Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: California
Posts: 295
|
Quote:
|
|
#51 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Rochester, MN
Posts: 1,518
|
The user information is stored in the local realm database, so at present restoring a backup should replace the user info. Sadly I don't have two GM accounts to test with. ::shrug::
Last edited by Parody; January 15th, 2015 at 08:13 AM. |
#52 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 707
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Seriously, AEOIOU is quite right, it would require lots of good communication and forethought between each of "us" for this bizarre application. Although, in the future, this thread could be the spark to what could be a community type of "Realm" that a new user could start from. hummmmmm But would require the cross communication and idea development being kicked about here to all use "One Realm" .... If we build it they will come..... One realm to RULE THEM ALL.... Mawwaahahahahhh Quote:
Quote:
You are quite right, not suggesting that this should be done, just that it might maybe could be done. there is ALOT of risk for the impatient wanting "quick fixes" ... @ All, this of course, is a hypothetical solution without merit or testing. As others have mentioned (different thread I think) the more likely solution would be the ability to "share" a realm via an approval system, similar to a mass used *.doc file or DBS, With the "owner" approving and reconciling conflicts before syncing.... this of course is more programming (A lot) to appease what is probably a very small market of users. |
||||||
#53 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 222
|
Since everything is Snippet-based, one hack for conflict resolution would be to merge the Topics, with every unique Snippet being kept in the consolidated Topic. Some sort of highlighting would be helpful, identifying Snippets that were unique to each copy.
That would leave the work on us to figure out which Snippets are variants of another (and thus need to be reconciled), and which were new and can be left as-is. |
#54 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 707
|
Quote:
This could lead to a lot of "fun player assumptions" that the DM could approve into the realm and then flag as "Untrue" ie like rumors leaving the player to determine the truths from the fictions... Seems this was kicked around in another thread but not the mechanics of how... |
|
#55 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Denmark
Posts: 740
|
Quote:
It was the wording "everything in the cloud in the future" or something like that which worried me. Vargr Deputy Calendar Champion Legend has it, that the Tarrasque is a huge fighting beast, perpetually hungry. Sleet entered History when he managed to get on the back of a Tarrasque only to be ridden out of History shortly after. Using Realm Works, Worldographer (Hexographer 2), LibreOffice, Daz3D Studio, pen & paper for the realm World of Temeon and the system LEFD - both homebrewed. |
|
#56 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 303
|
I suspect that Rob and team would find something more elegant on multi-GM conflicts. I see something like present them in a dialog similar to the linking dialogs we get now. It'd show us the topic, the conflict in the topic including who made which entry and offer someone the ability to pick one, the other or perhaps even combine the two for resolution later.
|
#57 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 222
|
That would be the end-state. I think everything in my idea is a necessary intermediate step, except for the final "merge all into topic" - which they would want to keep anyhow, for those instances where you want to focus on something else (flash of inspiration, game-prep deadline, let the other person clean up their own mess, etc.).
For delayed cleanup there should also be an automatically selected Utility: Conflict tag to allow easy filtering so you know where to come back later. Last edited by pyremius; January 16th, 2015 at 04:27 AM. Reason: added a word for clarity. |
#58 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: California
Posts: 295
|
Wouldn't the "Feedback Notes" idea I proposed several months ago be a better way, at least initially to handle multiple contributors? Provided it isn't too hard or time consuming for LWD to implement that is.
Here is the link to the other thread if your interested. http://forums.wolflair.com/showthread.php?t=50414 |
#59 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 707
|
Ah quite right Viking... I remember your thread on that... and can see an applied use here...
|
#60 |
|
|