Talk:The Official Ascension FAQ-Rewrite

From TheKolWiki
Revision as of 23:38, 22 August 2014 by Yatsufusa (Talk | contribs) (Outline: Thanks Vorzer.)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Outline

So we should probably create an outline for the topics that we need to cover, in the order we want to cover them. We should probably explain the basic point of ascension first, then the specific benefits of doing so, then various different ways of going about those goals.

So, something like...

What is ascending?
What is kept and what is lost
Items and Hagnk's
Campground
Familiars
Quests and events
Karma
Deli Llama, Pet Heaven, Jermery's Permery
Explain all three of those separately.
The Bureau of Reincarnation
Softcore Vs. Hardcore
Ronin and Pulls
Challenge Paths
Current path
Out-of schedule paths (Each explained separately)
Dietary paths
General tips for ascending well
Basic ideas for skills to perm (could be context sensitive for current class)
Classes vs. Avatars
Avatar points
Leaderboards and commendations
Ways to earn more karma (Nemesis/Sea quests, beating NS at level 13, making a leaderboard run)
Significant quests that take more than one ascension to complete fully (Sea/nemesis again, mainly)

...this is just to get us started. I'm sure I left some things out. --Chamou (talk) 19:42, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

So we still miss Classes vs. Avatars, Avatar points and Leaderboards and commendations, should we choose to include them – which sounds like a good idea. --Yatsufusa (talk) 16:30, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
I think the "cannot use old items during current challenge path" thing is worth mentioning somewhere. Unless an explanation was added to Valhalla? The last time I ascended was before Slow and Steady happened. --Vorzer (talk) 20:54, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, it's mentioned in valhalla, though it wouldn't hurt to include a link to type69.php in the FAQ as well, I think. --Chamou (talk) 21:10, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I took a break from KoL while that was implemented and still don't really know if that is a restriction that's here to stay or just something they are just experimenting with... The only time I had seen this made really noticeable was on Hardcore Familiar Analysis so I'm guessing the wiki community is either not that sure as well or reduced it to saying "you can't use stuff from before 2012 in this challenge path" without pointing out that this will be some kind of a basic concept from now on. --Yatsufusa (talk) 00:51, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Is there a proper, maybe even official name or description for the "type69" restrictions? I could at least whip up some hard to understand gibberish about the restriction and how it maybe or maybe not will affect all future special challenge paths while they're still in season. --Yatsufusa (talk) 18:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
This is all I could find on the subject:
Jick: "[...]Is type69 still the plan for future challenge paths? I'm fine with
it, but I've seen other players complain quite a bit on the forums." Yeah,
they'll do that. And yes, it is.
July 31, 2014 transcript. --Vorzer (talk) 21:42, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I just listened to that part and it's actually only those lines, so I'll work with what I got. --Yatsufusa (talk) 23:38, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
We have now written something about every missing topic Chamou came up with. Not knowing if any watching party had some kind of deadline in mind, I'd like to take the opportunity to thank anyone who participated in this rewrite. Considering it's been two weeks and a day since this page was started, if anyone suddenly remembered final tweaks he wanted to make or maybe even point out missing topics, he or she should speak up. --Yatsufusa (talk) 18:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Strategy Hints

While I see nothing wrong with an official piece of game documentation giving players little generalized help or a nudge in the right direction, I don't think specific skills should be discussed there – after all, the wiki didn't get created just because someone wanted to copy all the ingame text. On top of that I think it's a little awkward. Picture it yourselves:
You're a player that somehow managed to defeat the NS and freed King Ralph without ever looking at the wiki. What a glorious achievement! Then you notice the portal... You click the link to the FAQ. Let's see... changing character class... lots of text what will become of your stuff... PvP... keeping skills... Mr. Store... Moon Signs... and suddenly a single one of your skills is discussed and 5 others you've never heard of.
Besides maybe feeling a little inadequate I think that the player would be rather confused. I'm not saying "Strategy, Schmategy", but even discussing 3 skills in length won't give a player a good idea about a class. Rather than this I'd like the player to learn how to mine for fish himself. Like telling him to ask other players for advice. Encouraging players to search for knowledge and social contacts can't be wrong. --Yatsufusa (talk) 11:11, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

I agree with you on several points. As it is, I imagine our rewrite would be quite intimidating to the would-be ascender. As writers of a wiki, we are accustomed to account for all that is, indiscriminately; to describe it exhaustively and unambigiously; and to inform of any possible exceptions to discussed rules. For a FAQ, I think a little bit of limitation is in order. F'rinstance, it explained, before, each dietary path in detail, where I think it is sufficient (if not excessive) to say that they all restrict consumption. The ingame storedesc for the BTP stores explain how they work, and much the same goes for zodiac signs and the paths.
And for the record, I am very much against the idea of dumping Advanced Strategy Discussions into this. KOL is a game, and we shouldn't instill in newbies' heads that they should immediately begin calculating and comparing different choices for respective advantages and disadvantages. If they are interested in the favourite free-time pastime of KOLers that is optimality, they can ask in chat and consult sites like the forum or the wiki._-^Blargh (talk) 13:26, 8 August 2014 (UTC)^
I'm all for NOT adding a list of suggested perms to this thing. Telling people to pick the one they like best or ask the community for help is just fine. To be honest, I was worried I was going overboard by mentioning Gardens three times. --Johnny Treehugger (talk) 13:34, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm mainly speaking from personal experience when I bring up suggestions of strategy and skill perms for the FAQ. That's what *I* wanted help with out of the FAQ, and it was completely useless for that. (For reference, I started playing in February 2013.)

So, uh. I get where you guys are coming from. I do agree with the idea that more generic advice is called for rather than specific skills, but I think it's still of use to mention the various categories of skills in order to give players a more concrete concept of what they might be lacking. Things like turn generation, combat, defense, are all very concrete terms that I think anyone who completed an ascension and understands the basic idea of an RPG should get intuitively.

So maybe we won't get into specific details about individual skills, but I do think the basic idea of cross-classing skills in order to become a more well-rounded and powerful adventurer should be mentioned. How much detail do you guys think is necessary? --Chamou (talk) 14:29, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

I think it's worth mentioning, but I think getting into too much detail is a bad idea. It's not really a strategy document. Maybe give, like, one specific example of cross-classing (Saucecrafting + Pastamastry?) at most. As for getting into categories of skills, most newbies I've seen want quality of life stuff - attacks, defense, healing, maybe +meat - whereas veterans are going to tell them to get turn gen, turn savings, +/- combat modifiers, +item, +ML... I say let kids be kids and when they're ready for Ur-Kel's, it'll still be there for them. --Johnny Treehugger (talk) 14:45, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Those kinds of things are easier to judge if you make an example. Maybe the skill categories made for the Hardcore Skill Analysis could be helpful here.
Also <br /> or additional ::s can make your posts more readable. ;) --Yatsufusa (talk) 14:49, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

How is ascension spelled again?

Also, I strongly object to the first question not being "how is 'ascension' spelled", because, seriously, who spells it like that? --Johnny Treehugger (talk) 13:34, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I'm not an English mother-tongue speaker, so it's totally possible that I'm missing something here. What would be alternatives to spelling it "Ascension" and why would it be relevant to list it in a FAQ that reads Ascension over and over again? --Yatsufusa (talk) 13:44, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Words that end with a "-shun" sound typically end in -tion, so words like ascension can trip people up. It's funny because you don't need to ask how it's spelled, because the FAQ is written, not spoken, so, like, it's right there! The question doesn't even need to be there, but there it is! What a ridiculous (another word that people have trouble spelling) question to start an ascension FAQ with! I dunno, I think it's funny. --Johnny Treehugger (talk) 14:08, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
That's good enough for me. Restored it. --Yatsufusa (talk) 14:14, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. :) It's not exactly funny, but it's one of those "quirky" things that I love about KoL. --Johnny Treehugger (talk) 14:17, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Meh. According to Wiktionary (which I must rely on in lieu of actually hearing people talk English) -sion is pronounced -ʒən whereas -tion is pronounced -ʃən or -ʃn̩. I think I would pronounce tion more voicedly. But if it makes you happy, then oh well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blargh (talkcontribs) on 14:30, 8 August 2014
I just pronounced "ascension" and "vacation" (the first word I could think of that came to mind that ended in -tion) and now my coworkers are wondering what I'm doing. Also, they sounded the same to me. But maybe I've been mispronouncing ascension. It doesn't come up much outside of discussions about KoL and 99.9% of those are typed anyway. --Johnny Treehugger (talk) 14:45, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Since we had this chat, I've encountered two (probably) independent players performing this very error. Tsk, tsk, I thought the playerbase was better than that.__Blargh (talk) 17:49, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

" If you pick the more challenging route, (...)"

Hey Johnny

I removed that part because it implies that only a specific type of run (Normal? Hardcore? I'm not even sure) allows this function. It refers to the way perming used to work, before karma became a thing, and should be reworded, if you really want it to be there (which I'm still not sure I agree with). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blargh (talkcontribs) on 15:04, 11 August 2014

Hey Blargh. I agree with you that that particular sentence fragment is wrong, I'll remove it. As for the rest of the sentence, I agree that we shouldn't spend a lot of time calling out individual skills and strategies, but I think keeping a sentence from the original FAQ that does a good job of implying what your first three perms should be without shoving a THIS IS HOW TO BE OPTIMAL strategy section in your face is a good thing. --Johnny Treehugger (talk) 16:07, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Hiding Bad Moon

Since we're discussing these topics anyway: Why is the Bad Moon sign not more outlined? I mean I get that they don't talk in length about every little thing that exists in KoL, like side quests, but to what degree is BM supposed to be a secret? I haven't been around when it was first discovered and for me it is just one more type of ascension that existed as long as I can remember. Would it really be a problem to write "[...] as well as one more challenging Moon Sign that is hidden." in the FAQ? --Yatsufusa (talk) 16:09, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Are you implying that you would have wanted to be informed, back then? I can't tell. Anyway, I think the "Q: Ten? There are only nine zodiac signs here!" thing is funnier. It's teasing, and would cause some players to seek information for themselves; specifically, the people who care about learning the secrets of KOL. Maybe we should refer to the wiki in a way something like this:
Q: This FAQ doesn't answer my questions in any meaningful fashion!!
A: For further information, you may wish to peruse <link>.
I just can't help but feel that it would be shamelessly self-advertising!--Blargh (talk) 17:47, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, linking the wiki there when it's so restricted everywhere else wouldn't feel right. While I think the "Ten? I meant nine..." approach is good, I'm somewhat worried the hint itself might just drown between stuff like the "Ascension" gag. I wanted to know to what degree BM is supposed to be a secret (not implying anything there), because if it is actually something that Jick would have written in there himself (or at least something he would write today), we could skip looking for clever hints. ;) I wouldn't say that most players will learn about it anyway sooner or later, no matter what, but that's exactly why I'm asking what they said back then about the degree of secrecy – or if they even said something about that at all. --Yatsufusa (talk) 18:52, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
This discussion reminds me of a haiku - hard cored florists can / count down from ten to zero / don't go 'round tonight --Johnny Treehugger (talk) 19:32, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
don't go 'round tonight / 'cause it's bound to hardcore life / shun lucky flowers --Johnny Treehugger (talk) 23:06, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
There once was a demon from Hey Deze / who was quite a hit with the ladies / he was hard to his core / and you know what is more? / he never touched ten petaled daisies. --Johnny Treehugger (talk) 02:13, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Hm. I hadn't considered that approach. Yatsufusa, I've never heard about BM being a secret; if so, it probably stopped being before my time. As you have probably gueßed from my other posts, I am inclined towards shorter, more general information being in this FAQ than most are - it's not as if I am vehemently against this specific bit of enlightening. It's just that I think of BM as a "higher" form of gameplay, similar to Sea diving. And I also do think anyone interested would find their way to Zodiac signs at one point, and from there, to Bad Moon. Is there any rush? Is part of the joy of playing not exploring the Kingdom, and suddenly stumbling upon unknown content?--Blargh (talk) 14:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Dammit! Now I'm conflicted... :) Suddenly not mentioning Bad Moon at all sounds like a good option again. But doing a tiny "ten" hint sounds good as well. My biggest issue here is that I'm not confident that every player will find his way to the wiki. Judging from how some players dump spading data and new item descriptions into the official forums (instead of creating new wiki pages or posting it to talk pages here) some never will. So my concern is: Will an average KoL player ever discover Bad Moon if he doesn't use the community resources (chat, forums, wiki)? as well as Now that we have the opportunity – should we give him a nudge?
Truth be told: Without the forums, I probably would have never found out how to build a meatcar and without the wiki, I doubt I would have figured out the old level 9 quest... Without this community, KoL might have been nearly unplayable for years – and to a certain degree it possibly still is, despite the revamps. If BM would be a thing that players learn about throughout the game and/or had any logical unlock mechanism, we wouldn't be talking. Since it hasn't, I think giving some spoiler somewhere in the game would probably be a good move. What do you say? --Yatsufusa (talk) 18:25, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
No, the average player would never discover BM by their(them?)self. I'm not even sure how it was discovered in the first place - there aren't any ingame hints to its existence, are there (then, come to think of it, a person ascending first-time in HC might not be conscient of the benefits of clovers and as such, not use them? I don't know)? But the question we should ask ourselves is probably "exactly what do we want from this FAQ?". Is it its (and, by aßociation, our) responsibility to ensure that no player is left uninformed about things like Bad Moon, the Wiki, semirares? Is that a part of its purpose?--Blargh (talk) 15:36, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Not in the first place, no. If there were hints inside the game, like getting a "Really? You want to ruin your perfectly good misery by adventuring here with a clover? (Y/N)" the first time you attempt to adventure with a clover in hardcore, I would drop the topic completely. The thing is: Right now Jick doesn't care enough about the topic to dedicate his limited workforce into making it more discoverable. But if we have the chance to hide a hint to Bad Moon inside the game – shouldn't we? I feel like I should. My main question is still: How much of a spoiler would we be allowed to give? Which nobody here seems to be sure of, currently. --Yatsufusa (talk) 16:03, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Bad Moon was discovered because TPTB dropped hints about its existence. The Official NS-13 press-release claimed there would be "A super-awesome, super-secret, super-new ascension type -- the long pined-for totally level playing field." And people immediately started trying to do wild things to discover it. The first mention of the term Bad Moon was during this radio show, but we didn't know what that meant until Skully posted this. Knowing the name actually led people to the answer. There's a lot on the forums about our attempts to spade it, but it really happened because of those hints. It does not seem out of line for the Ascension FAQ to also drop a hint. --Bale (talk) 04:19, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much, Bale. Knowing a little more about Bad Moons history now puts things more into perspective. I guess the "Ten" hint is enough. --Yatsufusa (talk) 13:44, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

'Italics'

I know this is a minor thing, but for reasons unknown to me, the old FAQ used 'apostrophes' instead of italics to emphasize words. If there are no objections I'd like to replace the former with the latter. --Yatsufusa (talk) 17:31, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

You mean as in the case of "Q: How is 'ascension' spelled?" and "Q: What's this I've heard about 'hardcore' ascension and different 'paths' of ascension?"? I think those apostrophes are supposed to be quotation marks, which is weird, considering that the non-bold answertext uses ". But sure, italics are the best way to convey light emphasis. I'd believe that the FAQ will be perfectly capable of rendering italics; I'm not sure why it used asterisks before._Blargh (talk) 09:45, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Starting with jokes

I feel like expanding the "What does ascension mean" joke by another silly paragraph dragged the beginning gag a little to far. On the other hand it could be that I just lack humor... --Yatsufusa (talk) 16:14, 17 August 2014 (UTC)