Talk:5e Epic Boons

I'm thinking of completely removing the "prerequisites" field from the boon template. That people are putting things like "Strength 15" as a prerequisite tells me they think boons are like feats chosen by the player. As I wrote at 5e Epic Boon Design Guide - "Since a DM chooses a boon, it is their responsibility to offer one that is appropriate".

There are some rare good prerequisites, such as the story driven like with Boon of Abyss Mastery (5e Epic Boon), but again boons are decided on by the DM and these are more like suggestions - these are so rare that they should be written into the body of text as a suggestion. Marasmusine (talk) 10:54, 15 April 2018 (MDT)

Makes sense. --Green Dragon (talk) 13:13, 15 April 2018 (MDT)

Okay, I'll start going through them. Marasmusine (talk) 15:42, 15 April 2018 (MDT)

Naming Scheme

Just wanna put it out that the naming scheme wasn't incorrect. It matched the 1st party design. Recent edits are purely preference (again). Red Leg Leo (talk) 08:02, 21 February 2020 (MST)

I agree. I don't mind the change, but calling the naming scheme "incorrect" is incorrect. - Guy 11:01, 21 February 2020 (MST)

Boons in the DMG use the "Boon of X" or "Boon of The X" naming scheme, so I am confused as to why the boons on the wiki were renamed to not contain that part and why they needed to be changed in the 1st place. When referring to a Boon, the DMG also states the name of the Boon as "Boon of X", like how the Boon of Truesight and Boon of High Magic are addressed on p 231 of the DMG.--Blobby383b (talk) 14:18, 21 February 2020 (MST)

Since there was no discussion here about renaming the boons, I will be moving them back. It looks strange having an article called "The Barbarian" when the name of the thing is "Boon of the Barbarian". Furthermore, it's not a rule that the names of boons have to begin "Boon of..." Any help with moving the pages back would be appreciated, I don't have much time these days. Marasmusine (talk) 11:32, 1 March 2020 (MST)

Sorry if I complicated things here. I made the moves based on the 5e To-Do List saying that boons shouldn't always have "Boon of" in the title since it's in the page id, and decided to knock it out in a night. If all the titles need to be put back, I could probably finish it later tonight. Coaldstone (talk) 14:00, 1 March 2020 (MST)

Thanks for the info, I understand now why you made the changes. So it seems this was Green Dragon's idea... I still dispute it for the reasons above!

If you could change them back that would be wonderful, if it's not too much trouble. Marasmusine (talk) 14:41, 1 March 2020 (MST)

Knocking something off on the do due list is fair, it just seems that the issue was that there was not a conversation held on why/whether this change needed to be made. Besides that though, I don't believe we have to enforce that boons contain the "Boon of" in title if it doesn't make sense or if there are other reasons but we should generally try to keep to how WotC names things.--Blobby383b (talk) 20:33, 1 March 2020 (MST)

gollark: The old bot source is up. Someone could run a new subreddit with the old bot or something.

gollark: It seems a very weird system.

gollark: And generally for you to profit someone has to lose. Which is not quite the case in reality - stocks pay dividends.

gollark: Also, I would hope the "ways to deal with alts/bots" involve actually making the system work and not arbitrarily limiting those somehow.

gollark: <@558846968999313418> It's not like the real world stock market. It's like they thought "this stock market thing is cool, let's do this" and copied some of the features without understanding the core idea.

This article is issued from Dandwiki. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.