Quest Talk:Evidence of Foulplay

Questchains and more

It not a quest chain. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RingTailCat (Contribs • User Talk) at 2012-04-04T16:11:24.

First, let me explain the page structure a bit. Starting from the Main page. Click Regional Quests. Then in the last row of the table, for "The Great River" click on Quest Chains. This is a page similar to what we see for all other regions. Calling the link "Quest Chains" is a bit inaccurate, because there have been no non-epic quest chains in-game since Enedwaith.

The page The Great River Quests is implemented in pieces which are transcluded. The first one, for the Vol III, Book 6 quests is actually a quest chain. The remaining pieces list most of the quests that start in a region, and attempt to show the dependencies between them using ordered and numbered lists. There are a very limited number of non-prerequisite quests in each area. Most of the quest (in most divisions) for a fairly linear sequence of quests.

These transcluded pages, e.g. Eorlsmead Quests are also transcluded into the division page, in this case Eorlsmead. There are still a few rough spots in the implementation, and several of the pages are still marked as under construction.

As we progress through the quest sequences, the NPCs, and even the objects in the landscape are changing through the use of phasing technology. A good example of this is the The Oathbreakers of Parth Celebrant quest. If you encounter a bug with this quest, and need to cancel and reacquire it, you will likely find the quest giver at a different location from where you originally found him, especially if you have completed other quests which advanced the phasing. The static quest chains have evolved into a more dynamic quest progression.

This quest "Evidence of Foulplay" may be of particular interest, as it rewards a bauble. If I want to do this quests, what do I need to do first. Ideally, you should be able to click on the prerequisite links in the walkthough and notes to lead you back to the first quest without prerequisites. Or you could go to the quests section in Eorlsmead. RingTailCat (talk) 08:32, 5 April 2012 (EDT)

I'm not sure if I really see your point. If I got it right, your main argument here is, that you don't want a questchain because there is no name of that questchain written in the Quest Log ingame?

I got the structure of the Eorlsmead page and I didn't want to change the inclusion of that page without thinking properly about it (the redirect made it still show up there).

Our quest "chains" on the wiki are most of the time not linear at all, some chain elements require multiple quests to be finished (in order and sometimes not in order) and some even open new sub/-chains. But all of them follow a structure which I thought we are calling "chains", although "tree" would be more appropriate.

I got the quests of this new area only recently and I had troubles finding just *any* quest, because I advanced too far into the region without having done any quest already. So, I looked into the wiki (because I wanted to get this bauble) and was quite annoyed that I had to click my way through all the prerequisites until I was able to found what I thought is the starter quest. Only after that, I found out that someone already wrote a page of the quest-tree and I moved that page in a way such that I could take advantage of the questchain parameter.

After that I realized someone just reverted everything I did, without leaving any comment at all (which I expected on my talk page btw!).

[ I hate to write so much text ] --EoD (talk) 14:02, 7 April 2012 (EDT)

Merged from another discussion

I don't think the quest chains should be in the Walkthrough & Notes box at all: there is a Quest Chain box that is already treated this way: missing if empty, but it should be added to pages that need it. Zimoon wrote out a whole bunch about some of these things at Category talk:Quest Chains but those ideas have never been discussed as far as I know. Perhaps the time has come for a discussion - and it would be nice if it could be centralized somewhere, instead of scattered across various peoples' talk pages. --Elinnea (talk) 11:16, 7 April 2012 (EDT)

First, a quest chain is a very specific in-game relationship between quests that is shown by the presence of the quest chain name in the quest log. In some cases, page authors have created "fake" quest chains and "Quest Arcs" as a mechanism for showing close pre/post-requisite relationships between quests.

Second, the "Walkthrough & Notes" section should be allowed to contain any sort of notes that relate to the quest, its reward, special mobs encountered, and even prerequisite quests.

A quest chain implies a linear relationship between quests. While most quest prerequisites reflect a linear series of quests, this is not always the case. I have encountered some quests in Great River where there is no clear linear relationship between quests, but there is a prerequisite in the sense that you must be doing another quest, or have completed another quest before the quest is offered, or the quest starting item will drop, or the quest starting landscape item is active. These more complex relationships need a bit more explanation that listing the old style quest chain. RingTailCat (talk) 12:27, 7 April 2012 (EDT)

Woah, suddenly this discussion is very large! I guess I'll put this ... here...?

I acknowledge that there's a difference between official quest chains that have a name in the quest log (such as Category:Dire Pack Quests - each quest will be marked with the quest chain name) and the sort of de facto quest chains that just come from strings of prerequisites (such as Quest:Send Them Back Home). But I don't see the harm in including some of the latter in a Quest Chain section on a quest page. If I as a reader just want to know how to get through a series of quests, I don't particularly care whether Turbine decided to give it a name or not.

However, I do see that it's more complicated with quests in Dunland and the Great River. It's probably going to keep getting even more so, as they fiddle around with their dynamic NPC instancing. Perhaps the more recent quests will need to be treated differently than most of the older ones. I guess some creative thinking is needed to make information easily available in an elegant way. Though I'm afraid I can't say as any helpfully creative ideas are coming into my head at the moment... -- Elinnea (talk) 14:50, 7 April 2012 (EDT)

Changing game mechanics

I would comment on this comment -- RTC's description of the changes in LOTRO since Dunland is quite accurate. There is a radical difference in the Gaming technology in use in The Great River when compared to Dunland, which is radically different from that seen in Enedwaith. It is not a simple "level" of the quest vs level of the questor where the ring is "silver" -- and Turbine told us ...

Silver Rings. Some NPCs have silver ring icons, rather than gold. A silver ring indicates that a quest does not match your level. If the NPC will not talk to you about a quest, it means your level is not high enough; try talking to him again after gaining a couple more levels."

Now, there simply are no rings, and they still don't talk to you! (There is "one" Grey Ring in Galtrev as I recall -- Bron's two "dailies.")

One of the more fascinating "bugs" with Galtrev is this situation... complete the quest Quest:Instance: The Meaning of Alliance, then go visit someplace else -- Dunbog for example then return. WATCH carefully as you approach the gate and you will see the Half-Orc at the gate disappear. The effect is not visible on Swift Travel as you never reach that area, but any other means of travel causes it to occur. It's not really a bug, just the fact that your REAL line of sight is much further than the Game's "graphics blocks" presume your line of sight to be, and there is enough "swapping" of blocks happening because of other players.

In The Great River, if you go straight to Thinglad and Haldirth, you will find zero quests in that area - no "grey rings" or any other similar indicator. However, if you have taken the path directly along the River (as the Epic line takes you), you will encounter several quest qivers who "open-up" various "quests lines" in that area. This same process is repeated throughout The Great River. It IS a very different Game Mechanic than LOTRO has utilized in the past, and it doesn't "map backwards" into the old structure. It is the same as with many other aspects of things -- Just last night I was updating a bunch of Knowledge of Lore Master MOB stubs for Trollshaws MOBs. ... the Information provided in the KoLM in-game display, is quite different than what it used to be. I encountered at least 3 different templates used over time as I was updating/adding information.

There may be a more elegant way to verbally describe the information contained at The_Great_River_Quests but short of simply wandering around blindly -- admittedly, what RTC and I both did during the Beta (with the backing of the Eyes and Guard Tavern), there is no "easy way" to unveil the area. However, Turbine did do a pretty good job of "herding" your explorations. But it still takes a Kinship to explore the Limlight Gorge. :)

RTC has done an incredible job of pulling this all together. There is a huge amount of content, and as I'm discovering with Dunland, a lot that still isn't captured on the WIKI.

In conclusion, I would add, this discussion needs to be more prominent and maintained as I suspect more significant changes this summer as the full Riders of Rohan update is rolled out. Turbine has promised many more technological changes to come. And don't forget ... LOTRO is now getting quite "long in the tooth" -- the technology used in the beginning dates back to 2005, and gaming has come a long way since then -- despite what 8-bit Google Maps would have you believe :) if You missed them! Wm Magill - Valamar - OTG/OTC (talk) 14:36, 7 April 2012 (EDT)

Errm, yes Magill. I think everyone knows about those new quest-openers. But what you are describing is a typical quest chain. You need to have finished on quest in order to get a new quest. I don't quite see what you wanted to tell us here? --EoD (talk) 15:53, 7 April 2012 (EDT)

Coming in late to the discussion, and not knowing all details about this area. But...

The basic rules are explained at Category talk:Quest Chains and are in summary:

• If the quest does not read a quest-chain at the Quest Log, don't use the questchain parameter.
  The reason is that using it will also display the "name" at the info-box, which is foul.
• If the quest has a prerequisite, add a box for Quest Chain and spit it out.
• If the quest is part of an unnamed quest-chain, use a box for Quest Chain but transclude from a page, see The Bounty-hunter Quest Chain. Also, see the meta-quest-chain Orchalwë's Mission Sub Quests.

There are also information at Boilerplate:Quest.

Why not use the Walk-through box? Because prerequisites are not walk-through, neither is a statement that "this quest is a prerequisite for quest X".

If nothing of what I said make sense, sorry, I have not read it all yet. But I will. Zimoon (talk) 16:24, 7 April 2012 (EDT)

I'm away from home, so I'm not getting on the wiki as often as I'd like. I just got back from herding aurochs (or their modern kin).

I think I've been convinced that the quest's prerequisites should go into a "Quest Chain" questbox instead of the "Walkthrough & Notes" questbox. If you can be patient, I should be back home by Wednesday, when I can write a bot to split the prerequisites from the other notes, as Zimoon did manually for this quest.

I have run my bot to move prerequisites into a quest chain questbox. RingTailCat (talk) 05:13, 12 April 2012 (EDT)

There remains the issue related to the content of the Eorlsmead Quests and Category:Eorlsmead Quests (and similarly the Wailing Hills Quests and Category:Wailing Hills Quests). May I suggest that as an interim solution, we transclude the Eorlsmead Quests page into the Category:Eorlsmead Quests page, rather than copy the content and replace it with a redirect. These pages are not complete, even though I have removed my construction stub from most of them.

I have a hunter that is doing every quest she can find, while I write up the quests. I have a level 75 Champion that I have been taking around to the quest givers, quest starter droppers and quest starter objects, but who has not completed a single quest in Great River. With him, I hope to be able to get a better idea of quest dependencies, as illustrated by some quest that I had to change from having no prereqisites to having unknown prerequisites.

RingTailCat (talk) 20:42, 7 April 2012 (EDT)

I support Elinnea, if we need an open discussion, let us do that, then at the Category:Quest Chains talk page. After some discussions originating from me clumsily changing things (for a reason not about quest-chains as such as about ugly looks ... which is still present) I summed all bits and pieces from many different places at the wiki and wrote the current "guideline" ... none has said nada about it since then. (And it is linked to from some places! :P ) Perhaps it is about time to read and/or talk now.

There are plenty of unnamed quest-chains, and as long as the info-box does not read a fake quest-chain name I think we are all fine with that. But, at least for me, the content of the info-box is holy, it should reflect what it reads in game. However, it is possible to abuse the questchain parameter by a chain-name that is identical with the quest-group-name. Then all quests end up there anyway and it could be transcluded from. It may confuse newbie-editors, but that is a weak reason not to do it.

However, I strongly object against being too creative and name something a quest-chain for quests that rather just follow a natural dotted line, but they indeed do not have any prerequisites. And "yes!" I have come across a few, not many, but some ... no editor names mentioned. --- Of course this is tricky, certainly for these "transition quests" which takes you to the next location; is it a prereq or not? Sometimes hard to tell, and then easy to get it wrong.

Personally I like usability a lot, and in this context that means that we should be helpful and show quest chains where they exist, but we should do it right. And right is to show the name of the chain if it exists, otherwise not. For the latter case it is just a matter of which technique we use, and I suggest transclusions just because I have come across so many quests and chains which are partly wrong or outdated, just because it is tedious to update more than two quest pages with boring details.

Anyway, it seems we are in agreement in the end, it seems more a matter of which technique to use. The only issue I see may be if transcluding a quest-chain from a category clashes with transcluding quests from the same category but for being displayed at a location page. The chains are number- and dot-indented at chain pages, but NPCs and locations are never indented but plain dots all the way (including instances). That could potentially be a reason to use special quest-chain pages, certainly so if it includes a quest that begins at another location. But this is things that we can resolve somehow.

From me it is good night and sweet dreams, read you soon :) -- Zimoon (talk) 21:37, 7 April 2012 (EDT)

Hmmm "Special Quest Chain pages? (and in response to EoD above) -- there is no in-game indication that any kind of "sequence" exists concerning the quests. The only "indicator" in the Quest log is that they are all in the same AREA, i.e. "Quest Group." All quests in The Great River are in one of the 7 "Quest Groups" (Areas), plus the Epic. However, there is an ABSOLUTE sequence which must be followed to get the particular quest in any given group (area) -- sometimes there are multiple entry points, sometimes not, but, except in a very few quests, there is a "top-level" quest or quests which must be accomplished before the additional quests are opened.

Should each individual quest contain a transclusion of the Area Quest group into a "Quest Chain Box," as Zimoon's "rules" imply?

Don't know -- see Limlight Gorge Quests I've written it up "completely" and the Gorge is somewhat, maybe completely, unique. Now I need to write up the rest of the quests from there. (At least I don't believe there are any others except INSIDE the Fangorn instance, which I have not done.

I don't know if the other Great River areas follow this pattern -- I haven't done them extensively yet.Wm Magill - Valamar - OTG/OTC (talk) 23:25, 7 April 2012 (EDT)

Although this discussion is getting a bit chaotic (in the terms of structure)

1. We had a long discussion about "where" to post questchains (named or unnamed) about a year ago and we came to a conclusion that we don't want to spam the wiki and therefore put the questchain itself on the category where the questchain's quest are collected and don't create single pages That's why I wrote the template in such a way, that it transcludes the category pages into the questchain box.
2. I think the structure (in the sense of dots and numbers) at Limlight Gorge Quests can be represented easier and it has a few minor mistakes. If you don't mind Magill/RTC, I will correct some mistakes on that page [according to our dot/number guidelines - the informative and non-beautiful guidelines :)].
3. Magill, I don't know about any quest which has an prerequisite of the form "Quest-A OR Quest-B". That would definitely break the picture of questchains I had in mind and this would require the points If the quest has a prerequisite, add a box for Quest Chain and spit it out Zimoon posted above.
4. RTC, about the Great River area. I was trying to do that with my first char and I'll try to confirm it with my 2nd asap. Offtopic: I'm already doubting about some prerequisites on Quest Talk:Guarding the Vale, would be great if you can have a special look at it with your 2nd char.

--EoD (talk) 04:06, 8 April 2012 (EDT)

I have added Liquid Threads to Category:Quest Chains' talk page. And I have rinsed and cleaned the long-winded text I write many many months ago.

Magill, you are correct that there is nothing in this game that reads neither prerequisites not dependencies. Except fot quests that directly say "help X, Y, and Z" and the help are sub-quests that must be done. Many quests reads along the lines "now it is time to meet K over at S", thus implying a chain, but neither the Quest Log nor the quest itself has some visible tag "previous quest" or "next quest". But we all know this, and we all know that we must hunt down these facts by paying close attention. That is why it sometimes gets wrong, but this is a wiki and we correct ourselves :)

Transcluding is the way to go, we avoid several errors when things update by doing that. It does not matter whether it is an official (named) nor an unnamed quest-chain, we either use the "questchain" parameter (for named quests only) or add a Quest Chain box and transclude from there, and then usually from pages since the quests are not added to a good category to transclude from. Fresh examples in Category:Evendim Quest Chains.

As I cleaned and clarified the tentative "rules" at the Quest Chains category I suggest we all walk over there and debate pros and cons with the rules. I see no point in discussing one particular area, but rather to find something that works "globally. The goal is to make them practical and generic enough to be useful wherever. See you over there, at the liquid-threaded-discussion.

-- Zimoon (talk) 12:22, 8 April 2012 (EDT)

I'm not sure that finding something that works globally is possible or desirable. The game itself is not consistent across all updates and releases. Turbine has not rewritten old parts of the game using their new technologies. It may not be necessary or desirable for us to rewrite old quest articles to meet the requirements needed to document new quests. I would say it is more important to adapt to the documentation requirement of new quests. RingTailCat (talk) 12:40, 8 April 2012 (EDT)