sorts based on date then gameid. If they both came out the same year, there's no way for the system to make a good guess at which came first, and putting in a specific rule for Nightbane isn't the sort of thing to do for a generalist database.

owe for the flesh

08-13-2006, 11:56 PM

Ah, well. Thanks for the reply!

Also, I get a big kick out of the fact that a search for Arthur Machen now comes up with results. I can't really explain it, I just do.

mataglap

08-16-2006, 08:19 AM

You guy are fast!
Almost everything I own has been entered allready.
I had to resort to about 15 year old Over the Edge Adventures to score some entries.
I also entered 'Setting: Modern'. Would it be appropiate to change it into 'Setting: Al Amarja' since most of the rpg takes place on this fictional island?

I'm not sure if I can enter the 'Shadowfist Players Guide: Volume One'.
Shadowfist is the CCG of the Feng Shui RPG but the book contains fiction and artwork that would be useful for the rpg (and collectors like me).

owe for the flesh

08-16-2006, 03:58 PM

ShannonA

08-18-2006, 08:05 PM

You guy are fast!
Almost everything I own has been entered allready.
I had to resort to about 15 year old Over the Edge Adventures to score some entries.
I also entered 'Setting: Modern'. Would it be appropiate to change it into 'Setting: Al Amarja' since most of the rpg takes place on this fictional island?

I'm increasingly thinking the 'Modern' setting is unhelpful, so yes.

I'm not sure if I can enter the 'Shadowfist Players Guide: Volume One'.
Shadowfist is the CCG of the Feng Shui RPG but the book contains fiction and artwork that would be useful for the rpg (and collectors like me).

If it's a straight CCG book, no. If it has fiction relevent to Feng Shui, and there's a notable amount of it, yes.

ShannonA

08-18-2006, 08:07 PM

Here's an unusual question. What should choose-your-own adventure type books be entered as, adventures or fiction? To clarify, I'm talking about TSR's Endless Quest line and similar, as opposed to the Fighting Fantasy/Lone Wolf type of books. I can see arguements for either way, what do the rest of you think?

I added an "Adventure: Solo" category today. For true solo game books like FF/LW it's totally appropriate. I'm a little less enthusiastic for "Endless Quest" which I think had no gamestats if I recall correctly, but since some are explicitly set in TSR gameworlds, I'd say yes.

I'd prefer not for statless books not set in notable worlds, like "Choose Your Own Adventure".

ShannonA

08-18-2006, 08:10 PM

Oh, and if you put in any FF/Sorcery note that Steve Jackson is known in the index as "Steve Jackson (II)".

owe for the flesh

08-18-2006, 09:59 PM

I added an "Adventure: Solo" category today. For true solo game books like FF/LW it's totally appropriate. I'm a little less enthusiastic for "Endless Quest" which I think had no gamestats if I recall correctly, but since some are explicitly set in TSR gameworlds, I'd say yes.

I was going to suggest a new catagory for solo play, in fact there's already one such book in the index ("Wheel of Destruction," for DC Heroes). It'll also be good for TSR's *Class* Challenge series from the mid-eighties.

The Endless Quest series had no stats, but AFAIK all of them were set in TSR worlds (even if just the "default" D&D world).

I'd prefer not for statless books not set in notable worlds, like "Choose Your Own Adventure".

Naturally not! :p

Of course, one can argue that the "CYOA" format represents an early form of narrative resolution mechanic, but I trust no one really wants to go there. ;)

Oh, and if you put in any FF/Sorcery note that Steve Jackson is known in the index as "Steve Jackson (II)".

I might actually have one of those around, somewhere. I'll have to check.

owe for the flesh

08-18-2006, 10:12 PM

owe for the flesh

08-18-2006, 11:23 PM

Another sync to be done: C.J. Carella/C. J. Carella (note placement of spaces).

ShannonA

08-21-2006, 06:02 PM

By the way, Sandy, I have been visiting this site for going on six years now, and even used to post occasionally before NPCs were eliminated, but I never bothered to register. A desire to contribute to the Gaming Index project finally pushed me into it. Thanks for that!

Shannon, not Sandy. But in any case, I'm glad you've been enjoying the Index. A few times I've been adding entries to it late at night when my wife walked in, and she asked "You're still doing work??" and I had to admit that no, I just kind of liked the type of catalog that this index represents.

Though I'm beginning to worry...I'm running out of stuff to add from my own collection, but my FLGS has stacks upon stacks of ICE Shadow World books and old Judge's Guild material for a few dollars apiece. Before, I had no interest in that stuff. Now, I find myself carefully eyeing the bins and thinking, "You know, almost none of these are up on the index yet..." :eek:

You could always just copy down the relevent material there too;).

ShannonA

08-21-2006, 06:03 PM

Another sync to be done: C.J. Carella/C. J. Carella (note placement of spaces).

I should really make the software smart enough to catch that, but in any case ... done.

ShannonA

08-21-2006, 06:05 PM

The RPGnet Gaming Index now includes a full ranking system to tell you what's the best game of all time, and what's the worst. You can jump to ranking pages from any entry except those entered today.

The rating stats are actually still a little immature for these to be truly meaningful, but please take the time to rate your collection of games, and we'll slowly turn this into a great resource for not just WHAT the various gamebooks are, but also how good they are.

C.W.Richeson

08-21-2006, 08:17 PM

I submitted a bunch of pictures for the Quintessential Series today, but they were not posted. They met the minimum image size requirements and were jpegs, no funky background or watermarks appeared, and in general I can't figure out why they weren't used.

ShannonA

08-21-2006, 08:49 PM

They're in the queue, I just haven't run through and posted them yet.

ShannonA

08-21-2006, 08:51 PM

I rejected one, the Paladin, because it was one of those pictures with white space, here long white gutters to the sides.

Everything else is posted.

In any case, thanks for that particular bit of painstaking work;).

C.W.Richeson

08-21-2006, 08:54 PM

Sorry about that, my mistake :) I had noticed that two slightly larger ones had been posted while the others hadn't and concluded that posting run was done.

Thanks for the speedy response Shannon, you rock!

They're in the queue, I just haven't run through and posted them yet.

ShannonA

08-21-2006, 09:03 PM

If I posted two, then got distracted by something else, I understand your concern.

owe for the flesh

08-24-2006, 04:19 PM

Shannon, not Sandy.

...Of course you are.

Sorry 'bout that. Brainfart, brainfart, brainfart. Gah.

If you don't mind another suggestion, would it be possible to change the software to make it possible to enter multiple editions simoutaneously? Right now, you have to wait until the original submission makes it through the queue to update.

owe for the flesh

08-24-2006, 04:46 PM

I'm increasingly thinking the 'Modern' setting is unhelpful, so yes.

I realize this is a bit late, but I vote to keep it. It's a very concise description of the various "Today's Earth, but..." settings that are so common. It also helps keep the setting list from being clogged with stuff like "In Nomine Earth, Heaven, and Hell" and "Your Local High School" (for TFOS).

ShannonA

08-24-2006, 04:47 PM

If you don't mind another suggestion, would it be possible to change the software to make it possible to enter multiple editions simoutaneously? Right now, you have to wait until the original submission makes it through the queue to update.

That's quite hard with the current setup, unfortunately.

ShannonA

08-24-2006, 04:52 PM

I realize this is a bit late, but I vote to keep it. It's a very concise description of the various "Today's Earth, but..." settings that are so common. It also helps keep the setting list from being clogged with stuff like "In Nomine Earth, Heaven, and Hell" and "Your Local High School" (for TFOS).

I'm currently looking at things from a Call of Cthulhu perspective, because that's what I've been entering lately. The trouble is this:

1. There's no way to show the connection between 1920s and 1990s Lovecraft adventures.

2. There's no way to show a Lovecraftian novel is related at all (because they're *not* Call of Cthulhu books because there's no game system).

3. There's no reasonable background listing for a book that has adventures set in multiple timeperiods other than "Generic".

Solutions:

1. List them all as "Setting: Lovecraft Mythos", time period be damned.

2. Do the same, but figure out someway to introduce geography or chronology into the index as sub-settings or something since this is already an issue with, say, Traveller ... and as of about five minutes ago Glorantha.

3. List them all as "Setting: Lovecraft Mythos / 1990", "Lovecraft Mythos / 1920", etc. Make them all adjuncts of "Lovecraft Mythos". Set this as the proper way to deal with multiple time periods. (In addition set "Lovecraft Mythos / 1990" as an adjunct of "Modern", so that you get the appropriate subsets when you look at either master.

4. Leave everything as is.

snafubar

08-24-2006, 05:01 PM

Monsieur Meuble

08-24-2006, 05:14 PM

ShannonA

08-24-2006, 05:32 PM

Just for clarification, if there is a box set with multiple types of books (player's guide, equipment guide, world book, etc.) would it be better to list it as the box or each individual book? There are a few that I have that I'm not sure how to input.

The box should always get listed in any case. Use that as your default; it's never wrong.

The individual elements should only be listed if they were sold individually as well as in the box or if there's some other notable reason that they should be considered an individual unit (for example, AD&D module L3 which was only sold as part of the TSR Silver Anniversary box should get a separate entry because it completes the distinct L series of modules).

If you list both a box and its individual elements for one of the above cases, when they're published you can then use the "Add Content" on the box entry to include the individual elements.

ShannonA

08-24-2006, 05:34 PM

Excuse my question, but will foreign RPG products, both coriginal creations and traduction of anglosaxon ones, soon be possible to get entered in the index ? Are we waiting for a "critical masse" or wil this never happen at all ?

Soon: no. Eventually: yes.

Right now I'm trying to work out all the quirks with the base system and am also continuing to expand the base system's code.

It may well be early next year before we get to foreign editions, but get to them we will, I promise.

owe for the flesh

09-17-2006, 08:33 AM

Another sync to do: Robert M. Schroeck/Bob Schroeck.

Sprue Rubbles

09-18-2006, 12:40 PM

First of all, I love this index. I'm having a lot of fun rating and commenting on it.

1. Is there anyway we can have our own page that gives a summary of what we own and rated/commented on?

2. I'm a little confused by rating the different versions. For example, if you look up Gamma World, it lists four editions. When I rate it, am I rating for the overall game and not specific editions? For games like Gamma World and Paranoia, I would think you would get a wide and maybe not a true indicator for the different editions.

Anyways, thanks for the index!

C.W.Richeson

09-18-2006, 02:27 PM

Your first question, and the index generally, are discussed in the Gaming Index sticky thread in RP Open here: http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=275644

C.W.Richeson

09-18-2006, 02:28 PM

Having looked over the Gamma World entries I think your second point is a good one.

Sprue Rubbles

09-18-2006, 02:55 PM

:o I missed that sticky.

Thanks, I'll head over there.

ShannonA

09-18-2006, 03:26 PM

1. Is there anyway we can have our own page that gives a summary of what we own and rated/commented on?

I had a half-assed page to do this, but I seem to have broken it at some point.

The short answer is: yes, eventually. I'm mainly on vacation this week, but I'll see if I can do something next week, and it'll give me an excuse to remind people about rating again;).

[And thanks for all the rating. Every person putting ratings in for 25 or 50 games they care about really helps.]

2. I'm a little confused by rating the different versions. For example, if you look up Gamma World, it lists four editions. When I rate it, am I rating for the overall game and not specific editions? For games like Gamma World and Paranoia, I would think you would get a wide and maybe not a true indicator for the different editions.

I agree with that, and per-edition ratings are on my long-term list.

For now if you feel strongly about the different editions, I'd suggest not rating it.

Note that there's actually three entries for Gamma World: the original, the Alternity Game, and the d20 version. They may eventually get merged when we have the ability to differentiation ratings (and authors) per-edition but for now when somethings a totally new text, it's a new entry.

Sprue Rubbles

09-19-2006, 01:26 AM

I have a specific question about Darwin's World.

I submitted one for The Foundationists/The Metal Gods, a sourcebook. Technically, the setting is "Twisted Earth" but the general accepted setting is called, "Darwin's World." However, the entry for Darwin's World 2nd edition lists it as a "Generic" setting probably because there is no entry for "Twisted Earth" or "Darwin's World"

I'm not sure if that makes sense but what I'm trying to say is that this supplement as it stands doesn't fall under Darwin's World. It's listed seperatedly with the only common part being that it's from the same publisher.

C.W.Richeson

09-19-2006, 04:55 AM

If you think the other products should be set as Twisted Earth you can edit the entries (there's a button on each page for this) and fix them up! You even get XP for it :)

Sprue Rubbles

09-19-2006, 10:43 AM

If you think the other products should be set as Twisted Earth you can edit the entries (there's a button on each page for this) and fix them up! You even get XP for it :)
Cool, thanks! Truth be told, I brought a few books into work so I can write them up in my spare time...

Valandil

09-19-2006, 01:02 PM

1. Is there anyway we can have our own page that gives a summary of what we own and rated/commented on?

Your ownership is here:
http://index.rpg.net/display-collection.phtml?user=Sprue%20Rubbles

Just put in your user ID at the end of "http://index.rpg.net/display-collection.phtml?user=".
Use "%20" for a space.
Names with single or double quotes might have trouble.

Check out my sig for mine.

Adrienne

09-19-2006, 05:53 PM

Similar names will eventually get aliased, but pointing them out here speeds up the process. I've synced all the Cogman entries.

I just submitted a PDF listing (101 Spellbooks) from Ronin Arts, but entered "Studio Ronin" as the company name because that was the logo on the second page. I belatedly noticed that it says "Ronin Arts" on the front page, and I guess that's the official name, so I figured I should report the typo/duplicate name. :o

Sprue Rubbles

09-20-2006, 11:53 AM

Can someone delete this entry?

http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3713

I entered it without knowing there was this one (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=2029) already but it didn't come up in the search because the title is incorrect. I will go to the original one and make the corrections. Thanks.

Just put in your user ID at the end of "http://index.rpg.net/display-collection.phtml?user=".
Use "%20" for a space.
Names with single or double quotes might have trouble.

Check out my sig for mine.
Thanks Valandil!

owe for the flesh

09-24-2006, 12:22 PM

<a href=http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3539>The Ptolus: City by the Spire entry</a> has the wrong picture posted. <a href=http://index.rpg.net/pictures/show-pic.phtml?picid=2910>This cover</a> is actually from the Ptolus comic book.

Mechante_Anemone

09-25-2006, 10:58 AM

As of this morning, I note the following:
There are 3802 ratings in the Index. The average rating is 7.38. Ratings above 8.09 are in the 99th percentile, ratings above 7.59 are in the 90th percentile, and ratings below 7.18 are in the 10th percentile.
In other words, the average rating is not "Average" (which corresponds to a score of 6.) This makes sense because naturally, despite some unfortunate purchases, most of the books in our collections are books that each of us considered to be "good", "above average". As a result, we have such a small spread in scores as to be almost meaningless (80% of the more than 3,800 entries scoring within a spread of 0.41 points!)

This is not a criticism, but an observation, now that we have enough data for numbers to be reasonably representative of the RPGnet population. I guess I should go read on rating, scoring, and ranking systems for survey, to see if I can find good ideas on how to make such scores more workable.

Another possible factor for the very uniform scores may be the tendency of some people to score anything the like a "10", as if voting for the product. I don't know if this is happening here, but I have seen it in other places. Personally, I was very stingy with 10s ("One of the best ever"), and gave few scores below 5 ("Below Average".) I gave a large number of scores at 6, 7, and 8. Is that pretty much how others proceeded?

owe for the flesh

09-25-2006, 12:25 PM

Yeah, that's pretty much how I'm doing it. One reason the scores are high is that people have a tendency to buy products that they like, which means informed ranking will tend to be high. Also, the "default" ranking is somewhere around 7.5, whch means that most rankings will be pretty close to that unless they have a lot of people commenting on or reviewing them.

C.W.Richeson

09-26-2006, 04:03 PM

This item - Exalted Storyteller's Companion (2006) http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3913

is already in the database here: http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=43

Thanuir

09-27-2006, 08:02 AM

Another possible factor for the very uniform scores may be the tendency of some people to score anything the like a "10", as if voting for the product. I don't know if this is happening here, but I have seen it in other places. Personally, I was very stingy with 10s ("One of the best ever"), and gave few scores below 5 ("Below Average".) I gave a large number of scores at 6, 7, and 8. Is that pretty much how others proceeded?That is pretty much what I did; and I do believe it is possible that some people give an automatic 10 for stuff they like. I don't think it is common.

owe for the flesh

09-28-2006, 10:32 AM

Another wrong picture: <a href=http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=2888>The Justice League Sourcebook.</a> As best I can tell, this picture is from WEG's DC Universe RPG, not Mayfair's DC Heroes.

ShannonA

09-28-2006, 04:44 PM

I just submitted a PDF listing (101 Spellbooks) from Ronin Arts, but entered "Studio Ronin" as the company name because that was the logo on the second page. I belatedly noticed that it says "Ronin Arts" on the front page, and I guess that's the official name, so I figured I should report the typo/duplicate name. :o

This is now an alias.

ShannonA

09-28-2006, 04:46 PM

ShannonA

09-28-2006, 04:47 PM

ShannonA

09-28-2006, 04:50 PM

This item - Exalted Storyteller's Companion (2006) http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3913

is already in the database here: http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=43

I'm confused by this because 3913 is the Storyteller's Screen.

ShannonA

09-28-2006, 04:52 PM

ShannonA

09-28-2006, 05:07 PM

As of this morning, I note the following:

In other words, the average rating is not "Average" (which corresponds to a score of 6.) This makes sense because naturally, despite some unfortunate purchases, most of the books in our collections are books that each of us considered to be "good", "above average". As a result, we have such a small spread in scores as to be almost meaningless (80% of the more than 3,800 entries scoring within a spread of 0.41 points!)

This is not a criticism, but an observation, now that we have enough data for numbers to be reasonably representative of the RPGnet population. I guess I should go read on rating, scoring, and ranking systems for survey, to see if I can find good ideas on how to make such scores more workable.

Another possible factor for the very uniform scores may be the tendency of some people to score anything the like a "10", as if voting for the product. I don't know if this is happening here, but I have seen it in other places. Personally, I was very stingy with 10s ("One of the best ever"), and gave few scores below 5 ("Below Average".) I gave a large number of scores at 6, 7, and 8. Is that pretty much how others proceeded?

OK, more about ratings.

First, let me say that I'm entirely happy with the way that the ratings are proceeding. The system is still young, but I think we're getting good data into the system, and that's slowly developing into what will eventually be a great way to rank every RPG system ever written. I've been doing some more programming work on ratings and rankings this week because it's hitting critical mass, and I want to get more people involved.

(Among other, back-end stuff, you can sort any search by 'ranking', so you can now see, for example, all of the Call of Cthulhu books, from best to worst.)

But a few points beyond that:

1. There are actually not nearly enough ratings in the system yet for it to be generally meaningful. We have 3928 entries and 4003 ratings. My electronic daemons have been able to definitively link in another 2232 ratings from reviews through an ISBN or by-hand match, bringing the total to 6235, plus there's some additional number which are loosely linked to reviews through a name match.

If you think about that, that means that there's just 1.5 ratings per entry. If these were evenly distributed, every rating would currently be worthless, but as it happens the ratings are disproportionately allocated to a small number of entries, resulting in the entries toward the top and bottom of the rankings being fairly meaningful, and the huge batch in the middle (meaning probably the 80% being discussed here) not being meaningful yet.

That will slowly change as the database grows and as I figure out techniques to definitively link more reviews.

2. The algorithms I use to count ratings on the database are actually specifically designed to keep things toward the norm. The total sum of real ratings is averaged with a 25 sum of "average" ratings. The main goal is to keep things from bouncing all over the map as the result of a small number of ratings. But it also means that until entries meet a critical mass of ratings (5-10) their value is closer to the average than it otherwise would be.

This is called a 'bayesian average'.

3. In general, people tend to rate high. I've seen this in various statistical analyses that I've done. On a 10-point scale the vast majority of the ratings will be in the 6-10 range.

This is why we used a 10-point scale (because it means there are 5 meaningful data points) and this is also why each point value has a specific, named attribute (because it helps people rate more realistically).

By the by, no one gives everything a 10 unless they just rate 1 or 2 items, and those ratings actually get largely discounted (as you'll see if you read the below articles).

4. I've written some more on these topics:

General issues with ratings:
http://www.skotos.net/articles/TTnT_/TTnT_179.phtml

The Gaming Index rating formulas:
http://www.skotos.net/articles/TTnT_/TTnT_196.phtml

C.W.Richeson

09-28-2006, 05:35 PM

Rightfully so, I have no clue what I was thinking. Sorry!

I'm confused by this because 3913 is the Storyteller's Screen.

owe for the flesh

10-02-2006, 09:03 PM

Just out of curiousity, Shannon, is there a way for individual users to see the average of the ratings they have given?

ShannonA

10-02-2006, 10:49 PM

Not yet. It's easy enough when I get back to some personal info pages.

owe for the flesh

10-03-2006, 10:02 PM

Not yet. It's easy enough when I get back to some personal info pages.

Thanks for the reply!

Another error in the database I've found: <a href=http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=711>This entry</a> has the wrong picture. This cover is actually from <a href=http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=714&editionid=2703>Thystram's Collectanea</a>.

owe for the flesh

10-03-2006, 11:16 PM

:mad:Aaaarrrgh! I uploaded a bunch of Talislanta covers, and I put the wrong one <a href=http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=724>here</a>. Could someone please delete it?

owe for the flesh

10-04-2006, 02:28 AM

There are two entries for the Lostfinders Guide to Mire End: <a href=http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3461>here</a> and <a href=http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3559>here</a>.

ShannonA

10-05-2006, 03:43 PM

Pictures & Lostfinders fixed.

owe for the flesh

10-05-2006, 06:20 PM

Thank you!

I've submitted the correct pictures.

owe for the flesh

10-06-2006, 12:20 PM

Another sync to do: Nigel Findley & Nigel D. Findley.

ShannonA

10-09-2006, 11:32 AM

Another sync to do: Nigel Findley & Nigel D. Findley.

One of the easiest administrative tasks, because I've actually built the tool to do it.

Done.

Sleeper

10-09-2006, 12:01 PM

I scratched off Findley, but here are some others I've noticed:

Aliases: Gwendolyn F.M. Kestrel = Gwendolyn F. M. Kestrel, Gary Gygax = E. Gary Gygax, Sean K Reynolds = Sean K. Reynolds = Sean Reynolds, Owen K.C. Stephens = Owen K. C. Stephens ?= Owen Stephens, Stephen Kenson = Steve Kenson, Chris McCubbin = Chris W. McCubbin, None = None listed = "", Edwyn Thanks = Edwyn Kumar (typo in WotN), Carl Cravens = Carl D. Cravens, Ian Harac ?= Lizard

Duplicates: 109 and 392 (Enemies and Allies), 185 and 419 (Savage Species)

Misc: Add container doesn't seem to work, but Marvel Super Heroes Advanced Set should contain the Marvel Super Heroes Advanced Set Judge's Book and the Marvel Super Heroes Advanced Set Player's Book (though neither was sold separately, so you could make an argument for deleting them, though the comments would have to be moved). The Hellboy limited edition has the wrong picture (the cover is black, and while the art is reprinted inside it lacks the lettering).

Editions: Seems to be a tricky issue. I added Heaven & Earth 1st Ed. as an edition of the 2nd Ed. Game Master's Guide, but it should probably be separate since it was split into two. On a slightly different note, the earlier editions of GURPS Fantasy are direct ancestors of GURPS Magic and Banestorm, not the current version of GURPS Fantasy. The AD&D1&2 and D&D3+ DMG, PH, and MM should probably be three books and umpteen editions. Burning Wheel has a similar problem, with the two books (BW Book 1: Fantasy Roleplaying System, and Book 2: BW: Character Burner) listed as separate when they're always sold together (I changed the wording on Book 1 to make it sound more like the set, but I think it was originally intended to be just the book).

-Pat

ShannonA

10-11-2006, 12:04 AM

I'm not quite done with this, but I was struck by the bug to show lots of related covers today. This is an example of what it'll look like, using the good 'ole search interface:
http://index.rpg.net/display-search.phtml?key=system&value=RuneQuest&sort=nosort&type=pictures

ShannonA

10-12-2006, 04:34 PM

C.W.Richeson

10-12-2006, 06:55 PM

This functionality is now fully integrated. Whenever you do a search, you can do a "View As ... Cover Listing" and you'll see all the covers come up, which often looks quite cool.

If you enjoy adding covers to games, this interface is also really good for seeing what's missing and then adding them in with just a simple click through on the absent image.

This is freakin awesome. I expect you're going to get a *lot* more covers added over the next week.

Edit: I had been wishing I could do exactly this the other day.

C.W.Richeson

10-12-2006, 07:28 PM

There are two entries for Savage Species (though there is only one product):
http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=185
http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=419

ShannonA

10-12-2006, 07:38 PM

FIxed.

Sleeper

10-12-2006, 08:31 PM

A few more needed fixes:

Lenard Lakofka = Len Lakofka
The Gurps Horror (1987 edition) cover image is actually the cover of GURPS Horror, 3rd Edition (2002 edition)
The Silver Age Sentinels image with red and blue background (not yellow) is the d20 version, so one of the pics associated with the Silver Age Sentinels Deluxe Limited Edition (tri-stat) is incorrect (like the rotating images though)
The GURPS Martial Arts (1990 edition) cover image is actually the cover of GURPS Martial Arts, Second Edition
Transhuman Space (hardcover edition) should contain GURPS Lite for Transhuman Space
GURPS WWII (main entry) should contain GURPS Lite for WWII
The Discworld Role-Playing Game (main entry) should contain GURPS Lite (3E)
Hellboy Sourcebook and Roleplaying Game (main entry) should contain GURPS Lite (3E)
GURPS Prime Directive (GURPS 3 edition) should contain GURPS Lite (3E)
There is a duplicate Blasphemies (main entry numbers 62 and 97)
Plus most of the ones in my previous post.

owe for the flesh

10-13-2006, 08:03 AM

Sleeper:

You can use the "Add Content" button on the entry to make "contained in" changes yourself, if you wish.

Sleeper

10-13-2006, 09:57 AM

Thanks, but I tried it for all the ones I mentioned in both my earlier posts. Doesn't seem to work for me.

owe for the flesh

10-13-2006, 12:32 PM

I'll admit, it's not exactly intuitive, but I've (mostly) been successful when I try it. What precisely are you doing? Maybe I can help.

Assuming I can make it work, at least. I just added GURPS Lite to GURPS WWII. Let's see if it works.

Sleeper

10-13-2006, 02:03 PM

I went to the container entry, clicked add content, cut & pasted in the exact name of the contained item, left game id blank (no other option; the drop down box is blank, and nothing can be entered in the field), then chose the container from the drop down box.

I've tried it at least half a dozen times over the past couple weeks, and it's never worked. I've had the most luck just spelling out very clearly in a new entry what it contains or is contained in, and hoping an editor notices and adds the container (e.g. Rahasia (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=4050)).

owe for the flesh

10-13-2006, 02:25 PM

Have you tried entering the URLfor the "containee?"

Sleeper

10-13-2006, 02:34 PM

Just tried it with GURPS Lite for THS. But it asks for "entry name", not an url.

Sleeper

10-13-2006, 02:53 PM

Here's another issue: Should we "Upload A Cover" when there's a perfectly acceptable image already in the database?

Usually, there's a picture in the main entry but not in the edition. For instance, the main entry (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=172) of Arzno has an image, but the edition (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=172&editionid=191) doesn't, and it seems silly to upload the same image twice. I've come across quite a few like this.

Pierce Inverarity

10-13-2006, 04:33 PM

By the way, if people want to check what games are still missing from the Index, there's a German site which you can browse for comparison. It's a bit of a mess but quite comprehensive.

http://www.drosi.de/lexikon.htm

ShannonA

10-13-2006, 05:06 PM

Sleeper,

Thanks for all the corrections. I'd missed your earlier message. I just got most of those name changes in. I'm going to be writing some new software to help me with the picture changes and to help with the "none", "none listed", etc names. Suffice to say all of the corrections are appreciated and will go in, I'm just trying to write software right now as I need it to make the database more self-sufficient.

As for the "Add Content", you're using it wrong. Which means that the system wasn't intuitive enough. I've added an explanation. Go take a look and see if it works now.

ShannonA

10-13-2006, 05:17 PM

I did a big, nasty rewrite of the search engine today to better accomodate and interface with the new cover searches. I think everything's working, but you've been forewarned.

The only output difference you should note is that the covers now show the purple headlines for whatever you're sorting by.

owe for the flesh

10-13-2006, 05:18 PM

As for the "Add Content", you're using it wrong. Which means that the system wasn't intuitive enough. I've added an explanation. Go take a look and see if it works now.

Well, I hit tab, but there's no pop-up. I turned my pop-up blocker off in case that was causing the problem, but there's still nothing.

Sorry, this has got me confusticated now.

ShannonA

10-13-2006, 05:22 PM

ShannonA

10-13-2006, 05:41 PM

Well, I hit tab, but there's no pop-up. I turned my pop-up blocker off in case that was causing the problem, but there's still nothing.

Sorry, this has got me confusticated now.

It should appear write in the "Game ID" box, right there in the page.

If it doesn't you've got security that's blocking Javascript, communication with the server, or something.

Sleeper

10-13-2006, 09:44 PM

Thought you might just be busy.

Hmm. I'm still having a problem with the containers as well, and I don't normally have a problem with Java script. When I tried to add content to Transhuman Space, I entered "gurps lite" in the entry name field, and when I tabbed to the game id field it was briefly highlighted, then it went back to white. The drop down box still shows nothing, and the entire game id field is only about one character wide.

More duplicates:
Mind's Eye Theatre (1) (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=362) & (2) (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=2788)
The Fire Within (1) (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=515) & (2) (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3899)
Black Monks of Gastonbury (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=1418) is a weird one... someone entered two separate editions for the same book, apparently because it's statted in two different systems
Orbital Decay (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=1598), both editions are identical so one can be deleted
Library of Bletherad (1) (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3726) & (2) (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3796)
"Unknown" should be aliased with the "none" variants when you get around to it.

Feast of Blades should be a separate entry and In Nomine Game Master Pack should be its container (right now they're editions of each other) (1) (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=2843).

Wrong images (just need to be moved to a different edition):
The image for Big Eyes Small Mouth Second Edition is actually the Second Edition Revised (1) (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=82)
The image for Toon 1984 is actually the Deluxe (1991) Edition (1) (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=883)
The image for the Rifts Conversion Book 1992 is actually the Revised (2002) Edition (1) (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=875)
The image for Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 1985 edition is actually the Revised (1987) Edition (1) (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=1069)

ShannonA

10-13-2006, 10:10 PM

All good stuff, Sleeper.

I think I have all of your duplicates, name aliases, and pictures moves done.

The edition changes and the issues with no-names take some code changes to do right, and so they're going to wait a couple of days, but keep them coming. I'm using this thread as a master reference.

Oh, and it appears that IE doesn't deal with the content AJAX right. That's definitely something that's going to wait a couple of days. (I hate AJAX. And IE.)

Oh, and as for the Black Monks: that's currently the accepted way for doing multi-stat books. It's going to get cleaned up sometime in the future, but for now it's close enough.

Sleeper

10-13-2006, 10:38 PM

Ah ha. The game id drop down box is entirely different using Firefox.

That two-editions for one book thing is... awkward.

On a separate note, it still seems wrong that a book with three or four reviews averaging 3.5 out of five across the board is actually rated lower than a book with no ratings at all. You've obviously done a lot of research on the various rating systems; is there any precending for biasing the scores towards the theoretical average (5.5, or 3+3=6 in the review scoring system), instead of toward the average of all the scores currently in the system?

Part of the reason why scores are biased toward the upper end is that people tend to review or rate the items they like or are favorably impressed with first, and the items that didn't make an impression slip to the bottom of the pile. I think it's safe to assume that the average rating of all the items that haven't been reviewed, if they were all rated/reviewed and reached their correct rating, would be considerably lower than the average rating of all the items that currently have ratings or reviews. And normalizing ratings toward 5.5 instead of 7.37 would also spread out the very tight range of scores a bit.

-Pat

ShannonA

10-13-2006, 11:59 PM

That two-editions for one book thing is... awkward.

Yep. Somewhere down the road there will be a way to say "these are really the same thing", and then the data still gets stored as two editions, but it looks like one to a casual view.

On a separate note, it still seems wrong that a book with three or four reviews averaging 3.5 out of five across the board is actually rated lower than a book with no ratings at all. You've obviously done a lot of research on the various rating systems; is there any precending for biasing the scores towards the theoretical average (5.5, or 3+3=6 in the review scoring system), instead of toward the average of all the scores currently in the system?

I've considered using 6 as my average rather than the real average. However I suspect it's the wrong thing to do because it would create a statistical glitch in the system.

But I'm going to look at it at some point, do some math, and see what I think.

In any case, the more ratings an item has, the less relevent it becomes, because the bayesian weight shrinks as a percentage. In other words, when the system is mature enough, it really only matters for "new" items.

By the by, one of the answers is just not to rank games at all when they have too few ratings, and that's probably the better answer for the problem you laid out.

Thanuir

10-14-2006, 01:57 AM

This might be next to impossible to implement (I have no idea) but is worth a thought: Some sort of forum code, like double square brackets, wold link to the relevant index entry.

Like, say, writing [[Wushu]] would display Wushu (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3084).

There would be people reading the forums clicking these links and probably rating the relevant entries if they care about them. Also, "What system should I use for X?"-threads would benefit.

C.W.Richeson

10-14-2006, 04:48 AM

I think that is a good idea. However, it can already be done by doing a search and linking to the search. "Try out Cinematic Unisystem (http://index.rpg.net/display-search.phtml?key=system&value=Unisystem+%2F+Cinematic&sort=system,systemversion)!" I admit that takes more time than simple forum tags though.

Sleeper

10-14-2006, 09:22 AM

I prefer biasing it towards the center (and spreading out the range a bit), but simply not ranking items with "low-trust" ratings would solve another problem: two items with identical ratings can be separated by hundreds of ranks, since the database appears to use order of entry as a tiebreaker.

Last night I used Add Content (with Firefox) to enter the James Bond 007 and GURPS Lite containers, but they still haven't appeared.

ShannonA

10-14-2006, 11:32 AM

The order of entry thing: yeah, it's silly. I considered adding another significant digit, but the honest truth is that it's never going to be truly meaningful because the algorithms of the index just don't go out to three digits. I should probably change it to secondarily order by total (descending) weight of ratings/reviews.

Add content: all in except the James Bond one. If items are already editions of each other, there's no need to list them as contents too.

The forum link: a good idea. I'll take a look at it soon.

Sleeper

10-14-2006, 12:07 PM

Cool.

The two James Bond editions should probably be split into two separate entries when you get to that stage. The box set does include the book (exactly the same book).

C.W.Richeson

10-14-2006, 06:43 PM

If anyone wants to, there's a goldmine of entries in the HERO 5th covers. The HERO games site has them all. Unfortunately the 2 cover format makes the images look too small (according to Shannon) so they need to be cropped so as to just display the front cover.

Just wanted to share!

C.W.Richeson

10-14-2006, 07:03 PM

Sometimes items show up as lacking a picture (Upload a Cover) but once the cover is submitted it shows a different cover already being used. Is it drawing this image from the store database by default or what?

ShannonA

10-15-2006, 10:49 PM

No, the only caching is likely to be on your side.

Sleeper

10-16-2006, 03:00 PM

Some images appear to be associated with the main entry, not the edition they belong to.

ShannonA

10-16-2006, 03:06 PM

Yep. Often this is an artifact of someone not knowing what edition the cover belonged to or entering the cover before that edition was in the database. I've thought about disallowing it, but I think it's generally more useful to have an uncatalogued picture than a miscatalogued one.

I'm thinking about some ways to allow people to tag an uncatalogued picture as belonging to a certain edition.

Sleeper

10-16-2006, 03:32 PM

That would be good. I stopped using "Upload A Cover" and started clicking on the main entry instead when I realized how easy it was to upload a duplicate.

ShannonA

10-18-2006, 02:16 PM

That would be good. I stopped using "Upload A Cover" and started clicking on the main entry instead when I realized how easy it was to upload a duplicate.

You now see all existing covers when you upload. I'd intended this a long time ago (and had in fact programmed it but there was a glitch in my code and I never noticed it wasn't displaying the covers).

Shannon

ShannonA

10-18-2006, 05:56 PM

By the by, let me know if you see any wacky errors (specifically calls to undefined functions). I've been rewriting the entire library these last couple of displays, which includes updating lots of function names to better standardization and I've already caught a few updates that I missed.

Pierce Inverarity

10-18-2006, 06:22 PM

I noticed that the Chivalry & Sorcery entries are a mess, and of late a partly invisible one. As in, a title and system search for C&S doesn't list the early editions.

I added some (one?) C&S entries earlier this week--did the editor in charge notice the mess as well and pull them all for revision?

ShannonA

10-18-2006, 11:21 PM

Check your Private Messages. You should have received a PM for each of the additional early editions that you posted asking that they be posted as editions of http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=1571 instead.

All the data you entered should be in the PM.

Pierce Inverarity

10-19-2006, 12:12 AM

OK, got them. My PM alert said I have "0 Unread" messages so I didn't check.

ShannonA

10-20-2006, 02:45 PM

There's a new editing function now called "Add in Series".

This is intended for trilogies and other "official" series of books. Feel free to go crazy with it. There's lots of series in the database already. But, be sure to read the info at the right of the page the first time you do, so that we're all working from the same definition of what a "series" is.

ShannonA

10-20-2006, 02:57 PM

I just added another clarification to my "what a series is". It shouldn't replicate some datum that's already in the index. So, don't make a series for a setting or a game system.

"Transhuman Space" was the example that popped up here, but it's alreayd easy to do a search for that via the regular mechanisms.

C.W.Richeson

10-20-2006, 03:02 PM

"Transhuman Space" was the example that popped up here, but it's already easy to do a search for that via the regular mechanisms.

I was "testing the waters" to see if I understood :)

In some instances the title does not reveal the line - such as with Vampire: The Requiem books (Coteries, Invictus, etc.) Would it be appropriate in that circumstance? Or is this really more for novels and modules?

ShannonA

10-20-2006, 03:33 PM

I was "testing the waters" to see if I understood :)

No complaints; it showed me something I needed to clarify.

In some instances the title does not reveal the line - such as with Vampire: The Requiem books (Coteries, Invictus, etc.) Would it be appropriate in that circumstance?

No, because they're all visible by a "Vampire: The Requiem" system search. Just like the Transhuman Space is visible with a "Transhuman Space" setting search.

Or is this really more for novels and modules?

It can be for anything that falls into a well-established publisher-recognized series that isn't visible by one of the current keys (setting/system, mainly). Usually it's for when someone says, "this is book X of a Y book series".

Some variant examples entered so far:
* Several fiction trilogies (a coherent set of books)
* Three books released for Spacemaster 3 as "Tech Law" books (ditto)
* Four books released by Issaries as Pre-finished Works (this is borderline, and I may remove it because I'm thinking about entered some specific entries for binding type, and this would be a "chapbook").
* An 8-or-so book adventure sequence spread throughout Tribe 8 books.

Sleeper

10-20-2006, 04:56 PM

Love it. I've been playing a bit, and I just want to clarify how to handle the multiple layers of series. To use a convoluted example, Sign of the Skull (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3777):

is Number 15
in Series II
of the Instant Adventure product line
of the Legends & Lairs product line

I put it in "Legends & Lairs Instant Adventure Series II". Should it be shortened to just "Series II", with the rest implied as the additional layers are added?

Once both Series II and Series III are established, should I then create an "Instant Adventures" and include one from each (SotS, plus perhaps Daggers at Midnight (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3773) from Series III)?

And finally, should I create a "Legends & Lairs" series with just one item from the entire "Instant Adventures", or with one item from each of the sub-Series?

Note that there are also "Legends & Lairs" books that don't belong to sub-series, like Wildscape (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3728).

ShannonA

10-20-2006, 05:11 PM

Generally:

The longer names are fine. Figure that they should be uniquely understandable out of context (which is one of my rules for book names too). So, because "Instant Adventures" is so nebulous, it should have the L&L attached.

As for the layers (lairs?) of series, don't worry about them.

At some point in the future (as time allows) I'm going to expand the system so that you can say "series1 & series2 are in series themself". That would, in your example, link up the entirity of Series2 and Series3. There would them be a link that said "Also part of the L&L INSTANT ADVENTURE SERIES".

Sleeper

10-20-2006, 05:55 PM

Just the lowest-level? Might want to remove: "If a series is made up almost entirely of distinctive subseries, just include a book in the subseries", then.

ShannonA

10-20-2006, 06:05 PM

OK, I can see why that text was confusing. See if it's clearer now, and thanks for the pointer.

ShannonA

10-20-2006, 10:52 PM

By the by: there will be a UI to reorder things later on. Sometime next week ...

For now it sets an initial order based on how things are input.

I'm also going to create a "keep this alphabetized" option down the road for those lists that don't have a strict order.

Sleeper

10-21-2006, 12:14 AM

I've been careful about inputing them in the correct order, but obviously it breaks down when items are added later.

I've also been playing with naming conventions. It's a tricky balance between correctness, specificity, and brevity.

The "Original Adventures" series needs a more specific name. Perhaps "Original Adventures (Wizards of the Coast Column)". It keeps the correct title of the series, with a clear qualifier. And if it's too big, perhaps break it up by year.

ShannonA

10-21-2006, 10:23 AM

I don't see any need to break something up that really is a coherent set without any subseries unless you introduce an artificial distinction.

owe for the flesh

10-21-2006, 12:12 PM

Pierce Inverarity

10-21-2006, 12:48 PM

Alright, the C&S entries look good now! Do you need me to resubmit the cover images for the different editions?

Sleeper

10-21-2006, 03:10 PM

This (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=666) seems to be a waste of an item number, when there are much better candidates available, including this (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=4345) and this (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3910) (unfortunately, the pool is limited due to the conspicuous absence of this (http://atrocities.primaryerror.net/rahowasucks.html) and this (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=244590) from the index).

ShannonA

10-22-2006, 06:25 PM

OK, I'm not certain how I managed to do this, but I tried to put <a href=http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3877>Darkness & Light</a> and <a href=http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3878>Kendermore</a> into a single series, but I somehow wound up with them each in a seperate series, both called Dragonlance Preludes. Help please?

It looks like there's a bug in the mass-approve function I wrote for series when a series has exactly two elements in it.

Feh.

I'll get it fixed up tomorrow.

ShannonA

10-22-2006, 06:25 PM

Alright, the C&S entries look good now! Do you need me to resubmit the cover images for the different editions?

If they're all on the main C&S entry, I should be able to get it sorted out.

Sleeper

10-23-2006, 04:09 AM

How about series that include both subseries and individual books? For instance, a GURPS Space series should eventually include both the Space Atlas series and individual books like Unnight. Should we create the series and add the individual books, or wait until the subseries can be included?

Also, it should be The Darksword Trilogy, plus a sequel. The final book is considered distinct from the others (see here (http://www.margaretweis.com/books/bibliography.php); the setting is radically different, even if some of the characters carry over). So it really should be the Darksword Trilogy, and another series including both the trilogy and the Legacy of the Darksword. There doesn't seem to be an formal name for all four books together.

Edit: Oops, Wurst should probably be removed from Grimtooth series. It's a best of compilation, not a continuation of the original 7 books. Probably rename the series to "Original Grimtooth's Traps Books" and just add 1309, 1313, 1308, 1312, 1310 to the original (1311). (Tree and Bazaar aren't in the index yet.)

I also added "Powered by GURPS Lines". I only included the core books, but technically every book in each of the lines is PBG. Again, I'm not sure if we should wait until the subseries are implemented. It would also require a Transhuman Space series to work.

-Pat

owe for the flesh

10-23-2006, 01:20 PM

Two more duplicates: The Explorer's Handbook: <a href=http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=1750>here</a> and <a href=http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3587>here</a>.

Champions: Superpowered Roleplaying: <a href=http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=384>here</a> and <a href=http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=810>here</a>.

Sleeper

10-23-2006, 11:13 PM

That was weird. This edition:
http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=4530&editionid=5073

Should actually be an edition of this:
http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=4531

ShannonA

10-24-2006, 03:29 PM

ShannonA

10-24-2006, 03:31 PM

the database appears to use order of entry as a tiebreaker.

Weight of ratings is now the tiebreaker.

ShannonA

10-24-2006, 03:37 PM

Weight of ratings is now the tiebreaker.

And after that page views, which will only be of relevance for totally unrated items.

Mechante_Anemone

10-24-2006, 04:12 PM

Right now when I try to browse the index by letter, I get a number of results, e.g., "INDEX LETTER SEARCH: S (450 RESULTS)", but the query does not return the actual entries.

ShannonA

10-24-2006, 05:28 PM

Right now when I try to browse the index by letter, I get a number of results, e.g., "INDEX LETTER SEARCH: S (450 RESULTS)", but the query does not return the actual entries.

Thanks. I seem to have broken it in a fit of cleverness yesterday.

Fixed now.

ShannonA

10-25-2006, 06:34 PM

I just did a total rewrite of how series work. I think I put everything back together right, but if you see any problems, let me know

Sleeper

10-25-2006, 08:18 PM

There are two Hunter's Blade Trilogies, and one is garbage. But that was my bad, not a problem with the series.

New aliases: Patrick Younts = P. Younts, Alejandro Melchor = A. Melchor, Adrian Bott = A. Bott, Gareth Hanrahan = G. Hanrahan

The image of Mayfair's Undead is wrong (the image is actually of AEG's Undead, which already has a picture). The GURPS Lensman 1st edition image is actually an image of the 2nd edition.

The review http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/reviews/rev_6709.html has anniversary misspelled in the title, which is probably why it doesn't show up under the appropriate index entry.

ShannonA

10-26-2006, 05:54 PM

There's a new feature on the "Browse" page where you can now see the "Most Owned" items for each of the categories, which offers a different measure of popularity than straight ratings.

ShannonA

10-27-2006, 01:24 PM

For books with less common binding (that's novels that are trade paperback, hardcover, slipcased, or chapbooks or RPGs that are hardcover or boxed), you can select a binding in the add/edit edition page.

For books produced for a foreign, English-speaking market (that's Canada, UK, Australia, and it's mostly UK) you can now list that market.

Both of these bits of info are automatically added to the edition name, so you no longer need to put those in (and if you edit an old edition you should in fact remove the extra info).

Sleeper

10-29-2006, 08:45 AM

When you have a chance, you might want to combine the PDF/POD checkbox with the binding list box. Right now, all the PDFs have softcover bindings.

I also suggest allowing each edition to have a separate list of authors. There are more than a few books where that matters.

And since there is a field for the primary authors (covering Substance), how about a field for Style (the cover artist)?

-Pat

ShannonA

10-29-2006, 11:43 AM

The PDF<->Binding is a good catch.

I'll put it on my list. The others already are (and I've in fact already modified the databases to allow for them, I just haven't done the grunt work yet).

Sleeper

10-29-2006, 06:42 PM

A minor bug:

Browsing the 100 MostRated Entries, the first entry is:

"Dungeons & Dragons Player's Handbook Hardcover Hardcover"

The three editions are entered correctly.

owe for the flesh

10-30-2006, 07:42 AM

owe for the flesh

10-30-2006, 11:26 AM

Mechante_Anemone

10-30-2006, 02:19 PM

EDIT: Nevermind -- error code # ID10T, or "The problem is between the keyboard and the chair.":o

C.W.Richeson

10-30-2006, 03:36 PM

EDIT: Nevermind -- error code # ID10T, or "The problem is between the keyboard and the chair.":o

*laughs*

Edit: I think this is the only problem i've ever had while adding to the index.

Sleeper

10-31-2006, 01:40 PM

Ewen Cluney = Ewen "Blackbird" Cluney
Loren Wiseman = Loren K. Wiseman
Savaged Edition (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=4633) should be an edition of Brainwashed (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=1667)

ShannonA

10-31-2006, 05:29 PM

A minor bug:

Browsing the 100 MostRated Entries, the first entry is:

"Dungeons & Dragons Player's Handbook Hardcover Hardcover"

The three editions are entered correctly.

This is now fixed, though I'm not 100% I like the way the bindings are currently being displayed and might change it all.

ShannonA

10-31-2006, 05:30 PM

Is there a way to remove a listing from a series?

I carelessly pressed the wrong button and added <a href=http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3305&editionid=3636>this entry</a> to the "Into the Enviroment" series.

Well, I didn't approve it.

But generally, an "edit series" function is on my "maybe" list for this week. I need to figure out some deeper methodology for allowing editing of a lot of this other stuff to do it.

ShannonA

10-31-2006, 05:33 PM

Perhaps we could add a "loose-leaf folder/loose-leaf pages" entry to the binding options? I'm thinking specifically of the AD&D 2nd Ed Monstrous Compendiums, but I believe there are other releases in this format from TSR's Marvel Super-Heroes and Columbia's Harn series.

Added.

A "saddle-stiched/staple-bound" option could be useful, also.

The saddle-stitched v. perfect-bound just didn't seem important enough to note. The purpose was to create an optional bit of new data for unusual books, while contrariwise saddle-stitch v. perfect-bound would just split down the middle and create more incorrect data.

ShannonA

10-31-2006, 05:34 PM

EDIT: Nevermind -- error code # ID10T, or "The problem is between the keyboard and the chair.":o

Feel free to talk about those, as they're sometimes silly, but sometimes actual UI problems.

ShannonA

10-31-2006, 05:38 PM

ShannonA

10-31-2006, 05:38 PM

You can now search by series name in the little pop-up search box that appears to the right of many pages.

sheepy555

11-01-2006, 08:23 AM

thanks ;-)

Stupidity removed. - Curt

Pierce Inverarity

11-01-2006, 03:33 PM

Ranko

11-01-2006, 03:37 PM

Well, I didn't approve it.

But generally, an "edit series" function is on my "maybe" list for this week. I need to figure out some deeper methodology for allowing editing of a lot of this other stuff to do it.

Edit would be nice because I accidentally added the fictions to the wrong series here (also made a duplicate under the proper L5R 4 Winds Saga) (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=%202134&submit=series).

Also editing a series name would be good (or if you could edit "Clan War" into Legend of the Five Rings "Clan War" I'd appreciate it).

ShannonA

11-01-2006, 05:30 PM

I will try and make both of those possible this week.

I'm off playing with a new software system right now ...

ShannonA

11-01-2006, 05:31 PM

I just noticed a new entry for a Baldur's Gate novel, and it occurred to me we don't have a category for tie-in CRPGs?

Of course, so as not to open the floodgates, those should be strictly P&P-derived in terms of their "rules" or setting or both. So, Baldur's Gate, NWN and KOTOR would be in (because they use some version of the D&D / Star Wars d20 mechanics for combat and chargen), and so would the old Traveller CRPGS.

Hmmm... maybe there's too few to merit a separate category?

Probably worthwhile. I suspect there's quite a few, and it'd be really nice to look them all up.

Ditto, I've been thinking about a board-game tie-in section.

These aren't an immediate thing, but I think they'll eventually go in.

ShannonA

11-02-2006, 04:23 PM

This is what a mega-series is going to look like:
http://index.rpg.net/display-series.phtml?seriesid=536

The backend's all there. I'm not sure when I'm going to write the front-end so that other people can add them, but ... eventually.

Ranko

11-03-2006, 02:06 AM

Shannon, can you edit a few of the L5R series titles, that incorrectly state "Legends of the Five Rings ...", you just need to drop the extra -s.

Thanks.

Sleeper

11-03-2006, 09:53 AM

Oops. That was me. Funny what your fingers type when your brain knows better.

I like the use of space in the mega-series. Any chance of adding a series-level field for notes? Most of the series titles are self-explanatory, but there are a couple that could use an additional sentence or two.

Ranko

11-04-2006, 04:58 AM

Can we get a good way to report douplicates? I recently added a few, and tryed editing them into different books which resulted with PMs telling me not to :o

ShannonA

11-05-2006, 03:14 PM

Can we get a good way to report douplicates? I recently added a few, and tryed editing them into different books which resulted with PMs telling me not to :o

Yep. I'll think about how to do it next week.

Sleeper

11-07-2006, 06:51 AM

7th Sea dupes: Avalon (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=313) / Avalon (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=790), Eisen (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=311) / Eisen (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=791).

This series (http://index.rpg.net/display-series.phtml?seriesid=544) has a blank entry.

-Pat

Ranko

11-08-2006, 05:22 PM

Browse by genre & setting would rock my world.

Sleeper

11-11-2006, 01:02 PM

One thing that bugs me: OGL is a license, not a system. While almost all OGL products are derived from the d20 system, any game can be released under the license (like Fudge (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=3146&editionid=4504)).

-Pat

Mechante_Anemone

11-12-2006, 12:17 AM

ShannonA

11-12-2006, 11:01 AM

D'oh! I was entering a series of Star Wars d6 books, and I mistakenly re-entered Tatooine Manhunt (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=4069) (I missed the existing entry because I was looking for Star Wars: Tatooine Manhunt. Could someone merge the two or delete one? Sorry... :o

They're merged.

By the by, the name "Star Wars" really shouldn't be at the start of everyone of those books titles (probably). It's a rare line which definitively makes the product line name a part of each product title. Unless they're showing it in all the indicia and in their catalogs/web-sites/or-other-advertising, the product name should just be the product name, only using the line name when the book wouldn't otherwise be distiguishable (e.g., a "Player's Handbook", "Gamemaster's Screen", etc).

Mechante_Anemone

11-12-2006, 11:29 AM

They're merged.
Thank you!
By the by, the name "Star Wars" really shouldn't be at the start of everyone of those books titles (probably). It's a rare line which definitively makes the product line name a part of each product title. Unless they're showing it in all the indicia and in their catalogs/web-sites/or-other-advertising, the product name should just be the product name, only using the line name when the book wouldn't otherwise be distiguishable (e.g., a "Player's Handbook", "Gamemaster's Screen", etc).

Huh, OK. I understand, though it is exactly the opposite of the way I was searching game lines (because systems that are common to different lines become hard to distinguish.) But OK, I'll take care to enter the name w/o the game line if it's not absolutely obvious it needs to be there.

ShannonA

11-12-2006, 01:37 PM

Huh, OK. I understand, though it is exactly the opposite of the way I was searching game lines (because systems that are common to different lines become hard to distinguish.) But OK, I'll take care to enter the name w/o the game line if it's not absolutely obvious it needs to be there.

I think the systems have likewise been used a bit broadly. Yes, Star Wars is d6, but it's its own distinctive system, and you couldn't just pull out its supplements and use them for Ghostbusters. So it should be "Star Wars".

I personally think that the OGL and BRP systems are done right. Do a search on either and you'll see a few games come up with those names, and then all the subsidiary systems are shown too.

I just haven't pushed it much until I make it possible for people to list that sort of parentage.

ShannonA

11-12-2006, 02:32 PM

There we go, I think this is sorted out more nicely now:
http://index.rpg.net/display-search.phtml?key=system&value=d6+System&sort=system

Sleeper

11-12-2006, 02:53 PM

I still don't think OGL works. It's a license, not a system. There are OGL products derived from the main/fantasy SRD (like Unearthed Arcana), products derived from the Modern SRD (like Darwin's World), products that borrow from several SRDs and different sources entirely, and entirely stand-alone products that just use the license and none of the material from any of the SRDs (EABA, Fudge, etc). Claiming that they use a non-existent OGL system is misleading. While knowing which products are released under the OGL is a useful datum, it doesn't actually say anything about the system a particular game uses.

I'm not sure what the best solution is. It would be good to have a way to indicate that a particular product uses the d20 system license, or the OGL, but it would have to be a separate field. And picking a name for the different classes of SRD-dervived products is tricky, because there isn't a set of common terms.

-Pat

owe for the flesh

11-12-2006, 04:06 PM

I think the best solution is log products produced by WotC (or under special license from WotC, like Kenzer & Co's Kalamar line) as D&D, those produced under the d20 license as d20, and anything produced under the OGL as its own system (under the line name, if nothing else).

ShannonA

11-12-2006, 05:26 PM

Well, it's the system that's important, not the licensing agreement. However, I think the system is pretty important to note because some of the OGL sources only difference from d20 by the fact that they decided to include character generation.

So "OGL / Fantasy SRD" and "OGL / Modern SRD" and maybe "OGL / Mixed SRD" sound like the right things to list.

Is there anything under the current OGL megalisting that's not "OGL / Fantasy"? How about that Babylon 5 stuff which was plain d20 in the previous iteration?

Sleeper

11-12-2006, 07:22 PM

I don't think additional groupings would be useful. Creating hard to apply categories just leads to poorly categorized items. My basic problem is the terminology.

Technically, OGL refers to a license. However in common parlance, OGL usually refers to the set of games based on the d20 System (however loosely) that don't also use the d20 System Trademark License. This second definition also excludes games like Fudge that use the OGL, but not the d20 System itself.

The term "d20 System" is also tricky. Wizard of the Coast defines it as: "the game engine used in Wizards of the Coast's hobby gaming roleplaying game (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/srdfaq/20040123b)". Essentially, that means the d20 System is the basic engine behind both D&D and d20 Modern. However, by this definition, both D&D and d20 Modern belong under the d20 System penumbra. So do all OGL games derived from the SRD.

More commonly, d20 System is used to refer to products released under the d20 System Trademark License. By the terms of the license, all these games must also use the OGL. But unlike some of the games released under only the OGL, all d20 System Trademark Licencees are required to use the d20 System itself to some degree (since you can't have a complete game without rules for character creation and advancement).

The terminology is sloppy. Common usage and multiple technical definitions contradict each other, and overlap. I'd be inclined to separate out all the OGL games that don't have anything to do with the SRD, and make them their own systems or lump them into Generic / One-Off (more or less the status quo). Then take all the current OGL system games, and combine them with all the d20 System games.

Unfortunately, the most concise name for the combined grouping ("d20 System") is also misleading since it's commonly used to refer to games that use the trademark license, which exludes the games loosely referred to as "OGL". A more technically correct name is "d20 System (including all OGL products derived from the SRD)". But that's far too verbose.

ShannonA

11-12-2006, 08:11 PM

Well, right now I have d20 System, which include d20 Modern, Star Wars d20, and OGL, and OGL includes a number of non-d20 but SRD games. Thus if you do a search for "d20 System" you see everything and if you do a search for "OGL" you see only those games that aren't specifically d20 games. So, they are all technically under d20, they're just a step removed.

The only real issue with consistency that I've seen is something like Babylon while was d20 in the first edition and OGL in the second.

I'd also generally agree with your statement that D&D should be d20, I just didn't want to bloat the category that much.

It sounds like, from what you're saying, that this is actually a pretty accurate way of doing things, even if the terminology is technically incorrect.

Sleeper

11-12-2006, 10:19 PM

Yes, the categories are pretty good.

Thinking it over, "d20 System / OGL" would be a good compromise between brevity and accuracy. It's clear, and makes it clear that the system is more important than the license.

But if it's the system that's important, not the license, it's hard to come up with argument why the OGL and d20 System categories shouldn't be merged. An OGL game and a d20 System game can be more alike than two different d20 System games, or two OGL games. So there's no real distinction from a system standpoint, except that one requires the PH (or d20 Modern).

-Pat

Mechante_Anemone

11-15-2006, 09:24 AM

There we go, I think this is sorted out more nicely now:
http://index.rpg.net/display-search.phtml?key=system&value=d6+System&sort=system

Yes! Works better for me, anyway. It's easier to sort between D6 Space stuff, etc., and Star Wars material. Thank you!

Thanuir

11-16-2006, 12:41 PM

ShannonA

11-16-2006, 02:53 PM

Temple of elemental evil (novel) (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=4720) evidently counts the computer game reviews. It has no ratings and score far in excess of ~7,35. Or whatever the current average is.

Yep, I know.

I'm trying to decide whether to allow (1) related computer games -and- (2) related board games into the index.

Yeah or nay?

C.W.Richeson

11-16-2006, 03:29 PM

Yay. RPG related board games and video games are no more or less RPGs than the RPG related novels allowed, which often have little to nothing to do with the RPG.

In many cases the video games still use most of the RPG system.

If you could work in a disclaimer noting the video game needs to be related to a pen and paper RPG, and not just be a video game of the RPG genre, then that would be ideal.

This ultimately will result in a "Best RPG related board game" and video game results, which will be fun to take note of.

Pierce Inverarity

11-17-2006, 03:54 PM

What CW said.

Sleeper

11-17-2006, 09:58 PM

Might as well. Novels opened the floodgates.

Another dupe when you catch up with the previous ones: Digital Web 2.0 (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=4864) is already an edition of Digital Web (http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=642).

Ranko

11-18-2006, 02:42 AM

What are RPG related board games?

And dosen't that open up the Index to RPG related CCG's? Miniatures? Tabletop games (like Warhammer & 40K)?

I'd be cool with that but we would need rules, so we don't get Risk or Monopoly in there.

Or just open up the index to borad games too (which personally I would be cool with).

Sleeper

11-18-2006, 11:03 AM

T-Shirts?

ShannonA

11-18-2006, 12:03 PM

What are RPG related board games?

Board games set in an RPG-original background or using an RPG game system. Imperium (for Traveller), Grand Tribunal (for Ars Magica), The Great Khan Game (theoretically, but it does have the Forgotten Realms logo on it).

And dosen't that open up the Index to RPG related CCG's? Miniatures? Tabletop games (like Warhammer & 40K)?

Maybe.

Or just open up the index to borad games too (which personally I would be cool with).

What value-add could we offer over BoardGameGeek?

Ranko

11-18-2006, 12:19 PM

What value-add could we offer over BoardGameGeek?

None I suppose. Then again, what is BGG? ;)

C.W.Richeson

11-18-2006, 05:42 PM

owe for the flesh

11-19-2006, 07:01 AM

While one is the PDF version and the other the print version it may be the case that the two Scroll of the Monk entries should be merged.

http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=4830

http://index.rpg.net/display-entry.phtml?mainid=4658

These are actually different. <a href=http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=21029>The Imperfect Lotus</a> is apparently a compilation of 8 martial arts forms not in the print book (cut for space, maybe?), not a PDF version of the Scroll of the Monk. The entries don't really make this clear, admittedly.

C.W.Richeson

11-19-2006, 08:04 AM

These are actually different. <a href=http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=21029>The Imperfect Lotus</a> is apparently a compilation of 8 martial arts forms not in the print book (cut for space, maybe?), not a PDF version of the Scroll of the Monk. The entries don't really make this clear, admittedly.

Ah, good catch!

owe for the flesh

11-19-2006, 09:48 AM

On another note, many entries have their ratings linked to the wrong reviews. Is this something we should be reporting?

No, it's a long-term project.

The review doesn't actually get inserted into the ratings unless (1) the title is *EXACTLY* the same -or- (2) the ISBNs match. So for the most part it's displaying potentially wrong (but potentially related) items, not including them in the ratings. The aforementioned Temple of Elemental Evil was a rare exception, and I'd just take those out of the index-linking permanently if I wasn't going to want them to get linked when we put computer games in.

By the by, sometimes the incorrect item is only getting linked because the correct item isn't in the index, so if you take the time to insert the missing item, as long as ISBNs match up, the review will then get linked to the new index item the next evening.