Talk:Toxic Damoss

Skills

These revisions don't make much sense to me.

1. What was the point of shuffling the terrestrial and aquatic skills around? That just makes the section look more jumbled up imo. The terrestrial and aquatic ability sections were made different for a reason. x.x
2. Why would you just completely remove the "See also" section...?
3. Why remove the mini-headers under the "Events" section? Some of the events only occur in a specific zone, and now it's just a wall of text. -Somohexual (talk) 20:54, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Terrestrial and aquatic skills were not shuffled. Vaught clearly explained that change: Some skills are both land and sea. Rakuin (talk) 21:10, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

In regards to my changes in these questions:

1. Only the skills (and possibly the stolen skills) are separate by land and aquatic, there was no need to divide the Abilities section since that's unchanging. And as Vaught later edited, even some of the skills are both land and aquatic. I also removed the headers and turned it to simple bolding per the formatting guidelines and standardization.
2. Because it only listed different rankings and the standard variants, which is both unnecessary (easily obtained via Toxic Alliance and Krait) and inconsistent with previous articles. I really don't see a purpose of listing utterly unrelated ("Veteran Krait Damoss" for example) NPCs on the article, all it does is add to scrolling.
3. Because if people want to find out which zones they're in then they can go to the event pages. I also did so because it is per the formatting guidelines and standardization. And it isn't really that much of a "wall of text." Konig 01:15, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

1. Look again, I created different lists of abilities for land and water. Toxic Damoss PASSIVELY and immediately gain 5 stacks of might, fury, and quickness upon reaching 75% health, 50% health, and 25% health; this is an ability. However, it's only present on land, Toxic Damoss do not possess this ability while underwater. As far as the skills go, they at least look better now than they did when I started this discussion. NOTE: Serpent Strike behaves differently on land and under water...
2. How are NPCs that share nearly identical models, similar spawning locations, names, loot, behaviors, and similar skills "utterly unrelated"? There's too much information about creatures to just bundle Normal + Veteran + Elite + Champion + Legendary + Epic versions/relatives all on one page, but at the same time they're still completely relevant to one another. You say it adds to scrolling, but your solution just makes people have to click through multiple pages to find things.
3. Again, this just makes people click through more pages than they should have to. Headers also help to break up and organize the events section so that it's more readable. -Somohexual (talk) 14:16, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

1. That's skills (most likely passive skills), not abilities. Abilities is the words underneath the health bar. And that doesn't change. At the time I was just formatting, not making fixes throughout.
2. The unrelated ones I was talking about was, for example, linking Champion Krait Hypnoss on Veteran Toxic Hypnoss. There's no need to be listing the alternative variants of an NPC in the see also section. The see also section is usually if not always (other than the additions of them to the Toxic Alliance krait articles) used for articles which are directly related to the topic of the article but are not linked above. And by "directly related" I mean "should be linked above somewhere but isn't because it doesn't fit without being hard to look at." Things like alternative rankings or alternate naming of NPCs should go on disambiguation articles when they can be confused (which is how the Eye of Zhaitan articles should be IMHO), or just not needed to be linked. If someone is looking for information on a Champion Krait Hypnoss, then why would they be searching "Toxic Hypnoss"? Hmm? My solution doesn't make people have to click through more articles than if they were to go from Toxic Hypnoss to Toxic Damoss - or do you intend to list all Toxic Alliance krait on each of their articles?
3. No, not really. The headers can be viewed as helpful by some, but unneeded by many others. This is really a thematic choice that has no true right or wrong way, but there's no real need to separate them. Though I suppose they aren't entirely really needed because, hey, we don't go adding the events Risen Thralls are in (that would be monstrous and no headers can save that). It's usually only unique NPCs we list the events for - and except Champion Toxic Hypnoss (event boss), I'd say none are unique since champs and non-krait Elite/Vets are seen only because of scaling up. Konig 23:51, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

1. No. That effect, Unshakable, Defiant, and Berserk are not skills; they're abilities. By your logic Fluid Strikes and other passive effects would be skills. "Abilities" shouldn't be the "in-game description" because that is almost always incomplete or just entirely inaccurate and cramming these abilities into the "Skills" section just makes it look like a mess (Ex: Champion Toxic Damoss). I put listed abilities and non-listed ones in their own separate groups under the Abilities section to show that they're different, although splitting them into two separate sections would be unnecessary imo.
2. Disambiguation articles for every NPC that has alternative rank versions would be extremely unnecessary. Why go through the trouble of making [[NPC Name]] (the disambig page) and [[NPC Name (normal)]] for a majority of NPCs in the game when you can just make a short list at the bottom of an article? If you thought only the Krait Damoss links in "See also" were excessive then why remove the Veteran, Elite, and Champion Toxic Damoss links as well? I can agree that linking Normal + Veteran + Elite + Champion Krait Damoss would be a bit too much on this page, but at least the variant of the same rank should be listed (Ex: Veteran Toxic Damoss would have Veteran Krait Damoss listed). Toxic Damoss were based on Krait Damoss, as were their respective rank variants, so they have blatantly similar abilities, skills, models, weapon types, etc. Having these links lets people EASILY find related or similar pages, which can show them pages they might have never stumbled upon otherwise. The links also make the Wiki more cohesive because you can go from one article, to another related article, to another, and etc. Also, I'd have to disagree with your interpretation of the "See also" section. See also = Similar/Relevant/Related. Ex: wikipedia:Britney Spears#See also
3. If the headers help for some people without being obnoxious/cumbersome for others then there's no reason to not include them. Also, why wouldn't you list events for non-unique event NPCs? That's important information, you can't just omit it. Headers make large Event sections easily readable. Ex: Flame Legion Stalker#Objectives. -Somohexual (talk) 15:06, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

1. Unless something changed recently, "Abilities" by this wiki's terminology is indeed the description underneath the health bar when selecting an NPC - see Gaheron Baelfire for example. Originally we were listing them with ==Abilities== but when we started getting situations like Gaheron, we switched to ==Combat abilities==<br>;Abilities and added in a section for skills because, as you said, the descriptions are incomplete at best and not about their combat mechanics at worst. And you're wrong about Unshakable etc. Those *are* passive skills - no different than the passive effects of signet skills. Fluid Strikes is a trait and is different. As far as we know, NPCs don't have traits - though in a way, traits act no different than passive skills.
2. I never said there should be disambiguation articles for every NPC that has alternative rank versions - we'd be making a disambiguation for just about every generic mob if we did that. I only meant that for the Eye of Zhaitan because we have a champion, elite (at least prior to this update), and legendary rank which is called "Eye of Zhaitan." As for the see also bit - this falls under semantics and preference as I said before. You say it's worthwhile, I say it isn't. Such a thing won't be solved between the two of us so if you insist on continuing that discussion it'd be best to place it here. Also, wikipedia's usage of the see also section holds no standing on this wiki. This is Guild Wars 2 Wiki, not Wikipedia.
3. Again, this is something I disagree with and I would say that the Flame Legion Stalker article is a very poor example because it mixes in hearts with events and let's be honest - anything that's hostile and in the area of the heart contributes to said heart. No point in listing them. As for listing events on wide-spread generic NPCs - reason is simply because there are some, like Risen Thrall and Risen Brute, in which that list as well as the personal story involvement list would be insanely huge - even with headers - and will be the vast majority of the article when... does it really matter which events the Risen Thralls are mooks in? Konig 01:29, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

1. The ==Combat abilities== "template" needs to be revised/updated, in my opinion.
2. If something is helpful/informative for some people and unnecessary for others, without it being obnoxious/harmful/etc to those that find it unnecessary, then what's the problem? If there's no harm in adding the information, why not do it? The wiki is all about compiling detailed information.
3. See above. -Somohexual (talk) 18:05, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

"anything that's hostile and in the area of the heart contributes to said heart" That's an inaccurate generalization. I know specifically that for Aethervolt researchers require temporary assistants, killing the hylek only counts if you use the pigment change device on them first; killing the oozes on the north side of the pond counts with no special conditions. I'm pretty sure there are other hearts that simply can't be progressed at all by killing anything (Join the Ash Legion of Tawny Ridge in stealth operations is probably the one I'm thinking of, there are devourers just west of the NPC that you could test on). —Dr Ishmael 18:22, 11 November 2013 (UTC)