New Vampire Database Request

Is it possible to have an entry in ARDB for every merged vampire with their total combined text and their proper disciplines? Perhaps I should ask LSJ for those same entries in the WW files? Comments Welcome, Norman S. Brown, Jr XZealot Archon of the Swamp

XZealot wrote: > Is it possible to have an entry in ARDB for every merged vampire with > their total combined text and their proper disciplines? Perhaps I > should ask LSJ for those same entries in the WW files? The WW files list only the cards. It doesn't list what attributes they might gain or lose through play (through merging or discipline cards or equipment or referendums or whatever).

[ quoted text not captured ] Could the list be updated so any tournament banned cards state that fact? I imagine that it would require a little work on the text file, but would add a whole level of clarity to players browsing either WW website, or any deckbuilder that uses the WW text file. Something like this would be good; Memories of Mortality Type: Master Cost: 1 pool Master. Put this card on a vampire; this vampire cannot attempt to block allies. Any damage this vampire inflicts on allies is reduced to 0. This vampire may burn 1 blood during his or her controller's influence phase to burn this card; he or she then goes into torpor. <This card is currently banned for Tournament Play.> Rarity: AH:U5 CE:U Sam

Jazzbeaux wrote: > Could the list be updated so any tournament banned cards state that > fact? I imagine that it would require a little work on the text file, > but would add a whole level of clarity to players browsing either WW > website, or any deckbuilder that uses the WW text file. > Something like this would be good; > > Memories of Mortality > Type: Master > Cost: 1 pool > Master. > Put this card on a vampire; this vampire cannot attempt to block > allies. Any damage this vampire inflicts on allies is reduced to 0. > This vampire may burn 1 blood during his or her controller's influence > phase to burn this card; he or she then goes into torpor. > <This card is currently banned for Tournament Play.> > Rarity: AH:U5 CE:U Sure.

[ quoted text not captured ] To those of you who maintain programs that read and parse the datafiles, do you have a preference as to how this manifests? Options: A token in the "Set/Rarity" list with a date on which the card was banned (like promos are currently handled). i.e., AH:U5, CE:U, Banned-200800101 Errata line added to text box, as Jazzbeaux suggests above New column (field) in the csv

On May 9, 9:48 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > LSJ wrote: <snip> > Errata line added to text box, as Jazzbeaux suggests above This would be the easiest approach as it would require no effort on my (or likely any other 3rd party) part as the text of 'banned' could be searched for to find all banned cards. New column would be my next preference. I don't personally like the option of token in set rarity. </opinion> -------------- Ethan Burrow - still lurking http://monger.vekn.org http://presence.vekn.org

On May 9, 3:48 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > LSJ wrote: > > To those of you who maintain programs that read and parse the datafiles, do you > have a preference as to how this manifests? > > Options: I happy with Errata line in card text or New column. Not keen on Rarity token though. Graham.

On May 9, 3:18 pm, XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote: > Is it possible to have an entry in ARDB for every merged vampire with > their total combined text and their proper disciplines? Perhaps I > should ask LSJ for those same entries in the WW files? Let me think about this one. Graham.

[ quoted text not captured ] It just seemed handy to have the merged vampire shown in its entirety. As the functionality is that of a single vampire, not a vampire with library cards on them. It is the only instance where two crypt cards work in concert and do so by design. So it seemed intuitive that if you design them to merge that you would want to show the final product of your hard work. [ quoted text not captured ]

On May 9, 5:48 pm, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > LSJ wrote: > To those of you who maintain programs that read and parse the datafiles, do you > have a preference as to how this manifests? > > Options: > > A token in the "Set/Rarity" list with a date on which the card was banned (like > promos are currently handled). i.e., AH:U5, CE:U, Banned-200800101 > > Errata line added to text box, as Jazzbeaux suggests above > > New column (field) in the csv I'd definately prefer a new column to the CSV. That way I wouldn't have to change my CSV parser at all. Additional text to the card text would be ok, although I wouldn't like it too much. Definate no to the Set/Rarity column. That would create only problems. ----- http://www.secretlibrary.info/

On May 9, 4:55 pm, XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote: > It just seemed handy to have the merged vampire shown in > its entirety. As the functionality is that of a single vampire, > not a vampire with library cards on them. It is the only > instance where two crypt cards work in concert and do so > by design. Not really. Lots of card combos are intended by design. If we consider only crypt cards combining with other crypt cards, we have, for just a few examples: Aabbt Kindred combined with Nefertiti; Tremere vampires combined with Gargoyle Tremere Slave Vampires; Enid Blount combined with Edith Blount; Onaedo combined with Otienno. > So it seemed intuitive that if you design them to > merge that you would want to show the final product > of your hard work. Perhaps. But since the player must do the hard work of merging the vampires, seems to me that -- as with any combo -- he might as well do the hard work of calculating the result. Nor is it self evident to me that merging them will be a priority for the player's strategy. He might prefer to draw 4 different vampires, but want 2 copies of that vampire in his crypt for other reasons (such as the discipline spread), just to maximize the chances of drawing just one. But by instead using a base version and an advanced version, he minimizes the damage of such an "unlucky draw" by gaining a potential offsetting benefit.

JH wrote: > I'd definately prefer a new column to the CSV. That way I wouldn't > have to change my CSV parser at all. Additional text to the card text > would be ok, although I wouldn't like it too much. It seems like the solution to be enacted is "both a new column in the CSV and card text addendum", based on feedback so far. > Definate no to the > Set/Rarity column. That would create only problems. What problems? What problems has the promo-YYYYMMDD set created?

On May 11, 12:14 pm, nyst...@cs.com wrote: > On May 9, 4:55 pm, XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote: > > > It just seemed handy to have the merged vampire shown in > > its entirety. As the functionality is that of a single vampire, > > not a vampire with library cards on them. It is the only > > instance where two crypt cards work in concert and do so > > by design. > > Not really. Lots of card combos are intended by design. If we > consider only crypt cards combining with other crypt cards, we have, > for just a few examples: Aabbt Kindred combined with Nefertiti; > Tremere vampires combined with Gargoyle Tremere Slave Vampires; Enid > Blount combined with Edith Blount; Onaedo combined with Otienno. But no other mechanic in the game was designed to have two cards that were named the same thing but have clearly differing texts, which when played together generated an even more powerful gestalt. None of your analogies have that in common. > > So it seemed intuitive that if you design them to > > merge that you would want to show the final product > > of your hard work. > > Perhaps. But since the player must do the hard work of merging the > vampires, seems to me that -- as with any combo -- he might as well do > the hard work of calculating the result. Or you could just make it easier by having the merged vampire's text available. > Nor is it self evident to me that merging them will be a priority for > the player's strategy. He might prefer to draw 4 different vampires, > but want 2 copies of that vampire in his crypt for other reasons (such > as the discipline spread), just to maximize the chances of drawing > just one. But by instead using a base version and an advanced > version, he minimizes the damage of such an "unlucky draw" by gaining > a potential offsetting benefit. How is this even relavent to merging vampires? You are not talking about merging vampires and the resultant gestalt. It is a simple request, about an unique mechanic, not a "what if someone wants something different" speculation. [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] i think it should be one OR the other... no double info. Andrea

[ quoted text not captured ] Well that depends on what you mean Scott. For myself, since I have a database behind VEKN.SE and I split all the fields and then sometimes split the info in each field I need, placing the info into the correct database and column, I would have to make special code to handle the banned part if it placed into a column with info that it is not really relevant to. I doubt it would happen but you could choose to reprint a card that is banned from tournament play, what would that then mean in the CSV file? Is a card being banned info pertaining to a set or a rarity? I would say no. So please don't put it there simply for the reasons that it does not belong there. A new column would be my choice. Archie

[ quoted text not captured ] Some other search engine or tool might add this as well but I will add another entry for each merged vampire with the sum of it's descriptions to the VEKN.SE search engine. The cardname would be for example: Alan Sovereign (Merged) and can be searched for by simply typing merged into the cardname field. Also, Merged will appear as an attribute and can be selected from the dropdown (these are basically synonymous). It should appear by the end of tomorrow (or say 36 hours from this post is done). Archie www.vekn.se

On May 12, 7:10 am, andrea.la.ma...@infinito.it wrote: > > i think it should be one OR the other... no double info. I agree with Andrea. One or the other. I'm not a big fan of duplicating information. Graham.

[ quoted text not captured ] You mean like the many sets of double info already in the csv? How is that a problem, exactly?

[ quoted text not captured ] Then use the text file. The csv already "duplicates" the info in the text file, so those who find duplication onerous would be avoiding it (and it's nicely separated/duplicated Disciplines, titles, costs, and requirements) in the first place.

Archibald Zimonyi wrote: > Is a card being banned info pertaining to a set or a rarity? I would > say no. So please don't put it there simply for the reasons that it > does not belong there. Ah, a real point. Thank you.

On May 12, 1:16 am, Archibald Zimonyi <a...@aranzo.netg.se> wrote: > On 9 Maj, 16:18, XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote: > > > Is it possible to have an entry in ARDB for every merged vampire with > > their total combined text and their proper disciplines? Perhaps I > > should ask LSJ for those same entries in the WW files? > Some other search engine or tool might add this as well but I will add > another entry for each merged vampire with the sum of it's > descriptions to the VEKN.SE search engine. FWIW Monger has been doing this for years. I think Norm is specifically asking for ARDB to have this feature. ----------------- Ethan Burrow - trailblazer of functionality http://monger.vekn.org http://presence.vekn.org

LSJ <vte...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >To those of you who maintain programs that read and parse the datafiles, >do you have a preference as to how this manifests? > >A token in the "Set/Rarity" list with a date on which the card was banned >(like promos are currently handled). i.e., AH:U5, CE:U, Banned-200800101 It doesn't seem to belong there, as this purpose of this field is to answer questions like "In what set can I find this card?" or "How rare is this card?". Promo cards are essentially in their own unique sets, while banning a card doesn't affect what set it belongs to or its rarity. >Errata line added to text box, as Jazzbeaux suggests above I think the text box should reflect what should actually be printed on the card. Unless a hypothetical future printing of a banned card would include the errata line, I don't think it belongs here either. >New column (field) in the csv I think this is the best option. Ross Ridge -- l/ // Ross Ridge -- The Great HTMU [oo][oo] rri...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca -()-/()/ http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/~rridge/ db //

On May 12, 3:59 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > JH wrote: > > I'd definately prefer a new column to the CSV. That way I wouldn't > > have to change my CSV parser at all. Additional text to the card text > > would be ok, although I wouldn't like it too much. > > It seems like the solution to be enacted is "both a new column in the CSV and > card text addendum", based on feedback so far. Either or. Not both. And IIRC the only double info in the CSV are the disciplines. And they don't go into fields with other information. My absolute favorite would be a banned field with a date in it that shows since what date the card has been banned. > > Definate no to the > > Set/Rarity column. That would create only problems. > > What problems? > > What problems has the promo-YYYYMMDD set created? Promo-YYYYMMDD set creates problems that it needs specific code to parse correctly. Banned-YYYYMMDD would create additional need for such code. And even more, because I wouldn't like to show Banned info in the set information.

On 12 Maj, 17:30, texasjusticar <texasjusti...@gmail.com> wrote: > On May 12, 1:16 am, Archibald Zimonyi <a...@aranzo.netg.se> wrote: > > > On 9 Maj, 16:18, XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote: > > > > Is it possible to have an entry in ARDB for every merged vampire with > > > their total combined text and their proper disciplines? Perhaps I > > > should ask LSJ for those same entries in the WW files? > > Some other search engine or tool might add this as well but I will add > > another entry for each merged vampire with the sum of it's > > descriptions to the VEKN.SE search engine. > > FWIW Monger has been doing this for years. I think Norm is > specifically asking for ARDB to have this feature. Hmmmm, how? As far as I see Monger does what VEKN.SE does, which is currently show two different cards but add Advanced to one to distinguish between them. What I think Norm means is that you have the sum of both cards in the one search, eg: Cardname: Lucita (Merged) Cardtype: Vampire Sect: Sabbat Group: 2 Clan: Lasombra Capacity: 8 Discipline: cel DOM FOR OBT pot Cardtext: Sabbat Archbishop of Aragon: Sabbat vampires younger than Lucita get -1 intercept when attempting to block Lucita. Once each action Lucita performs, she may burn 2 blood to cancel a reaction card played by a vampire with capacity less than 6 as it is played (no cost is paid). As that is how the vampire Lucita looks once she is merged (if she would have been a completely other vampire). Sure it is a card that doesn't exist and yes one could do the math yourself in order to add up both the basic and advanced version of the card but with this you can for example search for DAI and find the merged Helena (which you would never be able to otherwise via the one search). A small and nifty addition which might only cater to a select few but no real reason not to do it. Archie www.vekn.se

On May 12, 11:08 am, Archibald Zimonyi <a...@aranzo.netg.se> wrote: > On 12 Maj, 17:30, texasjusticar <texasjusti...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On May 12, 1:16 am, Archibald Zimonyi <a...@aranzo.netg.se> wrote: > > > > On 9 Maj, 16:18, XZealot <xzea...@cox.net> wrote: > > > > > Is it possible to have an entry in ARDB for every merged vampire with > > > > their total combined text and their proper disciplines? Perhaps I > > > > should ask LSJ for those same entries in the WW files? > > > Some other search engine or tool might add this as well but I will add > > > another entry for each merged vampire with the sum of it's > > > descriptions to the VEKN.SE search engine. > > > FWIW Monger has been doing this for years. I think Norm is > > specifically asking for ARDB to have this feature. > > Hmmmm, how? As far as I see Monger does what VEKN.SE does, which is > currently show two different cards but add Advanced to one to > distinguish between them. I looked and noticed indeed Lucita doesn't have a merged version, dunno why. Helena's is here : http://monger.vekn.org/showvamp.html?ID=819 Guess I should double check the DB for all advanced vampires...maybe something got messed up in the transfer a while back. ------------------------------------- Ethan Burrow - confused http://monger.vekn.org http://presence.vekn.org

[ quoted text not captured ] I just checked Monger and Helena is the only vampire with a Merged version. [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] > Archon of the Swamp- Dölj citerad text - > > - Visa citerad text - Cool, I only chose a random vamp that ended up being Alan Sovereign, and he didn't have it. Archie www.vekn.se

JH wrote: > On May 12, 3:59 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: >> JH wrote: >>> I'd definately prefer a new column to the CSV. That way I wouldn't >>> have to change my CSV parser at all. Additional text to the card text >>> would be ok, although I wouldn't like it too much. >> It seems like the solution to be enacted is "both a new column in the CSV and >> card text addendum", based on feedback so far. > > Either or. Not both. Yes. I understood your statement of personal preference. I was summarizing the broader feedback set, however. > And IIRC the only double info in the CSV are the > disciplines. Title.

[ quoted text not captured ] Yeah. Well. That too. Title should be in the card text because it reads there. But having it separately also adds functionality of searches from the CSV. So it's a definite bonus that it's on two different locations.

[ quoted text not captured ] Um, yeah. That's the idea behind double listing info at all. Also: requirements. And soon: bannedity.

[ quoted text not captured ] Yeah, but all the previous double listings have been done so that something that is originally in the card text box is duplicated elsewhere to ease searching. Not the other way around. If you are really going to add it into the card text box i hope that you are going to make some kind of a parser code for it (like {'s for erratas, mrps and such), for easy exclusion. As it's own field it would be the easiest to add into a csv-parser. - you want to add it into the card text field: cardtext = cardtext + banned - you want it as separate entity: cardtext = cardtext, banned = banned - you want to ignore it completely: cardtext = cardtext

VEKN.SE is updated with Merged information. Follow www.vekn.se, click on the Search link and then you can search for the vampires either by entering the keyword "Merged" as part of the cardname of by selecting the attribute Merged in the Attributes list. Enjoy, Archie www.vekn.se

On May 13, 10:34 am, Archibald Zimonyi <a...@aranzo.netg.se> wrote: > VEKN.SE is updated with Merged information. > > Followwww.vekn.se, click on the Search link and then you can search > for the vampires either by entering the keyword "Merged" as part of > the cardname of by selecting the attribute Merged in the Attributes > list. Is there a way to sort the resultant list? [ quoted text not captured ]

[ quoted text not captured ] Nopes. I never had any use for it myself so I never bothered implementing it. The result list is extremely simple compared to the search page. It has a pre-defined grouping of cardtypes (same as in the Search page) and then lists in alphabetical order within each grouping. I have for a very long time tried to update the result list but it's slow work with all the other things I've got going. Lately I've gone back to updating the VEKN.SE site so such functionality will appear. I want users to be able to choose what info is listed on the result list page, so that you can select to see for example Name, Disciplines and Capacity for all results without having to click on each card for that info. Archie www.vekn.se

On 12 Mag, 12:50, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] well the info doubled is related to columns that extract specific information from the text of the card. This will be an extra info and then is not exactly the same.

[ quoted text not captured ] Since the proposal is to have the online card text reflect the banning as errata to card text, the column in the csv will be effectively a column in the csv that extracts that specific information. But regardless, the question remains: [ quoted text not captured ]

On May 15, 2:28 am, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote: > > But regardless, the question remains: > > How is that a problem, exactly? I do not think there is actual a problem. Add both in and I know I will handle it in Ardb. Graham.