Daggerfall Unity Wiki

[Deepfighter]

I did the UESP question. We'll see what they say: https://forums.uesp.net/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=40821

I specified our approach a bit, as I am a UESP user for 12 years, my experience is that they respond not so fast on forum queries, so I do hope that they will read it. If nobody reacts until Sunday, we go the way over the Community-Portal to give it more visibility. Will do that then, but first lets see if/what we get for responses.

[Jay_H]

Excellent counsel, Deepfighter. Thanks for your help.

[mikeprichard]

A dedicated space for DFU on UESP would be swell. Hope this works out.

[Deepfighter]

FYI - as there was no response till now, I posted our proposal now on the more visable Community-Portal. Let's see how it goes.

[Jay_H]

Good, thanks Deepfighter... I'm anxious to get started

[Deepfighter]

We got some positive answers, which give us now the possibility to give it a further thought and discuss for a unified respond.

For me both ways - namespace and subpages - would be fine. Subpages in the Daggerfall namespace would look like:

• Daggerfall:Daggerfall Unity/Mods/DREAM
• Daggerfall:Daggerfall Unity/Gameplay/Magic
• ...

So if we are going to create a basic structure, which we should in any case, we would be fine with this approach, too. Do you have ideas how to structure it, or what we want to cover in general?

Personally, I would argue to take the idea of Enodoc and create a TES2mod namespace, where other Daggerfall hacks/mods (Andyfall, Hackfall, Eye of Argonia,...) are collected, but also a page for Daggerfall Unity, and we go from there for subpages, which would look like that:

• TES2mod:Daggerfall Unity/Mods/Dream
• TES2mod:Daggerfall Unity/Gameplay/Magic
• ...

I would answer to be also open for an own namespace, and if they agree we can be happy, but otherwise the compromise would be the above and also enough for our purpose, I think. Could you all agree on that, or do you have any other thoughts?

[Jay_H]

If people go into the classic Daggerfall reddit, at least 60% of the people who post there assume Daggerfall Unity is the way to play it. I think people are underestimating just how much influence DFU is going to have on this game. I'd hesitate to call DFU "just another mod."

That said, I'm happy to go either way. I'd prefer a namespace under Daggerfall itself, but if TES2mod is what they prefer, I won't put up a fight

[mikeprichard]

I'd also suggest DFU is far beyond and altogether different from the scope of a "traditional" mod, and is rather an "alternative" to classic Daggerfall that is likely already more popular than classic itself. But as Jay_H said, whatever works to get the info visible and in one convenient location.

[Azteca]

I'm comfortable with TES2. I will defer to you Deepfighter on those internal workings of UESP, but it makes sense to me.

Re: UESP, since we will be working together in a way (leveraging their existing Daggerfall content for things unchanged from classic) we should look at the state of their Daggerfall pages.

I found this "Daggerfall Redesign Project" https://en.uesp.net/wiki/UESPWiki:Dagge ... gn_Project
This was started in 2007, you can see completed items, but is not done. According to the talk page, things went quiet by 2015. https://en.uesp.net/wiki/UESPWiki_talk: ... en_A_While

Seems like the spell maker and bugs are the remaining items. So, info on spell-making would be a good thing we could contribute to UESP in the future.

[Azteca]

I'd also suggest DFU is far beyond and altogether different from the scope of a "traditional" mod, and is rather an "alternative" to classic Daggerfall that is likely already more popular than classic itself. But as Jay_H said, whatever works to get the info visible and in one convenient location.

Hi Mike, I tried to message you but you have PMS disabled. So I'll put it here if you don't mind:

I saw your post elsewhere on the forum about updating Daggerfall pages on UESP. We could use the insight of someone who has edited Daggerfall pages on UESP. There will obviously be some overlap between the pages for classics and DFU and as you've discovered, developing DFU exposed how some systems actually work in contrast to the manual or accepted wisdom. It would be great to improve the DF pages and avoid confusion and contradiction in the future.
We chat about the wiki on the #dfu-wiki channel here: https://discord.gg/BFNJFrs
And we are getting some info together on this doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hYh ... xj47dm1d6p

I'm sure you're a busy guy but any insight would be greatly appreciated.