UESPWiki talk:Morrowind Overhaul Project

NPC and House PagesEdit

It might be worth bringing this up on the Community Portal before you go ahead with the project. It was originally decided to only give "relevant" NPCs individual pages, and with Oblivion houses were documented on the NPC page of its owner. I'd support following Skyrim's style and creating the missing Morrowind pages, but the change in policy still merits discussion. —Legoless (talk) 00:35, 22 February 2013 (GMT)

It's a fair point, but many of the houses HAVE pages already, but are lumped together on a single page based on each town. Jeancey (talk) 00:38, 22 February 2013 (GMT)

Construction Kit -> Construction SetEdit

A fabulous outline you have here, Jeancey, and I'd be happy to help on the project when it launches. I just wanted to point out a small detail. The modding resource was not called a "Kit" until Skyrim, when it became the "Creation Kit". In Morrowind and Oblivion it was referred to as the "Construction Set". Just a really minor tweak that I figure needs fixing, but I didn't want to go modifying your page without your green light. Snowmane➚^{(talk•email)} 19:48, 14 March 2013 (GMT)

Yes Done. Jeancey (talk) 19:55, 14 March 2013 (GMT)

How Does One Join?Edit

Is there any application, or does one simply add his name to the Project Members section? Downstrike (talk) 03:57, 14 April 2013 (GMT)

Just put your name in the list and include what you will be working on. ~ Ad Intellige Mecum loqui 04:03, 14 April 2013 (GMT)

Idea for PagesEdit

I had this idea last night as I was going to bed. Although this isn't necessary, I thought it would be really cool if someone were to take it upon themselves and write out the names of NPCs and place in IPA. This could be done by using some of the sound files from the game because I know some of them are said in-game and base other pronunciations on these. Let's face it, some of these names are really hard to say or even think how to say. Yeah, this is kind of random and not essential, but it would be something that would make Morrowind pages that much cooler. Let me know what you guys think, I'll check back tomorrow. --WoahBro (talk) 01:53, 30 April 2013 (GMT)

The problem is, the majority of morrowind is unvoiced. only a small few sequences are voiced, and almost none of the names (maybe... one or two of the big lore people) are spoken. There just ins't enough info to come up with them. Jeancey (talk) 02:11, 30 April 2013 (GMT)

Like I said, just an idea. I was thinking basing names off of the names that are actually spoken. Again, just an idea!--WoahBro (talk) 00:52, 1 May 2013 (GMT)

Like I said, there are (i think) maybe 3 or 4 names that are spoken, those of the gods (vivec, Almalexia, Azura) and Dagoth Ur. There isn't any of the common peoples names ever spoken. Jeancey (talk) 01:18, 1 May 2013 (GMT)

Quests on NPC PagesEdit

What exactly is meant by adding quests to the NPC pages? The related quests are already there. Alpha Panda (talk) 15:34, 2 May 2013 (GMT)

Essentially just summarizing the quest involvement that NPC has during the related quests. Jeancey (talk) 15:40, 2 May 2013 (GMT)

Oh allright. :) Mind if I use the little template (spells) you used with Llaros Uvayn on other NPC's too? :) --Alpha Panda (talk) 18:22, 2 May 2013 (GMT)

You know that table is for people SELLING spells right? The cost is how much it costs in gold... Jeancey (talk) 01:17, 3 May 2013 (GMT)

Fun ProjectEdit

I have just finished my round-up of all the houses in Seyda Neen so I can dump the information later, and it has been a lot of fun actually. It is unbelieveable how many hidden items you can still manage to find, after all these years, if you actually search the houses completely. Interesting experience, to say the least. --Alpha Panda (talk) 23:06, 2 May 2013 (GMT)

Map ImagesEdit

There are inconsistencies in these images. Should they all be simple thumbnails, enlarged thumbnails, frameless larger images, etc.? Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 01:46, 15 May 2013 (GMT)

I'm unsure really. It was part of the previous project, so I didn't really think about it at all. Which looks best? Jeancey (talk) 02:01, 15 May 2013 (GMT)

Large thumbs, 700px or so. They are generally vertically aligned so there shouldn't be a problem on smaller screens. If we're moving MW pages to look more like Oblivion and Skyrim, then just thumbs in the right sections. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 02:07, 15 May 2013 (GMT)

I really really really dislike the oblivion dungeon layout. I like having the maps just on the bottom of the page. Make them all large thumbs if that's what looks the best. Jeancey (talk) 02:12, 15 May 2013 (GMT)

Nothing ReallyEdit

I tend not to like these projects as they tend to break more than they help. Take Rpeh's contributions, replacing original Morrowind photos with MGE Photos. The necessity of trying to "improve" often "invents" problems that thus need to be improved upon.

Of course, most of what you're suggesting tends to be adding the CS information into the wiki. (On that note, instead of doing the whole "various ingredients" deal; you should just create articles for the loot lists and link to that.)

Only other note I'd make is that we do have most of the dialogue on the wiki; it is just absurdly paraphrased, usually with subjective inferences. What should become of those once the new system replaces the old? 173.168.30.119 09:24, 15 July 2013 (GMT)

Actually, all the loot information is already on the wiki, with redirects for each list that link to the appropriate section on the page. Also, as we go we are converting the absurdly paraphrased dialogue to actual, quoted dialogue. My intent with this project is to bring the entire morrowind namespace out of the muck and into a proper, reliable and complete form. This includes bringing the professionalism that was previously lacking to the namespace. Jeancey (talk) 09:49, 15 July 2013 (GMT)

Quest DialogueEdit

Are we really going to exclude quest-related dialogue from NPC pages (see here and here)? It hardly belongs anywhere else. —Legoless (talk) 19:58, 28 July 2013 (GMT)

I think this is a silly rule that is mostly ignored on large NPC pages, especially in Oblivion and Skyrim. I would say anything relevant to an NPC goes on the NPC page, which includes all their dialogue. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 20:08, 28 July 2013 (GMT)

Should the project page be changed then? —Legoless (talk) 20:08, 28 July 2013 (GMT)

It really depends on the quest dialogue. Since most of the quest pages are (somewhat) written, I was figuring that important quest related dialogue would go there. But, it does make sense that an NPC's entire dialogue goes on its page. What I really want to avoid is pages for people like Vivec, where it is just a complete wall of text because he has a TON of unique dialogue that comes at a single point in the game. All we could conceivably do is have a massive wall of text, which I think would be terrible. Besides that, I guess having quest-related dialogue section and a unique, but non-quest related dialogue section works. We might need to come up with a unique plan for Vivec. In this case, the "Unique Dialogue" check for the template should only include non-quest-related dialogue and the "Quest" check should include the quest-related dialogue. Does that make any sense at all? Jeancey (talk) 21:26, 28 July 2013 (GMT)

Vivec definitely seems like an exception. Apart from possibly guild questgivers, most quest-related dialogue should be easy enough to list. —Legoless (talk) 22:10, 28 July 2013 (GMT)

I think Vivec and maybe Caius would be the worst. Jeancey (talk)

Could be usefulEdit

I am busy gathering lots of dialogue on a sandbox page. I'll just leave a link there so that you can all use it should it be useful. --Alpha Panda (talk) 12:54, 27 August 2013 (GMT)

Remember to put Morrowind: in the links. :) Jeancey (talk) 20:03, 27 August 2013 (GMT)

In-game Dialogue QuestionEdit

Could someone please check the generic "Background" dialogue response ("I am [name], [class].") and see if the class is capitalised or not? —Legoless (talk) 16:30, 2 September 2013 (GMT)

Name, class, rank, and race are always capitalized, so yes. Vely^►t►e 16:52, 2 September 2013 (GMT)

Cool, thanks. On a related note, do we want to treat variable-containing dialogue as unique? It's different for each NPC. I think it's worth including if they already have unique lines, but putting it on every page seems pointless. —Legoless (talk) 18:38, 2 September 2013 (GMT)

Maybe if only one or two NPCs say it and it's notable; otherwise, probably not. It's fairly redundant with some sentences like "I am %name, %class, a %rank in %faction"--which is a possible line for many--since that's already all on their pages. Vely^►t►e 19:51, 2 September 2013 (GMT)

I don't think it's worth including. All it takes is common sense to work out name, class, and/or rank in faction. Guard of Dragons^{Speak To Me} 20:02, 2 September 2013 (GMT)

No Services/Dialogue/QuestsEdit

I have noticed on many of the Morrowind NPC pages that there are sentences such as, "He is not involved in any quests and does not provide any unique information." Are these types of sentences really needed? In the Skyrim and Oblivion namespaces, NPC articles typically do not include sentences of this nature. Also, the OBNPCRP project page specifically states, for example, in the quest involvement section: "No note is needed if a character is not involved in any quest (i.e. no "He is not involved in any quests.")". While I do not think it is entirely necessary for the Morrowind pages to be consistent with the Oblivion and Skyrim pages, I personally believe these pages could live without these types of sentences as they do not add anything to the article, often times also interrupting the flow of the page. If the NPC in question in involved in a quest or offers services, it would be noted on the page or will be once the project guidelines have been met for the given page. Just curious as to what others think. Forfeit (talk) 01:22, 18 September 2013 (GMT)

Seconded. We ought to remove them. -snowmane  ^xoxo 01:29, 18 September 2013 (GMT)

Agreed. — ABCface^◥ 03:47, 18 September 2013 (GMT)

It's been over a month without any objections, but since only three people participated in the discussion, I'd like to just bump this on the Recent Pages page to allow for others to add their input before moving forward. If this goes another week without further input, I think it would be acceptable to treat all MW/TR/BM pages with this in mind from then on. — ABCface^◥ 19:13, 31 October 2013 (GMT)

Agreed, its unneeded filler not seen elsewhere on the site. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 20:00, 31 October 2013 (GMT)

(←) Frankly, it is good to know if a character isn't involved with any quests. That way you know that you can use him in a mod for something without any headaches.Pleasenoname (talk) 21:09, 14 February 2015 (GMT)

If there's not a 'Related Quests' section, then the NPC isn't involved with any quests in a way that would interfere with mods or anything. And when the dialogue eventually gets added to every page, the topics will indicate any involvement as well. -- Hargrimm^(T) 23:05, 14 February 2015 (GMT)

Presentation of DialogueEdit

From what I have seen on articles so far, dialogue is currently being organized in its own section within an article. This section then lists the topics for which the character has unique dialogue for and their unique replies for these given topics along with any unique greetings they may have. This approach seems to be quite logical given that this is very much the same way dialogue is presented in the game itself. For topics where an NPC may only have one reply to at all times, this method is quite effective in organizing the dialogue in a way that readers can easily see what unique dialogue a character says when you ask them about a topic. However, at least in my opinion, the current format can be a bit confusing when a character may have multiple replies to a topic (such as during a quest). In the current layout of dialogue, all the replies to a given topic are listed in that same area. Sometimes this still works well because there may be choices the player can choose that will elicit different responses (e.g. I will help you: "Blah blah." I can't help you: "Grumble grumble." ) However, this doesn't always happen and can then result in just separate responses being listed without any real indication as to the conditions that are necessary for the character to say this. If a reader is already familiar with the quest or with a little bit of interpretation, it is not all that difficult to figure out when this reply will be said, but it can be confusing if a reader is not familiar with a quest. This is the main, and perhaps only, weakness I have seen in the current style as opposed to using a more Oblivion or Skyrim NPC approach.

While I'm not certain that using an approach similar to Oblivion and Skyrim articles would be better, I think it's something that should at least be considered. For major quest givers it could result in articles that are simply too long, but for NPC's only involved in one or two quests it might work well. One thing led to another, and I happened to stumble upon this sandbox. From what I gathered, this is an example of a Morrowind NPC page written very much in the style of the OBNPCRP for a Morrowind NPC project that was never launched. I'm not suggesting this page is perfect and an example of what should be followed, but it is the closest thing that demonstrates an Oblivion or Skyrim NPC approach on a Morrowind article. This format could address the issue of being able to easily describe the conditions as to when a character will give a specific reply to a certain topic when they have multiple possible lines of dialogue, as it is written in the form of chronological narrative of the quest events. Although it results in a much longer article, this format could perhaps provide a more interesting read (though this is certainly more of an opinion). However, even though I bring up the suggestion of considering this approach, I can think of many possible flaws that could arise with this method. Given the nature of how dialogue works in Morrowind, paragraphs very easily could be flooded with sentences along the lines of "When asked about example", "After destroying the castle, on the topic of example he will say", "Asking him about his example", etc. Although it could be easily addressed in this case, the article I pointed to also presents another possible issue. In the paragraph that mentions Fargoth's reply to the topic of the "Bitter Coast Region", there is no indication that this is the topic that is asked about to elicit this response, just: "He seems to be knowledgeable of the local geography and can provide som information about the terrain and nearby settlements:".

I typically would not have suggested this given how well the current method is working and how the method I suggested could contain some limitations, but I believe the idea of using this approach should at least be discussed. While I think the limitation of the current approach could be addressed without changing the way dialogue is presented (I believe I have seen hover text being used to describe conditions for dialogue, which may be a great idea to address the problem I suggested), but perhaps using an NPC approach similar to the newer namespaces would be a better answer. It may not be, but I thought it would at least be wise to suggest/discuss this while the project is still in a somewhat earlier stage of its life. Forfeit (talk) 02:12, 21 October 2013 (GMT)

Hover text or bracketed conditions could be implemented into the current layout. Usually it's a disposition modifier or quest stage. —Legoless (talk) 19:14, 21 October 2013 (GMT)

As Legoless said, hover text and brackets could be used to give conditions. And underlining or flow charts for more complex dialogue can be used to make the dialogue read easier. I would prefer to keep the dialogue format as it is because it's better suited for the Morrowind style of NPC interaction, as it's built around topics like the in-game dialogue is. But I'm mainly thinking about NPCs who have a medium to large amount of dialogue, like if they're involved in a quest or have a large amount of knowledge to share. If the NPC only has a small amount of information to spare (like Simine Fralinie) then I can see this style as a better alternative. --Maroonroar (talk) 22:41, 28 October 2013 (GMT)

Yes, Dagoth Ur's dialogue uses a flow chart. A lot of factors and circumstances are taken into account. I guess it depends on who the NPC is, how much dialogue there is, and… other things. I guess it depends. DG^T•C• 23:01, 28 October 2013 (GMT)

Yeah, the more I have thought about this, the current style seems better suited to characters with medium-large amounts of dialogue, as Maroonroar said. This method replicates how the dialogue is presented in the game, which is definitely a nice advantage of this strategy. The more I think about it, that Fargoth sandbox I pointed to is pretty large, given how unimportant of a character Fargoth is compared to plenty of other NPC's. Although he's involved in two quests, he doesn't have much dialogue in either one and that article still has plenty of size to it (granted this is partly due to the inclusion of rumors about him). I definitely agree though, that for NPC's with smaller amounts of dialogue like the Simine Fralinie page pointed to, the paragraph style would be a better fit for presenting the dialogue. As to what's "small" will largely be up to the editor(s) that document the dialogue for that page. On a last note, I agree with using hover text and brackets to document conditions; that seems like an easy fix to one of my main concerns. Forfeit (talk) 00:13, 29 October 2013 (GMT)

NPC default spellsEdit

Looking a bit into why CSList doesn't list the spells for Edwinna Elbert (she has them as checked ingame via console), I found out that the cs assigns a list of spells to NPCs that have "Auto Calculate Stats" checked. The list of spells and the power variant (strong, masterful, ...) seems to depend on both, the level and the class of the NPC. Is there anything already known or even documented about this? Just asking before I spend hours figuring the details out. --Alfwyn (talk) 00:07, 19 January 2014 (GMT)

Do you mean that they will have Fireball, Greater Fireball and Lesser Fireball listed in the CS, but only one of them for the actual character depending on that character's level? Or that they are assigned that list and only the spells they actually use are listed, but if you changed their level, a different list of spells may be generated? Jeancey (talk) 00:11, 19 January 2014 (GMT)

Well, the list changes in the cs when changing either level or class. If I change Edwinna to level 20 for example her "masterful green wisdom" changes to "surpassing green wisdom". So for auto-calc NPCs the spell list seems to be generic, but a complicated way of generic and is not found as a plain list in the game data. Of course looking the NPC up in the cs works, but I would be interested in how it works. I tried looking at obvious places like NPC or Classes for that info, but I'm not that familiar with the Morrowind/TES3Mod namespaces. --Alfwyn (talk) 00:21, 19 January 2014 (GMT)

Dialogue Formatting:Edit

Moved from User talk:Anil

I can use that format. I'm just following Legoless' example. DG^{Any Questions?} 19:39, 17 April 2014 (GMT)

Using one example in contradiction of most other pages, no matter who it was who did it, is not the way to base what is acceptable and what is not. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 20:05, 17 April 2014 (GMT)

Why are you changing dialogue format on other pages then? Louis Beauchamp's page is one of the only pages that uses that format for dialogue. It's not doing nobody any harm by using a 'slightly' different format, now is it? DG^{Any Questions?} 20:10, 17 April 2014 (GMT)

Yes it is. Inconsistency is the bane of all serious editors. "If one page does this and another does that, why can't I do a third thing on this page?" is the conclusion to this spurious reasoning. If everything looks the same then in 10 years when no-one around now is left, someone comes along and adds something new, and it doesn't look awful and out of place. Keep it the same, follow the project. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 20:13, 17 April 2014 (GMT)

So do all NPC dialogue layouts have to be slightly different, or do I have some indents on dialogue lines, then some bullet points on others, balancing it 50/50. DG^{Any Questions?} 20:19, 17 April 2014 (GMT)

I apologise if I was unclear. All pages should be the same. Follow the style set out in the MWOP project. If that is unclear to you you can ask on the MWOP talk page for clarification on how to edit. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 20:39, 17 April 2014 (GMT)

So putting an indent before dialogue on Morrowind pages should be done from now on?; I shouldn't be putting bullet points there instead? DG^{Any Questions?} 20:57, 17 April 2014 (GMT)

I am not a member of the Morrowind Overhaul Project, so I cannot answer your question. Like Silencer said, if you need any guidance on how to edit, ask on the project's talk page. --AN|L (talk) 21:55, 17 April 2014 (GMT)

So, as Silencer said, we have to keep dialogue formatting the same. He might have seen one page with colon format, then saw others with bullet point format, and said: "Hmm… these pages need colon format, not bullet point format." Everyone vote: consensus: Bullet point or colon format? Decide. DG^{Any Questions?} 14:29, 19 April 2014 (GMT)

(←) Hold on there, this is not just something to be decided upon. This is clarifying an inconsistency that you saw (the bullet point format) on a page already, used on pages, and are being told to do the correct format on nearly every other page (the colon format). Therefore, this isn't a community discussion for change, this is just making sure that we're uniform. •WoahBro^►talk 15:21, 19 April 2014 (GMT)

If we have to do colon formatting, where's that guideline, huh? The Silencer only confirmed that dialogue layouts have to be the same, but said nothin' about bullet point format being an absolute no-no. DG^{Any Questions?} 16:16, 19 April 2014 (GMT)

"Using one example in contradiction of most other pages, no matter who it was who did it, is not the way to base what is acceptable and what is not"--The Silencer in reference to the bullet point format. "Yes it is. Inconsistency is the bane of all serious editors."--The Silencer again referring to the bullet point format. Also, since Jeancey is busy with ESO, he told me to take care of MWOP stuff for now (Silencer of course is still a leader as well) and I'm saying that pages with bullet point format for dialogue (a minority of pages) are inconsistent and should be changed. •WoahBro^►talk 16:32, 19 April 2014 (GMT)

Why is it better to use colon format and not bullet point format. DG^{Any Questions?} 16:54, 19 April 2014 (GMT)

Consistency. We want the same format across all of the Morrowind namespace. The colon format is what is already used on most pages, so why does it wouldn't make sense to change almost every Morrowind page to be consistent with a few pages. This is why we need to change the oddball pages to be like the others. Consistency. — Unsigned comment by WoahBro (talk • contribs) at 17:11 on April 19, 2014

OK, we'll go bullet point format hunting and clear bullet point formatting on all pages. The bullet point dialogue formatting is going to get fossilized. Let's start at mountain range, then we'll work out way through NPCs until bullet point formatting is permanently fossilized. Starting with Louis Beauchamp. DG^{Any Questions?} 17:25, 19 April 2014 (GMT)

(←) Fossilized? What? On another note, I'm seeing on other pages a mix of colon/bullet points. It looks like the bullet points have to be removed and it should be peachy. •WoahBro^►talk 17:29, 19 April 2014 (GMT)

Yes, each topic should be bulleted, and then each possible line within that topic or any choices, should just be indented appropriately. -- Hargrimm^(T) 19:13, 19 April 2014 (GMT)

Shared DialogueEdit

Spun off from the CP discussion, there' some interest now in cataloging the generic/shared dialogue that is assigned based on location, race, faction, class, etc. I've done some work on this in my sandbox, but I'd like to open discussion as to how to present things. For instance, you can see in the first 'Healer' table there that there's some generic Healer lines, some that require a Healer in the Temple faction, and some that require a Healer in the Imperial Cult faction. So should those go under the faction dialogue page, with only the generic lines on a Healer class dialogue page? Also let me know what you think about the actual format and contents of the table. I have full access to all the CS data about dialogue and a script that assembles the tables so it wouldn't be too hard to change the columns or anything like that. -- Hargrimm^(T) 22:23, 16 January 2015 (GMT)

Modded npcs?Edit

I don't know where to bring this up, however since this is an overhaul project this seems like a likely place. I noticed that people are uploading pictures of modded NPCs. I have only noticed it on the Morrowin NPCs so far. I use the wiki to see what the unmodded characters look like, so that there is a reference to the original style or look of the character. I would request that there be a rule that all uploaded pictures of NPCs be from the unmodded game. Pleasenoname (talk) 21:03, 14 February 2015 (GMT)pleasenoname

There shouldn't be any images of modded NPCs... do you know specifically which ones are modded? Could it be due to differences in graphics settings? Jeancey (talk) 21:13, 14 February 2015 (GMT)

I looked at them awhile ago, I only now had enough time to bring it up. It was clearly graphics from MGE or something like better bodies. I will see if there is any current examples.Pleasenoname (talk) 21:18, 14 February 2015 (GMT)pleasenoname

If you find any, the best thing to do, I think, is to click on the image and then place a {{CleanImage}} tag on the page, something like {{CleanImage|other=This image is modded.}}, perhaps with an additional explanation of how you can tell. – Robin Hood  ^(talk) 21:19, 14 February 2015 (GMT)

I clicked through a bunch of NPCs and couldn't find anything. If i see something in the future I will apply that image tag, thanks. Pleasenoname (talk) 21:40, 14 February 2015 (GMT)pleasenoname

While there are some NPC images that this can be seen in, some place images clearly have view distance mods along with other enhancements in them as was sort of mentioned above. One of the more blatant ones I remember is Berandas. Without mods, there is no way that you should be able to see Gnisis and many of the other places in the background. Some images in Vivec also show some view distance and water enhancements, such as this. As far as I know, there are no graphics settings in unmodded Morrowind that can give the water a reflection as clear as what can be seen in some of these images. The water should look more like this or this depending on settings. Forfeit (talk) 21:44, 14 February 2015 (GMT)

Place images might be taken from the Construction Set, which has very different logic around draw distance -- you can generally see much further than in Vanilla. Are CS screen captures okay for place images? — Unsigned comment by ‎67.139.70.154 (talk) at 20:04 on 27 February 2017 (GMT)

(←) Yes. We have several, I believe. As long as they could look like the game (as in, you don't have UI, you haven't made any actual changes to the game, just trying to take a good picture, then I don't see why you couldn't do that. I'd have to see some examples of the pictures to be sure though. Jeancey (talk) 20:19, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Almost Unique DialogueEdit

When I was filling out Gudling the Rascal's page, I intended to add his dialogue lines about the various creatures in Morrowind but then noticed that none of these lines are unique. While the CS lists this dialogue as belonging to Gudling, the expert barbarian Briring also will talk about these same topics and give the same responses as Gudling. Again though, the dialogue is listed as belonging to Briring in the CS. How should we document dialogue in cases like these? By the project's guidelines and the style guide, it wouldn't be allowed to be included on either NPC page since it isn't necessarily unique dialogue as it's shared by two characters. However, it would seem like a shame to me to not add all this dialogue to the wiki as it is rather interesting and it is literally one step away from being unique. Also, from the CS perspective it is technically unique dialogue since it is marked as only being said by a character with a specific ID. However, it just so happens that the responses both characters give in this "unique" dialogue are identical to one another. This would also apply to some other cases, like Artisa Arelas' dialogue for the Uriel Septim topic that is listed as unique to her, but is actually also used by savants. Forfeit (talk) 22:37, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

There's been a couple suggestions at listing all generic dialogue somewhere, which seems like the ideal place to me. If needed, the topics could then be mentioned on Gudling's page. —Legoless (talk) 22:40, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

So, are you talking about a "Generic Dialogue" page with linkable entries? That sounds excellent. And then we just link to dialogue options for each NPC? Insignificant Revisions^{Threats•Evidence} 23:01, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

{{LE}} could definitely be used, yeah. Pretty sure work was abandoned on it though, there's a ton of dialogue. —Legoless (talk) 23:25, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

A full set of clothing?Edit

Do I write 'a full set of extravagant clothes'? I know that 'a full set' applies to armor (seen here and here), but does it also apply to clothing? Or is it 'matching x'? --Sweat BoyX8 (talk) 08:11, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

I would lean towards 'matching extravagant x, y, and z' personally. Just seems a little odd to refer to a 'set' of clothing, whereas the term makes sense for armor. -- Hargrimm^(T) 14:23, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

May also depend on what elements are included. For a particular context, does it matter whether gloves, shoes, and hat are included? — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 21:21, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Some identified gapsEdit

• Morrowind:Level is a total train-wreck. I've raised a proposed overhaul on its talk page.
• Morrowind:Menus does not exist, either as a single page or a collection of pages like Morrowind:Stats or Morrowind:Stats Menu or whatever. All specifically named interface and gameplay elements should be addressable by name here at UESPWiki, or people will not be able to find what they are looking for (that means redirects to sections, sometimes).
• Morrowind:Rest and Morrowind:Wait don't exist yet, so readers aren't going to be clear on what the difference is (the former is directly connected to leveling, crime and bounties, etc., while the latter is not).
• Somewhat fixed: Morrowind:Persuasion and all of its elements like Morrowind:Taunt (which were all redlinks) now redirect to Morrowind:Personality where they are at least discussed. I think it would be better for Morrowind:Persuasion to be its own page about the UI element and the options on it, since the present target article is about the Attribute.

I'm sure I'll find a lot more. I'm just annotating what comes up as missing when I encounter it.

— Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 21:20, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Merchant InventoriesEdit

After patrolling some recent inventories that were added to a few NPC pages, an issue came up that I have been meaning to ask about. With many merchants, a majority if not all of their wares are included in their inventory. Usually, I have purposely avoided adding inventories to these pages to be honest. The few times I have approached these, I did so by not listing the wares at all since all these items are listed in the wares section and I think I also saw Jeancey or Maroon take this approach before I started adding them. Maybe not, I don't really remember. However, this could perhaps be misleading since this may imply the items do not appear in their inventory when in fact they do. Also, I believe there are scenarios where not every item a merchant sells is in their inventory since it may be in a chest somewhere in their shop instead or on a shelf. Instead, only a partial selection of their wares appears in their inventory.

My question is how do we best handle these scenarios? Should we continue ignoring wares in merchant inventories or begin including them?

If we decide to include them, I was thinking that if the merchant's wares and inventory match up identically, we could say that "he carries his selection of [[#Wares|wares]] as listed below". For scenarios where they may only carry part of their wares, I think there are a few good approaches. We could just list out the specific items from their wares they are carrying. Alternatively, we could just say something along the lines of "he carries a partial selection of his [[#Wares|wares]] as listed below". I suppose another option would be to just use one broad statement on all merchant pages that says they carry some or all of their wares, rather than figuring out if they are carrying all or some of them.

Thoughts? Forfeit (talk) 19:06, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

To provide a few examples, Morrowind:Dralasa Nithryon, Morrowind:Ra'Virr, and Morrowind:Nalcarya of White Haven take into consideration wares but Morrowind:Clagius Clanler and Morrowind:Ernand Thierry do not consider wares. Forfeit (talk) 19:29, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

This discussion was brought up because of my own work and talk page comments, so in light of that, I'm going to suspend my inventory listing, pending the conclusion of this topic (or for a week or two if there are no responses back). I don't want to do it one way then have to go back and do it again later on if the discussion indicates that I did it the wrong way.

The guidelines don't explicitly say not to share inventory that's reserved for sales, and it does say "Specifically, the contents of containers and inventories of NPCs need to be checked to confirm that any non-leveled, important items are specifically mentioned, and that all the contents of that container or inventory are accurately described." - UESPWiki:MWOP#Construction_Set_Work.

I think we'd be neglecting part of the job to deliberately omit half of the inventory on those NPCs.

This is something that might not be in the near future for a task, but if houses and properties are ever gotten around to, I think general shop inventory should end up over on a shop page, similar to other games (ex SR:Warmaiden's), and we should dedicate space towards specifically notating what is in the NPC's inventory, because as I said and as Forfeit concurs with, it comes off as a disservice to the reader to imply that specific things are not part of a character's inventory to loot, and as the guidelines show, it would not be an accurate description of their inventory.

As for the status of the pages in their current state with all sellable inventory, I'm partial towards being more detailed about mentioning wares and being specific about what's in their inventory versus what's found in the room or in an owned container that is nearby and being drawn on for inventory, rather than saying "He/she carries some of their wares". As a reader, I personally would want to know what and where I'm finding things at. If I want to appropriate items from a shop keeper, I'd want to know what's in a room out of sight and what's in their person that I'd have to pickpocket or murder for. the raconteur 23:39, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

I tend to agree with the points Raconteur is making in regards to this issue after thinking on it some more. It looks like more articles than I initially thought already consider wares into inventories as well, so this may have just been misinterpretation on my part and a few others. I like the idea of just including the specific list of items they carry from their wares for each NPC. A wise man once said, "The UESP is about including EVERYTHING" and I always think that message should be taken to heart. The only exception would be if they are actually carrying/wearing all of their wares where it would be much simpler to just specify that fact than list everything out again.

I'm sure some readers would be interested in what specifically from their wares a merchant is carrying if they are considering pickpocketing or killing them, so this information seems relevant to include. As mentioned many times as well, it is misleading if it is not included as a reader may believe the merchant does not carry any of their wares, similar to how other entries in the series work. Thus, I think a little bit of redundancy is more than justified for this scenario to best document these inventories. Forfeit (talk) 19:13, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

My only comment would be, are there ever items in an NPC's inventory that aren't equipped but also aren't buyable? Maybe if the store type doesn't buy those items they won't appear in the wares. The solution could be, include all the inventory items in the text, and only include the items in the wares table that AREN'T in the inventory, and then add a note saying something along the lines of "This merchant may also sell items from their inventory." Jeancey (talk) 19:37, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

It's entirely possible, though I don't have examples off-hand to share. Wares that a merchant can sell are whatever items are in the cell on their person, in the open, or in containers, as long as any of those items are both flagged as owned by them and are of the type that the merchant is set to sell. Any other items wouldn't be able to be sold by them and would just exist.

As for the handling of the inventory table, I'd say in the body of text if it was me what they held (ie "He/She carries an iron broadsword, a steel tanto, and chitin daggers") to establish that some amount are there, then the table can repeat the information, but include the quantity and whether or not it's restocking. A little redundant, yes, but we establish in the body that it's in the personal inventory while still being able to document specific quantities without going overboard in the text. the raconteur 21:05, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

A common example of merchants having something in their inventory that they can't sell would be keys. One example is Helviane Desele who holds the Bedroom Key. She can't sell it to you since she only barters in ingredients. I think the wares table would be sufficient in differentiating the items in the inventory that can be sold to the player and those that can't.

I think I would prefer to leave the wares table as is for now where it provides a comprehensive list of what the NPC sells. The reason for this is that it allows readers to quickly see what a merchant sells without having to look through a paragraph of text to figure out if the merchant sells some specific item. I think Ranconteur has a good approach with just listing the items and letting the table point out how many there are and whether or not they restock. If we would include quantities and restocking information, these paragraphs could get a little wordy. However, I could see the merit of including quantities and respawning information in the inventory paragraph as well, so I don't feel strongly either way about this part. I do think the tables should be left as is for now though, since they are all already complete and can be used to quickly identify what a merchant sells. Forfeit (talk) 22:02, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

(←) Having been a week without further discussion, I went ahead and reinstated the wares I removed from a few of Raconteur's edits since the general consensus was to include wares in some fashion. Forfeit (talk) 18:17, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

CompanionsEdit

We have no page about Morrowind's companions, though there is one about the equivalent in Skyrim, I think. All we have for MW is Category:Morrowind-Follower NPCs (and its Tribunal and Bloodmoon subcats). These categories should be split (but cross-referenced, or perhaps Category:Morrowind-Companions made a subcat of Category:Morrowind-Follower NPCs), as there is a major distinction between:

Companions

whom one may direct to stay or follow, to give/take inventory items, and do other things. Calvus Horatius is a good example. Most of the highly functional ones are from Tribunal and Bloodmoon, but what we need to say about them as a class of NPCs is mostly generic to the entire Morrowind gaming system.

Followers

who only follow, and exist solely as a "keep me alive to complete a quest, and I will definitely be in harm's way and try to get killed" trials, and over whom the player has no control (except through trickery like using Command spells to lead them into rooms and lock them in there, using Fortify Speed to outrun them to a new location, etc.). Thrud is a good example (though also from Tribunal; I'm not paying much attention to which characters are technically which, since I'm playing the GotY Edition, which is MW+TB+BM.

Many things apply to companions that do not apply to followers. As just one example, see the "On companions" notes I added at Morrowind:Clothing. Those notes really belong at a Morrowind:Companions article, since they also apply to other Constant Effect items given to companions, not just clothing ones.

Due to UESP being a big fan of namespaces, we'll need to create shorter similar articles for TB and BM, after developing a general MW one (and cross-referencing to it from the others, which should probably be limited to a) lists of followers particular to that add-on, and b) features specific to those companions and not found in base MW ones. There are actual scripting differences between the companions provided by MW, TB, and BM, and if anyone knows the specifics of that, its probably worth documenting. I note that a lot of third-party companion mods specifically mention requiring TB, BM, or both because features added to companions in them were also used in the mods. The only one I know for certain is that TB added the ability to take Restore Health potions during combat (though in a buggy way – a wounded companion will guzzle all of them back to back).

— Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 18:55, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

If we had a large list of well developed companions, I'd say say that yes, definitely the MW, TR, and BM namespaces should have dedicated pages and lists, but the only companion I can think of that's reasonably well developed as far as functionality goes is that mercenary you pay for in Mournhold. If you can point out specific NPCs that are more developed than the "follow me" ones for quests (like all of Morrowind's, the Imperials in that Bloodmoon quest at Frostmoth, etc), point them out, but for what I think is definitely only one, maybe possibly a couple of other "companions" who have use outside of quests, I see diminishing returns if we put too much effort into documenting the additional functionality. I also believe that a broad generic MW article is highly unnecessary, because to my knowledge none of the NPCs serve a function as a follower outside of their related quests. the raconteur ✉ 21:14, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

There is no need for three pages. The example of the Skyrim page is to include any followers under an appropriate header. We are a fan of namespaces, but we also know the value or otherwise of spreading information too thinly to be useful. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 23:14, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Rest/Wait/BedEdit

All of the following are redlinks:

• Morrowind:Rest
• Morrowind:Resting
• Morrowind:Bed
• Morrowind:Beds
• Morrowind:Wait
• Morrowind:Waiting
• Morrowind:Sleep
• Morrowind:Sleeping
• Morrowind:Time

and should not be (but should redirect to the same place).

We need an article on beds and the Rest function, covering at least all of the following:

• The difference between Rest and Wait
• The relationship between Rest and leveling
• The relationship between Rest and Health, Fatigue, and Magicka recovery
• The lack of necessity for Rest for Fatigue recovery, which happens on its own, while Health and Magicka recovery do not (require Rest, or some form of Restore magic - potion, scroll, spell, shrine, healer – but not all of which affect Magicka).
• Those with the Stunted Magicka effect of the Atronach birthsign cannot recover Magicka via Rest
• Rest will not cure a disease, and will make Corprus worse (or " 'worse', ha ha ha" if you're using Corprus temporarily on purpose, to boost Strength).
• Rest will not restore damaged skills or attributes from curses, jail, etc. (requires some form of magic to do so).
• What the Wait function will and won't do for you (e.g., will eventually reset a merchant's funds, will not recover Health or Magicka).
• I'm not sure if it does anything for speeding Fatigue recovery, since I run with the "Better Fatigue Usage" and "Speed and Stamina Tweaked" mods.
• Owned versus unowned beds – penalty for using owned one.
• Beds in multiple forms, including literal beds, plus bedrolls, hammocks, and (with Bloodmoon installed) vampire coffins.
• That the ground itself can be used for Rest in the wilderness (no bedroll needed), with great risk of random attack by wildlife. There are places this may not happen (just north of Balmora, perhaps, since the creature spawning locations are very fixed; I have not tested this).
• Penalties for using Rest in owned beds, or in public in settled places
• Sadrith Mora rule against sleeping anywhere but one specific tavern, the Gateway Inn, if you don't have hospitality papers (obtained at the same venue).
• Mention that you can always Rest on the bedroll in the Seyda Neen Census and Excise Office, and it is the one place the Dark Brotherhood assassins from Tribunal cannot attack you.
• Technicalities: attempting to Rest or Wait during combat, while underwater, while falling, while non-Constant-Effect magic is active, while being pursued for a crime.
• Use of Wait to get a mobile NPC who seem stuck in one place to finally move (doesn't always work - sometimes you have to resort to either teleporting out if you can, or using TCL in the console, if an NPC has wedged you into a corner and won't move away).
• List of always-unowned beds.
• Breaking into rentable rooms to use their unowed beds.
• The "rent a bed for a night" bug – it's actually usable forever, unless you have one of the code-patching mods installed that fixes this.
• The Tribunal Rest-between-Fighters-Guild-bunkbeds exploit - Dark Brotherhood assassin spawns stuck in a bed and can't fight back, which nets you an extra 2000 gold in profit (while covered in detail at the DB article, it should be mentioned at the Rest/Beds article).
• Time passage speeds up in other ways than Rest or Wait, e.g. when training, and during fast travel. This time passage does not affect certain things, like some (all?) forms of recovery, but does count toward factors not integral to the PC, such as merchants' gold-on-hand reset hour, Calvus Horatius's contract period, and non-Constant-Effect magic expiring.
• What about Guild Guide, Mournhold, Mark/Recall, and Intervention teleportation, and "training" via skill books? I never bothered to check if they cost random time the way siltstrider and boat travel do. I suspect they don't, except perhaps for Guild Guide travel.
• Morrowind's clock runs at 30× realtime, except when sped up temporarily by one of these things. (As far as I know, nothing slows it down, other than a mod like "Tempus Fugit Ring", or being in a dialog box or menu, which stops it.)
• Vvardenfell has seasons, but they are subtle; see other article for the months and their names.
• For aspects of time in relation to other things in the game, e.g. how long spell effects last, see the articles on those other topics.
• Probably something I'm forgetting. Do some beds become usable only after you're part of the right faction? I've never bothered to check.

I guess that's pretty much the outline of the article.
— Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 22:29, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Not every ingame function needs a redirect, nor do they need two (one for the name and one for the effect). For example, 'waiting' is good enough to cover both the function 'Wait' and the effect 'waiting'. That stance applies best when they are spelt the same so someone searching 'wait' would have waiting come up. The OB:Time page should really be duplicated in all namespaces, and some of these things seem best left to more relevant pages (eg Magicka for how to replenish your magic pool, how to level on the Level page). It seems harsh to say but many of these things seem far too basic and irrelevant to even mention, such as being unable to wait while in combat. I'm not a fan of mentioning what something does not do, as that list is always endless. List what it does do and if its not on the list it doesn't do it. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 23:30, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

That works for me. There's still enough left to do a good Morrowind-specific equivalent of OB:Time, then. In the course of expanding existing articles here, I quite frequently find the need for this article, most commonly for distinguishing Rest from Wait from just waiting by letting the game run, but also for differences in time passage in realtime versus game time. Re-explaining this stuff on multiple pages is a Redundancy Policy problem, and best resolved by centralizing the time-related stuff at an article that can be linked to. PS: I would quibble with one thing: Explaining what can and can't be done under various conditions isn't "mentioning what something does not do", it's providing useful information about the game's unintuitive, unrealistic, and inconsistent systems (of combat, swimming, etc., etc.). But that's not really tied to time stuff in particular, and it might be better to cover such vagaries at other pages more particular to the contexts or actions in question.  :-) — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 21:04, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Missing article: Morrowind:JournalEdit

Some other games have a corresponding article (e.g. Oblivion:Journal), but MW doesn't. Skyrim:Journal is a disambiguation page; the journal-related information for that game is at Skyrim:Quests, apparently. This is inconsistent and not very helpful to readers. One would expect something this important to have an article, which covered the relationship of the Journal to quests, how to use the Console's Journal command to fix bugged quests, what the various options in the Journal pane are, etc. — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 14:18, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Skyrim doesn't have a journal, just menus. The journal in Oblivion was most of those menus in a unique format not unlike an actual journal. Morrowind doesn't have a journal either, its a set of menus, or windows as Bethesda refers to them. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 21:31, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Not sure if that's meant to be an objection of some kind, or a contribution toward eventual content explaining how the journal functions work. Morrowind clearly does have a Journal, accessed by the J key, and called the Journal, and manipulated with the console command Journal, and the player receives notices that their Journal has been updated when they do certain things. Breakage of the Journal can badly bollix up the game, so it matters and readers need info about it. We could also better comply with the Redundancy Policy by centralizing information about this instead of repetitively explaining in so many places the mechanics of how to fix broken quests. What the journal functions are coded as in this game versus that game, from a programmer perspective, doesn't really seem relevant. The separate namespaces obviate any need to explain in-article how this the MW journal differs from others. Maybe (I'm guessing) you're referring to the fact that a pickupable object called "Journal" doesn't exist in the game as an inventory item; that is worth mentioning in the eventual Morrowind:Journal article (or perhaps Morrowind:Quests#Journal section, if we decided it should all go there).

Anyway, I see that there is a Morrowind Mod:Journal article, but this is not about the Journal from a player perspective, in general, but rather about using the Journal console command to manipulate the Journal. So, still not much of the kind of content needed for an article about the Journal (though that would of course be cross-referenced or merged; due to bugs, people frequently have to fix their Journal that way). And it's not a mod, so the TES3Mod namespace is a poor fit. I note that Morrowind:Console is in the game's namespace and is not at TES3Mod:Console, so the treatment is confusingly inconsistent. — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 18:40, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Missing article: Morrowind:Armor RatingEdit

This is an important stat, and we don't appear to explain anywhere how it is calculated. I can't even find a plausible redirect target for this redlink. — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 08:25, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

There is some information about this subject on the Morrowind:Combat page. See here. The role it plays on how damage is calculated is discussed a few sections above. The Oblivion and Skyrim namespaces do have articles for Armor Rating, which redirect to the appropriate sections on Oblivion:Armor and Skyrim:Armor, so perhaps a redirect could be created to this section on the combat page. Forfeit (talk) 16:30, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

That sounds like a good enough approach. It's more that the term is redlinked at present, than that an article per se is missing. :-) I'll create the redirect, since I've already redlinked this in an article where the term is important in the context. — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 16:56, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Overhauled Tribunal:The WarlordsEdit

I rewrote Tribunal:The Warlords to address the flagged problems and improve it in various other ways. I've removed the MwOP tag from the article. Not sure if that is the desired procedure, nor whether reporting the cleanup here is needed or if there's a better way to track such efforts and their progress. — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 16:54, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

The ideal process would be to leave the tag on the article. Assuming you were the one to complete the tag (as in marked your name as reviewer for the last thing) the tag itself would no longer appear on the page and it goes into a Final Review category. The current process has been to just leave it there, since it marks the page as having been completed, rather than somehow missed. We generally want multiple eyes on an article, so I've readded the tag and added you as the writer for each section. Someone will come along and check that the information is accurate at some point. :) Jeancey (talk) 18:28, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Ah so! That makes sense. I'm not sure I'm interpreting the parameters correctly. I wouldn't say that the article was "written by" me, but rather that I've checked and corrected the description/objectives, rewards, etc. — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 20:49, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

To be fair, mostly what is needed is for the article to be checked by two different people who are checking against our current standards. Whether the article was actually written by the first name is irrelevant, but I couldn't think of a better way of doing it, and that's the way it was set up for the Oblivion and Skyrim projects. Jeancey (talk) 20:59, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Overhauled Tribunal:Quest ItemsEdit

This list article was not MWOP-tagged. I have not added the template to it, since I'm not entirely up to speed on its usage. The important part from an encyclopedic perspective was that almost every entry wasn't just wrong but severely wrong (aside from one weapon, one armor item, and maybe the "Misc. Items" stuff). I've gone through all the weapon/armor/clothing items one-by-one and verified them directly (aside from Speed and Reach, which are unlikely to be incorrect), then updated both that article and (again) Tribunal:The Warlords, to which most of these items pertain. This makes me wonder how many other pages about Tribunal and Bloodmoon are in serious error. It's probably worth a special MWOP project focus for a while to programmatically check the rest of the pages about the items, monsters, ingredients, NPCs, locations, etc. that are particular to these expansions, especially since they are integrated into the GotY edition, which is what the average modern player is going to have. Any similar errors may also affect quest pages, etc., that rely on information from a faulty list article. — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 20:49, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm curious to see where the disconnect occurred.... I wasn't around when these pages were originally created, could it be that there were significant differences between the original release versions and the GotY edition? Just to head this off at the pass, though I don't expect there to be any issues, but aside from OpenMW, are you using any mods at all? I don't think OpenMW changes stuff like this, but you never know, I'm not well versed in it. Jeancey (talk) 20:57, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

The changes match the cs, so the differences appear to stem from the edit that "Moved quest items from other pages". I very much doubt there is anything other than this one page, and it would be extremely hasty to assume so based on zero evidence. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 21:16, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Jeancey: I looked directly at the game data (the item entries and the scripts they call, and the stats in them), with just Morrowind and Tribunal loaded, so it was not mediated by OpenMW, and could not have been affected by mods. (I have several concurrent games with and without mods, both for playing, and for testing for UESP, the OpenMW wiki, etc.; the configs are under version control with Subversion so I can switch between them.) OpenMW is just a new parsing and rendering engine for the original Bethesda data files, anyway, so the content, such as the pre-set properties of an item or scripts that it calls, will not differ between OpenMW and Bethesda's original "vanilla" game engine. Except where the OpenMW team has implemented a bug fix already implemented by MCP and other code-patching projects; they maintain lists of what those fixes are here and at two more-specific pages linked therefrom). Even then, such fixes would only show up in actual game-play. The data in the actual game files I'm looking at is raw and unaltered. I have GotY v1.6.1820, which as far as I know is the final official version from Bethesda.

All: Anyway, it looks to me like what happened at Tribunal:Quest Items is someone started an article on the TB-specific quest items by copy-pasting data on the base items (Imperial Silver Helm, etc.) they're based on, then just stopped, and neither filled in the quest-item-specific additional details, nor verified that the copied default info was correct for even the basic stats of the quest-specific items (sometimes it is not, e.g. Soscean's Cuirass doesn't even have the same number of Condition points as the stock one, and has a lower list value despite being super-badass; I just went and checked this again in case my glasses were dirty). So, someone didn't really "move quest items from other pages", I think, but copied kinda-sorta similar items from other pages and didn't follow up any further. I'm not assuming this did happen at other pages, but this was undetected for a long time, and similar incomplete work could have transpired elsewhere by the same or other editors. I guess this points out why this wikiproject is needed, since that article has existed since 2008, and after its initial creation (which the creator said was skeletal) most work on it has been visual and infrastructural - adding images, Style Guide enforcement, templating and linking, etc. I guess this also points out why Morrowind Overhaul Project makes more sense than the now-moribund Morrowind Redesign Project. Heh. We need content verification and expansion more than design tweaking!
— Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 22:15, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Someone did "Moved quest items from other pages" because that's the edit summary they gave. That means they took the information from other pages and not from the source (ie the game). That person for clarification was rpeh, someone you can trust to be right with their game-facts 99% of the time (quite important given he is still the person with the highest amount of edits on the wiki). But the main point is that one example does not a trend make, please stop trying to use one incorrect page to justify a crusade that is guaranteed to be a complete waste of effort. There are doubtless going to be more pages where information is incorrect, but unless it can be shown to be a widespread problem there is nothing more to it than one editor presuming the information they were copying was correct. I also just confirmed that the cs (the game data) backs up your edits so any talk of mods is entirely moot, and we don't need yet another detailed explanation of openmws engine. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 23:51, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Suggesting some spot-checking of similar pages is hardly a "crusade", it's normal diligence for an overhaul project, and no one is trying to "justify" anything. Nor has anyone demanded you personally do the checking. We're all volunteers here, and choose whatever we'd like to focus on. I said nothing about any "trend". Also did not blame anyone by name, or consider it a matter worth finger-pointing over, so rpeh's honor needs no championing. This kind of error is common on wikis because we assume good faith about prior contributions, and material gets merged/split as needed. That does necessitate sometimes reviewing pages after a long while to see if what they now say holds up and makes sense. Having already written the article on OpenMW and linked directly to it, there would be no need to go into further detail about it here. You've made a long string of negative assumptions, basically. Most of the rest of it was redundant (I also already said someone moved game data from one article to another, you already told us you verified with the CS, and we all already know what the CS is). Are we done? I know we got off on the wrong foot several months ago, but it's time to let that go, please. — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 10:56, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Spell IDsEdit

We're pretty good about including the console IDs of just about everything and everyone, but this info is missing for spells. This might come in handy for console stuff, e.g. for a spell only available from a single NPC, who is already dead. To be more specific, some spell's IDs don't quite match their names, most commonly due to inclusion of underscores. For spells like this, we could give the spell ID in parentheses underneath the visible spell name, in lists like Morrowind:Conjuration Spells, and also note the IDs on pages about the spell effects when such spells are mentioned by name. — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 16:35, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Seems like a solid idea to me. With the idea behind MWOP being to apply newer standards for layout and information presentation to the user where possible, then there's certainly a case for the information being shown here for easy access, since it's done in other namespaces. the raconteur ✉ 05:00, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. Go for it. Jeancey (talk) 14:35, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Incomplete list here: http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Spells_(Morrowind) — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 23:49, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

The spell IDs should be available through the CSList: https://cs.uesp.net Echo (talk) 01:56, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Overhauled Morrowind:Siege at FiremothEdit

I just ran through that entire quest again, this time as a high-level character instead of a level 4. Did a bunch of updating of the article, including adding error corrections, details, strategy tips, grammar and style cleanup, a lore note, a bug description, etc. I don't have the patience for "there are exactly x number of y items in the left chest" kind of stuff, so if someone wants to add that level of detail, they can CS it. As far as I can tell, nothing in here is leveled. It's exactly as I remember it from the first time, down to every skeleton, rat, and loot item, other than the contents of ingredient sacks might be randomized like usual. Also did some extended eventuality testing, like what happens if you go find J'Hanir after killing the Lich, multiple ways to keep all three companions alive, whether J'Hanir will disappear like the rest of them upon quest completion, whether the original companions still disappear if you lead them across the sea manually and they are not on the ship that despawns, yadda yadda yadda. What I didn't correct I verified (e.g. the reputation points you get as a reward, etc.) — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 18:53, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Also touched up the related NPC articles and that on the lich Grurn, though they are still missing a lot of detailia from CS, like what their exact gear is. I did provide this for J'Hanir, and updated the MWOP template on that page. Also added follower= to the appropriate NPC articles, and expanded them with info on what the conditions are to retain them as follower NPCs after returning from Firemoth. — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 22:28, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Unless there is something specific to the project that you need help with, there is no need to make a post here every time you improve an article. Also there is no need to make a post on the articles talk page unless there is something you need/want help with, or want to clarify something you did but couldn't within the edit summary. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 23:13, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Didn't notice this until just now. Please see the third and fourth sentences in my original post, and first sentence of second post. These are specific invitations for others to provide more detail to really complete that page. — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 19:23, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Gathered most of the missing DB Assassin infoEdit

Please see Tribunal talk:Dark Brotherhood Attacks#Assassin_stats. Summary: We seem to be missing info on the assassin NPCs, and I have pulled all the necessary and available bits for an NPC table out of the CS. All that's needed is someone who understands the stats auto-generation (Auto Calc) and what that will translate to in generated stats (or range thereof). — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 13:57, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

New NPC article is now at Tribunal:Dark Brotherhood Assassins. I could use some help with updating mt_save_data, as detailed at User talk:Darklocq#Dark Brotherhood Assassins. Short version: the Tribunal:Assassin redirect to Morrowind:Classes#Assassin needs to change to Tribunal:Assassin (class), because Tribunal:Assassin is an NPC name, and needs to redirect to Tribunal:Dark Brotherhood Assassins as do the rest of the generic DB assassins' names (Tribunal:Dark Brotherhood Punisher, etc.). — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 04:31, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Categorization of add-on items and questsEdit

The Morrowind:Helm of Tohan page serves as a triple-purpose article on the add-on, the quest, and the item. However, it is not in any category at all for quests or items, and this is apt to confuse and frustrate readers. I would suggest that it be added to Category:Morrowind-... categories for helms, artifacts, and misc. quests (or create a new category like Category:Morrowind–Add-on quests as a subcategory of the misc. quests one). We should probably also do similar categorization with Morrowind:Siege at Firemoth, etc. Rationale:

• We are using the Morrowind: namespace for all the minor add-ons that don't rise to "expansion" level like Tribunal and Bloodmoon.
• Most players today have the GotY edition, which integrates all the expansions/add-ons; many are not even aware that these were DLCs at all. No one but an "old hand" is likely able to distinguish misc. elements like armor items and quests on a vanilla vs. inserted-by-a-former-DLC basis. It's kind of an expert distinction at this stage.

— Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 19:27, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Shrine of DaringEdit

Morrowind:Shrine of Daring a.k.a. Morrowind:Shrine of the Moon doesn't go anywhere. This is a really significant feature, not only for its connection to a quest, but because it's a re-usable source of long-lasting, fast levitation players can use for map exploration, and its use costs nothing but a Cheap Potion of Rising Force. A section at Morrowind:Vivec Temple is logical place, if this wouldn't be a good stand-alone article, but the Vivec Temple page presently only mentions it in passing, without any detail. — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 03:55, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

To be fair, I wanted to completely redo all the Canton pages, because I think they are awful, but I have just never found the time. I think a redo of Vivec Temple with actual sections on the different places and sights of the canton would be best, with redirects from the two pages you linked anchored to the relevant section. Jeancey (talk) 16:44, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Sounds good. I did some work on Morrowind:Vivec Redoran, but it perhaps just highlights the same need (I richly expanded one section, but the rest are mostly skeletal). — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 22:25, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

PS: The big Morrowind:Vivec Redoran#Robbing the Redoran Treasury section I worked up could possibly be moved to Morrowind:Making Money or even Morrowind:Starting Out (where it is mentioned); depends on how we want these city pages to go, I guess. Should they have any walkthrough info on them at all? — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 10:02, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Place article titlesEdit

The above thread also jogged my memory about the article names: I have to wonder why these pages are named Morrowind:Vivec Redoran, etc., since terms like "Vivec Redoran" are never used in-game, and players don't refer to them that way, either. All it does is require us to pipe every single link to these articles for no real reason (either to the in-game "Vivec, Redoran" or something more explanatory, like "Vivec's Redoran Canton"). I think it would make more sense for our place pages to use the actual "official" cell names, since that's what people are most likely to look for, and it's also the most consistent approach with the Style Guide directives to use in-game names exactly as they're given (even if they have typos). For example, the parenthetic disambiguation we're using in cases like Morrowind:Guild of Mages (Caldera) appears to be completely pointless; this article should be at Morrowind:Caldera, Guild of Mages, which is its actual name. I created a handful of redirects (like that one), before realizing how systemic the problem is (and also getting groused at repeatedly by the anti-redirect camp). — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 22:25, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Morrowind:Leveled Lists is missing half the dataEdit

The article only covers the item leveled lists, and has nothing at all on the opponent leveled lists, which we also need to have in there (as at Skyrim:Leveled Lists). Maybe it "lives" somewhere else, but I've not found it if so. We also have Morrowind Mod:Leveled Lists but it's mod-focused. — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 22:27, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Missing Tribunal locationsEdit

Tribunal:Temple Reception Area, Tribunal:Temple Infirmary, Tribunal:Hall of Ministry, Tribunal:Temple Basement, Tribunal:Office of the Lord Archcanon, Tribunal:High Chapel, maybe others. Many of these are key quest locations. The Temple ones (there may be other missing ones) could all be sections at Tribunal:Mournhold Temple, probably. We also have Tribunal:Temple Courtyard, but that's the huge area outside the temple. — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 10:00, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

There are definitely other (non-Temple) missing ones, either with no real content about them or just missing redirs for key quest locations that are sections in other articles; e.g., I just created Tribunal:Moril Manor as a redir to Tribunal:Manor District. — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 10:21, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Birthsign abilities/powersEdit

Most if not all of them (e.g. Morrowind:Tower Key) are redlinks, but people are going to want to look these up, and we generally ensure that everything with a unique name in the game is page or a redirect here. Should these just redirect to the appropriate birthsign's section at Morrowind:Birthsigns, or is there a better target? — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 02:59, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Will make Morrowind:Powers, listing all racial/birthsign and quest powers, as well as powers not normally attainable. This will probably render Category:Morrowind-Powers obsolete, but I think "Morrowind:Powers" is easier to look for. It will be similar to Morrowind:Spells.

Rykaar (talk) 16:24, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Walkthroughs on Place PagesEdit

On many "Place" pages, the template has a section for Walkthrough. I'm not 100% sure what exactly is expected for this. I've looked around at different dungeon articles, for example, and I see some differences, and I'm not completely sure of what the standard should be.

On the Aharunartus page, the summary does a good job at describing what the player will encounter, from the enemies, the loot, and lock levels, etc. Would this count as a walkthrough? I guess it's not as thorough as you'd expect a walkthrough to be. But, if you were to write one in another section, it might just end up saying the same thing, and would just be redundant.

On the Ashmelech page, there is a separate section for the walkthrough, and it goes into depth. At the time of posting this, that section has a cleanup template on it, but is that the general idea of what is desired? A tour of every area, step by step, in the order that the player will probably explore it? This might already be done for dungeons involved in quests, on their related "Quest" page. Should there be in-depth walkthroughs of every dungeon, even generic dungeons like a tomb with one or two rooms?

Finally, one more example, the Galom Daeus page has a sort of mini-walkthrough, kinda like a summary of each major area. That's somewhat in line with the first example, but with more than one area.

And for a place like, say, a manor or an empty shack in the wild, what kind of walkthrough would be expected?

Sorry for all the questions, I know it's a lot, I just want to make sure I completely understand the standard. Thanks in advance.--Croup shrunk (talk) 17:10, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

I would say dungeons and houses would have two different walkthroughs. Especially the more complicated dungeons would likely require multiple sections for each of the different levels or zones. A manor or shack might only need a paragraph or two detailing items or containers of note and NPCs present. For these, Dralas Gilu's House might be a good example to follow. Fairly short, due to not much of value being present. Arobar Manor is a good example of a larger manor (though that probably is even a little light on the details, in my opinion). Others to look at would be St. Olms Waist South-One, Draren Thiralas' House, Yansirramus (for a small dungeon).

Hopefully that helps! Jeancey (talk) 18:16, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

General guidelines about mods neededEdit

Morrowind is probably the most heavily modded games in existence. Perhaps the authors considered it too obvious to mention, but in my opinion it would be a good idea to clearly state in these guidelines that all testing and image captures must be done without any mods that could affect them. (There are already posts on this page that allude to this problem.)

However, this is not always easy. Vanilla Morrowind has so many bugs that it's effectively impossible to explore all aspects of the game with a vanilla install.

You might think that it would be possible to use a modded game to get to the point you are trying to document, save the game, disable any relevant mods, load the save, and do the test and capture. Unfortunately, many mods affect the saved games, so that it may not be possible to load the save with the mod disabled.

I'm sure that there are people out there with detailed knowledge of what's possible in this area. If you are one of those people, please consider adding some guidelines about how to deal with this issue.

Tungsic (talk) 02:56, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Quest ObjectivesEdit

{{Cleanup-mwop-quest}} has a section for confirming "objectives". What does this entail? Is the tag asking for the journal entries to be verified? There isn't any additional information on the template documentation. I think the quest section of this project page needs to have an short explanation describing how to complete the tag. —⁠Legoless (talk) 14:21, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

When I created it, I sorta intended it as a catch just in case the sections were missing anything. Basically it is quite as simple as making sure the quest objectives were listed correctly by the bot. It is quite possibly the easiest check on the page. :) Jeancey (talk) 16:11, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the addition! —⁠Legoless (talk) 19:28, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Replace Morrowind Patch Project with Patch for PuristsEdit

Not only is it under active development, but it reverts some "non bug fixes" from MPP/UMP and is generally recommended by the community nowdays and included in mod guides/lists over M.P.P, unfortunately many UESP morrowind pages list M.P.P instead which can lead to people installing that over Patch for Purists. — Unsigned comment by Tauin (talk • contribs) at 02:25 on 25 March 2022 (UTC)

I would support updating {{Bug}} to include Patch for Purists fixes as an option. That way, we can maintain the current Morrowind Patch Project notes but add additional bulletpoints to include Patch for Purists. —⁠Legoless (talk) 13:49, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Edit: I've actually gone ahead and added it as an option for pages: {{bug|Bug description.|PFP|version number}}. As for removing MPP fixes from articles, is there a need? —⁠Legoless (talk) 13:54, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

I would generally agree with Lego's approach and suggest that we should just detail both. As long as the articles for both are up-to-date, people can then decide for themselves which they want to use. --Enodoc (talk) 17:30, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Personally, I prefer Patch for Purists as it only fixes bugs. Agree with including this mod.Zebendal (talk) 19:48, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Acceptable Image FormatsEdit

I just contributed a few images on a whim because I noticed there were some locations that were missing images. The images I contributed were .png files, but I notice that all the image file name examples in the project article use .jpg, and other similar images of house exteriors in Morrowind are also .jpg.

Should I have contributed .jpgs instead, or are .pngs also acceptable?

I should be able to offer up identical `.jpg`s if necessary. I can't offer anything at a higher resolution though.

(Note: I'm not officially joining the project, I merely contributed some images (and a page) on a whim. I'm only mentioning it here because my contributions appear to fall under this project's jurisdiction, or are at least of interest to this project in particular.)

Pharap (talk) 17:17, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Bugs first or Notes first?Edit

Trivial question, which section should go first? On the app and on mobile, it really helps if the user could get to the content they need with the minimum amount of scrolling. Thus, I guess the question is essentially: which section is more relevant to users?

• Off the top of my head, I thought Bugs would be more relevant because they have a more direct impact to the player, as opposed to, say, lore-related (but not gameplay-related) trivia.
• Upon further thought, I reconsidered that Notes might be more relevant since very few users play an unmodded and/or unpatched game nowadays; also, notwithstanding trivia, they might also be more interested in related alternatives/exploits/hints, which are also listed in the notes section.

So, like I said, totally trivial question. I'm just slightly peeved that these two sections are inconsistently ordered and that's on me... but if there's some consensus/policy that already addresses this, which I'm not yet aware of, that would also be great. Salamangkero (talk) 14:37, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

The UESPWiki Style Guide lists the standard section order as Notes first, then Bugs (at least for the Place Page and Quest Page; the NPC Page omits Bugs entirely, but I would say it's safe to conclude that the order should remain consistent). As for whether we should re-examine the standard section order in light of the mobile scrolling issue, the Community Portal would probably be the best place to start such a discussion if you're still interested in pursuing it. Hope this helps! — Wolfborn^(Howl) 19:56, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Skip spell enumeration for Spell MerchantsEdit

The task list for task list for Morrowind, Bloodmoon, Tribunal says that:

"The spells that an NPC knows how to cast should also be documented. For consistency purposes, a list of sentences to document spells for each race can be found here".

However, the style guide has this to say on redundancy:

"Before adding a new note to a page, editors should double check whether ... The information should be merged into another existing paragraph or note. It is generally better to add a few words to an existing sentence than to write a whole new note that mostly repeats existing information."

I believe that, for Spell Merchants, it is redundant to be enumerating the spells they know if it is the same set of spells that they have for sale. I advocate for something similar to the approach taken in Estirdalin's page, which addresses both consistency and redundancy issues:

"Aside from her <racial bonuses>, she knows a wide variety of spells. Specifically, these are the spells that she will sell to you."

I'll be working on the intros of spell merchants' NPC pages in a bit but posting this here; just in case I'm missing any context re: the enumeration of spells for spell merchants. Salamangkero (talk) 07:53, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

That makes sense. I see no reason to list them twice. —Dillonn241 (talk) 20:05, 4 July 2024 (UTC)