Category talk:Mount Appearance Traits

From Lotro-Wiki.com
Jump to navigation Jump to search
  • I just stumbled upon this Category, Category: Mount Appearance Traits, while updating a quest, and in general, it bothers me, as the nomenclature and organization makes no sense.
Many, if not most, of the "entries" in this Category are actual physical Items, not Traits. All ARE Cosmetic Items, yet there is no cross reference to them as such, i.e. to ; Cosmetics, Category: Cosmetic Items or Category: Outfitting.

I realize that there is also Category: Appearance Traits, which seem to be virtually all from the Ettenmoors from 2008. I have no idea if those items are still available and or the pages accurate. Relatedly, the article Traits makes no reference to either of these two "Cosmetic" categories, and probably should not as they are NOT really traits, but Cosmetic Items.

Therefor, I would propose the following changes. These can be done trivially, without disrupting anything else, as there does not seem to be any kind of cross reference to these.

  1. These two Categories should be moved to Category: Cosmetic Items -- (Done)
  2. The header: Template:L:1:Character should be modified to include a pointer to Cosmetics -- (Done)
  3. Category: Outfitting should only exist under Category: Cosmetic Items -- (Done)

Giving us:

Category: Appearance Traits
Category: Mount Appearance Traits
Category: Outfitting
Category: Skirmish Cosmetic Items‎

Next:

4. The articles Cosmetic, Cosmetics , Outfits and Equipment should be expanded to logically link together and to include reference to the Monster appearances entries (Category: Appearance Traits) and Mount appearances (Category: Mount Appearance Traits), as well as to explain the concept of Cosmetics, and probably a link to The Wardrobe, LOTRO Store, etc. Cosmetic should probably be the "root" document, linking to the others.

See: Cosmetic for a start.

That article has a "More Information" section where I tried to list all of the relevant categories and articles I found. Several are probably redundant -- Outfits and Cosmetics for example -- and should be merged. They have surprisingly little overlap that I noticed.

Note tha the statement:

  • Monster players also have access to Appearance Traits.

needs to have details about acquiring and equipping them added.\

I've gotten things started, others who have more interest, not to mention knowledge, in such topics need to expand on this start.

Wm Magill - Valamar - OTG/OTC - talk 23:41, 3 August 2013 (EDT)

Of course, I forgot what got me started.

  • All of these various "Mount Appearance Traits" and "Appearance Traits" should be changed to Items.
And someone who does the moors needs to verify the current status of the entries as they are apparently all from 2008 - about 3 revs of the Moors ago. :)

If nothing else, Trait vs Item impacts how the entity displays in the Rewards Section of a Quest -- they get listed as "Traits" when in fact they are Items you (can) receive. i.e. by using the Trait Reward template instead of the Reward template.

Even though the in-game tool-tip calls them traits,they are really items. Traits being something which modifies the stats of the entity... while an Item may or may not do so. The trait template also does not allow for any cost other than Spirit Stones for the Monster Appearance Traits. Of course the template can be easily fixed. Wm Magill - Valamar - OTG/OTC - talk 00:03, 4 August 2013 (EDT)

I'm not sure I agree with your conclusions. You define traits as things that affect stats, wheras items may not. I would rather define items as an actual thing which exists in your inventory or perhaps wardrobe or storage, and traits as things that you equip in a trait interface. By that definition, the monster appearances are definitely traits. You have to trade for them and then equip them in your traits window, similar to how the skirmish soldier appearances are equipped as traits. The gender, race, and outfit of your skirmish soldier behave exactly the same as the skills and bonuses you can equip for them, even though they don't provide any stat benefits.
The war-steed cosmetics are more debatable. When you receive one it turns up as an item in your inventory, and then you right-click it to convert it to an appearance trait that can then be equipped in your war-steed appearance interface, or sometimes it skips your inventory and automatically converts to a trait. I suppose technically the reward is an item, wheras the actual appearance is a trait, but we don't need to be too pedantic about these things. I wouldn't be upset with either calling them items or traits, but you interact with these appearances as if they were traits, which I believe is why we have been using that template for them. -- Elinnea (talk) 09:38, 4 August 2013 (EDT)

Hmmm... definitely an issue/question. I don't know the Monster stuff at all, and I have to go back and look at the Skirmish Soldier stuff to see how it "hangs."

I'm wondering if some of this simply reflects the way Turbine has changed their own references to things (especially as Devs come and go) ... like how their original usage of "Automatic Quest Bestowal has been replaced by (almost completely) Landscape Quest. Which seems to reflect the difference between the original Designer and the Implementer(s). Or, as I just updated for Outfitter -- the use of "Trousers" instead of "Pants." (I didn't change the Item names on the Wiki, just the names displayed in the Inventories of the NPCs, but that probably should actually happen also. I didn't check how many links there were to the items. :) ) Or, for that matter, the use of the phrase Cosmetic Item(s) instead of Outfits. The Wiki clearly shows the nomenclature, or generally "common usage," change over time.

  • Maybe what we really need is a new Template -- Appearance (or maybe just a couple of more parameters in the Trait Template -- which more closely mimics the in-game display.
Note the "Earned" / "Not Earned" lines.
  • Or elimination of the "Trait" prefix to the Trait Reward template; or change it to War-steed Appearance, as they seem to be the only places where it has been used.

The display difference is really what got me started: for the quest: Quest:An Unfair Exchange. The jarring impact of "Trait Reward"

In this case, the quest reward immediately goes to the Mount Appearance Panel, nothing goes to your inventory first. However, I have a vault full of "pre-purchase" Appearances (for War-steeds and Heralds), which you do click on to have them "spawn."

This is the In-game "look."

The wiki displays the reward this way, jarringly different.

Wiki: quest reward section

Light Caparison of the Sutcrofts-icon.png Light Caparison of the Sutcrofts

However, simply using the "Reward" template fails as it is not an item. Item:Light Caparison of the Sutcrofts

  • So I guess the question becomes -- do we flag these things with a "Trait:" prefix, or just display them as Icons as in-game. I guess the latter makes most sense. i.e. the "solution" is to fix Template:Trait Reward
Wm Magill - Valamar - OTG/OTC - talk 13:24, 5 August 2013 (EDT)
Headed over here from Magill's message...however the cosmetics I've been poking with are only those of actual items that can be moved around and equipped...But reading through the discussion I'll give my 2 cents...
Regarding the pvp cosmetic items/traits, I'm afraid I'm no help whatsoever as I've not played in the moors. The cosmetics for mounts...to me neither 'traits' nor 'items' fit. Sure it may exist in your inventory until you click it, but you cannot equip it in the form of an item, only through the interface. Calling them traits may cause confusion (even to myself) as race/class traits are what should be focused on with that word (in my opinion). A possible categorization could be to have a specific one for mount cosmetics only. I think they may be better placed connected to the mount categories though than the normal cosmetics. Putting them with the armour,cosmetics,jewelerry, etc of equippable characters may cause some confusion. Also not sure if each individual piece needs its own page or not...perhaps just one for each set...
--Savi (talk) 10:59, 6 August 2013 (EDT)
Oops, I guess I let this slip out of my mind for a while. I think everyone who has commented agrees that the wiki display in quest rewards should match what the game looks like, with just the name and the icon. What Savitara says makes a lot of sense - no use arguing over items vs. traits when really it's not either. The best possible solution would likely be to make an entirely new template for these, which would categorize them appropriately and use the Tooltip template so that it can use the modes for imlink, which can be used in a quest reward listing. It would be nice to not have to change Trait Reward, so that template can stay focused on the actual traits that it currently serves.
The thing is, with Helm's Deep about to hit, this falls a bit lower in priority, at least for me. I would love to get back to this and fix it up properly, but I probably won't have time for that until the more fundamental changes have been addressed. -- Elinnea (talk) 19:48, 1 November 2013 (EDT)
I have changed the Trait Reward template with the suggestions made here. I copied {{Reward}} and stripped out all the extra functionality like quality coloring, multiple amounts and plural names since that won't ever be needed for these.
As for items vs. traits, I can say that there are both. Some of these traits are earned by items, similar to cosmetic pets, and others are learned directly. For example, when purchasing a mount from the store, you'll automatically learn any mount appearance traits associated with it without the item in-between. The fact that the items and traits have identical names makes it all the more confusing.
Side note: It would be nice to have the functionality in our tooltip template to display two tooltips at once from different pages similar to how it is displayed in game. E.g., hovering over 'Tome of the White Rabbit' displays both that tooltip and that of the 'White Rabbit' pet skill to the right of that tooltip. Neum (talk) 17:05, 19 May 2018 (UTC)