Template talk:Item

Modifying MasterItem Template.
I'm interested in modifying Template:MasterItem. Changes include: Here's a text comparison tool illustrating the changes: https://www.diffchecker.com/8s2bthpt --Muhgoof (talk) 11:22, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * becomes, because some items that aren't collectibles still have an article page. Currently Special Cards fit that description, but more may in the future.
 * Removing the line which categorizes templates into Category:Item Templates, because I think the categories hierarchy should resemble a tree, not a graph. That line is one of the largest obstacle in that effort.
 * Removing the line which categorizes templates into Category:Collectible Templates; instead adding a category for activated collectibles and one for passive collectibles. The reason for this is that the category of collectible templates is a confusing designation. For some reason it includes actives, passives, and trinkets as well. It's in conflict with the in-game Collection Pages (they don't include trinkets). Additionally, the collectibles template is excessively inclusive at 400 pages and growing with Afterbirth.
 * Finally, the line which categorizes templates into Category:Card Templates can be split to instead categorize card templates into either Category:Major Arcana Card Templates, Category:Playing Card Templates, or Category:Special Card Templates.

There's always some dusty templates that need revisions, so any feedback is very much appreciated.
 * 1) Yep originally any non-collectibles weren't planned to use the MasterItem template like they do now, so  is a left over from those times.
 * 2) Any template using the ItemMaster template should be in once catergory, mainly for maintenance reasons. (Things like bot edtis based on certain categories for example)
 * 3) Yup, I agree, trinkets etc shouldn't be listed in the Collectibles category.
 * 4) Same as above, it's always useful to have all collectible templates together in one category. There's no reason not to add the categories Activated Passives and Passive Collectibles though, as it only helps to make things easier to group. I'd suggest to add the "Collectible" and "Passive"/"Activated" group is an item fullfills the isactivated/ispassive requirement.
 * 5) Again, no to just splitting cards without having them all in one group. It's especially weird because:
 * Cards don't all have specified groups they belong to. From a flavor perspective it might work, but gameplay wise a card is just consumable item with a one time effect. It would be similar to grouping collectibles around categories such as "food" or "household items". We try to categorizes based on mechanics first if possible.
 * Runes are Cards in all but name. Ties to the one above. I predict that with Afterbirth we might get more pickups that behave in similar ways. Eventually we might have to come up with names to group items that mechanically fucnton the same.

So how does that sound?

Excellent use of diffchecket btw :P

Dooomspeaker (talk) 17:27, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. --RoshanLynch (Jsmooth13) (talk) 19:17, 4 August 2015 (UTC)