-
Please note: In an effort to ensure that all of our users feel welcome on our forums, we’ve updated our forum rules. You can review the updated rules here: http://forums.wolflair.com/showthread.php?t=5528.
If a fellow Community member is not following the forum rules, please report the post by clicking the Report button (the red yield sign on the left) located on every post. This will notify the moderators directly. If you have any questions about these new rules, please contact support@wolflair.com.
- The Lone Wolf Development Team
"snippets" or prose
- Thread starter Agyess
- Start date
Depends on what it is. In the Mechanics section I have a lot more not just paragraphs but even whole sections all together in one snipped. In the Story section I may have a few things of maybe setting text, explanatory text or just summary/synopsis/overview text that may well be a full on paragraph or two. For anything that might get revealed to the players, however, it depends on if they would find all the information that might be in a given paragraph or sentence at a time or not. If not then snippets will be much, much smaller chunks.
So for me it's all very situational as to what I use.
So for me it's all very situational as to what I use.
For the most part, I've been using full sentences/paragraphs and haven't been worrying about what I might want to reveal to the PCs. I figure if I had to reveal something in the middle of a paragraph, I can easily just use Ctrl+Enter before and after the part I want to reveal. Then I will have a separate snippet that I can reveal at that time. The only issue would be if I couldn't find the detail I wanted to reveal in the middle of the paragraph.
I've been thinking that too big snippets may effect indexing - as I'm unsure how the Realm Works database is structured (it being a non-standard version)
The various cleanup buttons for re-indexing make me think their choice of not going with standards for large databases will mean RW will keep a legacy of dodgy structure and maintenance well into the future. So in that regard, I'm loathe to enter large amounts of content as it will likely need to be restructured on release.
The various cleanup buttons for re-indexing make me think their choice of not going with standards for large databases will mean RW will keep a legacy of dodgy structure and maintenance well into the future. So in that regard, I'm loathe to enter large amounts of content as it will likely need to be restructured on release.
For players, I've been breaking it down into short snippets if the material could be learned at different times or by different characters. Most things are 1-3 sentences. Things like a description of a building or area may be longer depending on how much flavor I want to include.
For quests/encounters/GM-only-info, I have been creating paragraphs in a single snippet. And anything I want to call attention to I either create as a separate snippet or I use text formatting. This info is for my use and won't usually be revealed to players. If they need info, it'll be a summary after-the-fact.
For quests/encounters/GM-only-info, I have been creating paragraphs in a single snippet. And anything I want to call attention to I either create as a separate snippet or I use text formatting. This info is for my use and won't usually be revealed to players. If they need info, it'll be a summary after-the-fact.
@curufea: Underneath the covers, Realm Works uses Firebird on the client as the database engine. That's a high-horsepower, very traditional database engine. So I'm not sure what you're basing the "non-standard version" reference upon.
When you assert that we're "not going with standards for large databases", I again don't understand the basis for the assertion. We're using a powerful, traditional, relational database. And we're using a widely adopted full-text search engine (Lucene).
The cleanup button for re-indexing are there in case a crash occurs that can potentially render the full-text search index inconsistent with the database. If that happens, users can trigger a full rebuild easily. So it's a safety net for users, especially during the Beta testing phase when crashes are still happening.
All database operations are fully transactional and all data is 100% ensured to maintain its integrity. We've had logic errors with how we've done things throughout the Beta period (the past 16 months), but I don't believe we've ever lost a shred of actual data for anyone in the Beta team throughout that entire span of time.
When you assert that we're "not going with standards for large databases", I again don't understand the basis for the assertion. We're using a powerful, traditional, relational database. And we're using a widely adopted full-text search engine (Lucene).
The cleanup button for re-indexing are there in case a crash occurs that can potentially render the full-text search index inconsistent with the database. If that happens, users can trigger a full rebuild easily. So it's a safety net for users, especially during the Beta testing phase when crashes are still happening.
All database operations are fully transactional and all data is 100% ensured to maintain its integrity. We've had logic errors with how we've done things throughout the Beta period (the past 16 months), but I don't believe we've ever lost a shred of actual data for anyone in the Beta team throughout that entire span of time.
Please don't hesitate to ask to clarifications on things like this. It's vastly better than assuming the worst and potentially giving other users pause for no good reason. Thanks!
