Multiverse Feedback: Recent Activity
| Multiverse Feedback: Cardlist | Visual spoiler | Export | Booster | Comments | Search | Recent activity |
| Mechanics | Upcoming releases | Skeleton |
Recent updates to Multiverse Feedback: (Generated at 2025-05-13 21:28:42)
put this in a couple of weeks ago
I think this is pretty much covered by the recent search enhancements, particular card search "Restrict by user", as I described on Order by submitter.
What? Yes it is! Just use the Search page's "Restrict by user" and "Restrict by cardset" features that I rolled out two weeks ago.
Still not a thing :(
Still not a thing :(
Still not a thing :(
It works... except except or the lack of header and footer. I think it should be made much more explicit that skeleton generation does not "paste over" the older one (unlike editing the other pages or cards).
Speaking of which, I've noticed that "custom" card codes will cause the skeleton page to fail. It looks as if codes with a second letter not associated with a color will cause the entire skeleton table line to fail to render and no link will be created (in my case, I wanted MN to indicate undecided between colored and colorless). This would certainly pop up for anyone trying to introduce a new color. Couldn't those default to a transparent background?
I always intended for skeleton generation to be able to be an incremental thing. (That's why the line in the history says "generated part of a skeleton".) I'd have thought that by deleting the whole details page you ought to be able to create a new one from scratch; does that not work? (Or equivalently changing its title to something other than the magic name "Skeleton".)
But you're right, I should make it that if the existing page doesn't have a header or footer, it'll regenerate those for you.
Mmm, true. I always intended that people would just edit the skeleton after using the Generate page to create a template to start with, but yeah, that'd make some sense. You would have to specify what single letter you want to appear in the code for such cards, though.
A custom-line option that can be used for stuff that falls outside the normal realm (e.g. colorless nonartifcats, DFCs, split cards...) would be useful in general.
The most resilient I can see is:
When type becomes planeswalker:
If you're not willing to add a third field; then blanking the one you didn't pick is the second best option, I think.
Another equally less-good option would be to present a thid box for loyalty; label it as such, and flip to the planeswalker frame if the use puts something there.
Type is usually the last field I fill out. I'm not making a planes-walker; I'm making a card. Sometimes it turns out to be a planes-walker.
...Oh. Okay, I guess I hadn't considered someone designing a planeswalker typing a detail like initial loyalty before setting the big-picture things like type="Planeswalker". I would have thought the way it looks like a P/T box rather than a loyalty shield would dissuade you from doing that. But yes, what you propose is a plausible means for occasional users to submit planeswalker cards with nonblank power.
If someone submits a planeswalker with power as well as toughness (that isn't Jeska, Mending Medium), do you think I should actually ignore and blank the power, since I have no way to display it anyway?
it's exactly as Vitenka stated. it's easily replicated. make a new card, type in a value for power, then type in Planeswalker, then preview. you can see power value, no slash or toughness. at this point, the edit frame only shows one box for loyalty. so type in a value, then preview. now you see P/T. now delete the loyalty, then preview. you see just power value. so by this point, the user is confused since he doesn't know what happens behind the scenes nor what to do to get the loyalty to show up correctly.
I think the point is that a "new card" form comes up with two blank boxes, down in the bottom right.
It's not at all obvious which one you should fill in, if you want to make a planeswalker. Nor is there any prompting that you should fill out the type first, to make the frame change.
So people are as likely to pick one as the other. (Obviously, if someone is actually making a creature, having two is right and it's obvious what they're for)
Do I gather from the tone of your comment that you think you do understand why the bug appears? Could you have a go at explaining precisely under what circumstances a planeswalker can acquire a nonblank power?
i think you still don't completely understand why the bug appears, how the user interacts with the unintuitive interface, and why sharing fields in a database is a bad idea. as vitenka brought up, now you have to remember these exceptions for every type of output that could ge generated.
I've been bearing Jeska, Mending Medium in mind throughout this discussion, but, well, there's a reason SadisticMystic commented on her "A lot of players would have problems handling innate creature planeswalkers no matter how you phrase them, so I wouldn't worry about seeing a card like this pop up in a booster pack near you". And SM is both the card's creator and the person who knows the rules best out of anyone I've interacted with.
Gideon Jura-style planeswalkers are fairly frequent, but inherently creature-plus-planeswalker cards? Ideally they'd want a custom frame to show both the P/T box and the loyalty, but, well, let's say writing a custom frame for a niche case like that isn't my highest priority. I'm fairly sure the toughness box does accept "/" (and I think even " ", space) so she'd be able to work as well as she currently does even under this new proposal.
(amuseum's comments continue to puzzle me. Are you saying you think that of the two creature stats, power is more like loyalty than toughness is?)
Seems a good compromise to me. Toughness/Loyalty accepts things like 'X' and '*', so presumably the solution for Jeska would be to also permit '/'.
Note: Also important to be consistent in handling this field in other forms of output - card export, plain view etc.
Jeska, Mending Medium is a thing.
well, if a user would type in a number before changing frames, they would usually first type it in the power box, not the toughness. so the whole situation is unintuitive. 1) sharing loyalty box with toughness or power. 2) worse, choosing toughness over power to be shared.
In general users don't start with creatures and turn them into planeswalkers, certainly. But in general planeswalkers created on here come out with just one figure in the loyalty box. The bug you and wlframe experience seems to be pretty unusual.
But yes, the user can't fix it while staying in the planeswalker frame, which is why I created this discussion topic for the proposed enhancement to hide power on planeswalkers. I'm planning to make this fix unless anyone can suggest reasons why it's a bad idea.
it's not user error. if a user is making a pw, theres no reason to assume he started with a creature. even so, after it becomes a pw, the user cannot fix it by staying in the pw frame and has no idea why it still shows p/t.
As Jack said, it's Chrome on Android. I would clear my cache but I don't know how. :-(
I'll Google it.
FWIW, I definitely had the same problem for a while (Chrome on Android), but recently it's seemed OK.