Crafting Ideas

Iosyne · January 2013

Definitely one of the reasons we made this change, Sarita. All pertinent information for guidelines is now accessible to the public, by reading HELP DESIGN GUIDELINES and HELP DESIGN APPROVAL.

Having, or not having, access to the Crafts board should not preclude you from understanding the system.

Raeche · January 2013

On that note, why not make Crafts an organisation of its own, with a channel so that information can be easily disseminated.

That way, players won't need the additional clan for it that might or might not have all crafters in it.

Sarita · January 2013

Iosyne said:

Definitely one of the reasons we made this change, Sarita. All pertinent information for guidelines is now accessible to the public, by reading HELP DESIGN GUIDELINES and HELP DESIGN APPROVAL.

Having, or not having, access to the Crafts board should not preclude you from understanding the system.

I just realized my post got ninja'd with the copy of the one on the board. Sorry, I hadn't seen it yet while I was writing that.

Raeche · January 2013

Could we have design rejections require 3 votes, just as it is for approval?

It is an unpleasant experience to have a design rejected over a contentious (at least only in the opinion of the rejector) interpretation of a design guideline, and be forced to pass the matter on to Becue because that's the only next step. On a long enough timeline, this also adds to Becue's workload, and will require her to sort through more designs than otherwise.

Right now, there's a bias towards rejection (it takes only 1 rejection, in contrast to 3 approvals), which in my opinion, shouldn't be. It should be balanced.

By allowing 3 votes, it allows other crafters the chance to give their second (and third) opinions to whether the design actually does pass muster. If it turns out that it is only that one officious rejector, then there's no reason Becue should be troubled, or a design delayed by being taken off queue. If enough crafters agree that the contention is nonsensical, the design should be allowed the chance for approval.

On the other hand, if there is a valid reason for rejection, other crafters who look through it can vote to reject the design as well. The designer has the chance to make the amendments while leaving it in queue, or could, if he/she feels his/her design is justified, wait till three people agree that his/her design should not pass before take it up with Becue, or give in and make the correction.

Doing this would take power away from one person, and place it in the hands of the many, and overall make the process a more transparent and balanced one.

Alexina · January 2013

Needing three rejections just seems excessive in most cases. Actually, I am assuming you want this because of situations that're a bit more ambiguous. In the case of spelling, grammar, or punctuation error, the design do not require more than one rejection. On the contrary, if a design is skirting design guidelines or commodity rules, items that were not supposed to slip through might actually do just that if there is not enough people around that're confident enough with the crafting system to reject.

If the goal is to maintain a system that has a minimum standard while delegating the approval/rejection workload to the playerbase, it just seems like a good idea to need more than one vote for approvals and just one for rejections. Blatant abuse of rejections will lead to privileges being revoked anyway.

On a related note, it'd be interesting to know what the ratio of Becue's workload consists of in terms of improper designs being pushed through the queue vs erroneous rejections preventing an item to get through the queue. I'm guessing the former is as big of an issue - if not bigger - than the latter.

Raeche · January 2013

Alexina said:

Needing three rejections just seems excessive in most cases. Actually, I am assuming you want this because of situations that're a bit more ambiguous. In the case of spelling, grammar, or punctuation error, the design do not require more than one rejection. On the contrary, if a design is skirting design guidelines or commodity rules, items that were not supposed to slip through might actually do just that if there is not enough people around that're confident enough with the crafting system to reject.

If the goal is to maintain a system that has a minimum standard while delegating the approval/rejection workload to the playerbase, it just seems like a good idea to need more than one vote for approvals and just one for rejections. Blatant abuse of rejections will lead to privileges being revoked anyway.

On a related note, it'd be interesting to know what the ratio of Becue's workload consists of in terms of improper designs being pushed through the queue vs erroneous rejections preventing an item to get through the queue. I'm guessing the former is as big of an issue - if not bigger - than the latter.

Where one stands on this matter really depends on whether you've observed more wrongful approvals, or been the victim of mean-spirited rejections. Personally, I've encountered more of the latter. My experience thus far has been that the guidelines, though not ordinarily vague, has had interpretations forced down in order to 'justify' a rejection. At best, it followed the word of the ruling rather than the spirit of it; at worst, it was a deliberate interpretation of it in a manner unfavourable to me.

Regardless of where you set the threshold (1 or 3 votes), it will always be possible to have wrongful rejections or approval. If nothing further is done, it just becomes a game of 'who has more friends?' Tweaking the number of votes only helps to alleviate the symptoms, but not treat the underlying problem. The panacea, instead, would be to have wrongful approvers/rejectors seriously clamped down on. BOTH types of trouble-makers need to be taken out of the approval process. This, ultimately, needs to be the solution.

That being said, I suggested an equal 3-3 votes for approval and rejection because while it will not cure the problem of sneak-approvals, it at least helps alleviate the problem of one officious rejector holding a design hostage. It balances things up to at least make it as hard for wrongful rejections as it does for wrongful approvals. It increases the chance of involving more people in the decision-making process. That should make the problem less severe while buying time for Becue to investigate and clamp down on wrongful approvals/rejections.

Also, I highly doubt that there are a lack of people in the crafter's guild with the confidence to reject designs >.> I actually get the vibe of enthusiasm, more than anything else.

Alexina · January 2013

Perhaps this is where we disagree; I always assumed the wording of the guidelines was the spirit of it. People have skirted the crafting rules for so, so long, getting away with doing things that was against the spirit and letter of the rules because they were unclear. There really is not much that is unclear about these new rules, so there should be a lot less malicious interpretations of them now than there used to be.

Personally, my experience has been that most designs go through without any hiccups. Only a small percentage of my designs actually sparked some sort of debate about rulings, and in those cases Becue would have a look at the item and either tell me it was fine as it was, or that I needed to change it.

I really love the new helpfiles. Really, really much. I figured they were all worded in a way to avoid excessive rejections.

Phoenecia · January 2013

I disagree with needing three rejections because requiring only one makes it much faster for the designer to know they've made a mistake, so they can correct it. Requiring three rejections in order for a design to be rejected is, as Alexina suggested, excessive. With most experienced designers, it usually takes only one rejection to catch most, if not all, mistakes. Requiring more than one rejection wouldn't be very productive; if the first rejector catches most of the mistakes, what's the point in needing two more? At least with requiring three approvals, it's more of a 'this design looks correct, and it's good to go' sort of thing, and serves as a means of double-checking.

As far as designs being 'held hostage' goes, if a design is being contested, there's usually a reason for it regardless of whether you think that reason is stupid or pedantic. If it's getting rejected over and over, you ask for the final say from Becue and you wait for the ruling instead of just sticking it back in the queue where it can be ninja-approved before any decision can be made (hello, Syndicate flags, I'm lookin' at you).

I've been a crafter for a while, and I've seen a lot of wrongdoing and have experienced a fair bit of it myself. The system isn't perfect, but at the very least, it's getting better than it used to be. The one thing I will agree with, however, is punishing crafters that repeatedly break the rules or are habitually overly nitpicky.

Amara · January 2013

Raeche said:
Also, I highly doubt that there are a lack of people in the crafter's guild with the confidence to reject designs >.> I actually get the vibe of enthusiasm, more than anything else.

I won't lie. After being in the crafting clan for a -very- short period of time when purchasing my woodcraft license way back when I first came to Aetolia, I quit the clan and have kind of a 'controversy' gauge in my head that leads me to sometimes not approve or reject designs because I just don't want to see it come back at me over and over again, when I know it doesn't 'offend' my own approval rubric, but will for others.

I craft less than probably anybody with skills because it's just not enjoyable to me to have something rejected for having a component added, then rejected for not having it after I remove it (this really has happened to me, it's not a theoretical) or other things that just make me grind my teeth and remove the fun and creativity of the whole exercise. I also think that with so many folks playing from so many different places and cultures, and having English being taught in different flavors to people who learn it as a secondary language, there's just -no- way to completely alleviate this whole dynamic from the process.

Mitigation is possible, sure, and I have to give credit to the players and admin who are trying so hard to smooth it over. Frankly, unless you're talking about someone trying to use plastic as a material, having spelling errors that aren't in the vein of 'colour' vs 'color' or really cringe inducing grammatical cock-ups, I don't even like to deal with rejecting because of my worries that I'm judging their style versus the proper, accurate expression and wording of their created content.

Raeche · January 2013

Phoenecia said:

I disagree with needing three rejections because requiring only one makes it much faster for the designer to know they've made a mistake, so they can correct it. Requiring three rejections in order for a design to be rejected is, as Alexina suggested, excessive. With most experienced designers, it usually takes only one rejection to catch most, if not all, mistakes. Requiring more than one rejection wouldn't be very productive; if the first rejector catches most of the mistakes, what's the point in needing two more? At least with requiring three approvals, it's more of a 'this design looks correct, and it's good to go' sort of thing, and serves as a means of double-checking.

As far as designs being 'held hostage' goes, if a design is being contested, there's usually a reason for it regardless of whether you think that reason is stupid or pedantic. If it's getting rejected over and over, you ask for the final say from Becue and you wait for the ruling instead of just sticking it back in the queue where it can be ninja-approved before any decision can be made (hello, Syndicate flags, I'm lookin' at you).

I've been a crafter for a while, and I've seen a lot of wrongdoing and have experienced a fair bit of it myself. The system isn't perfect, but at the very least, it's getting better than it used to be. The one thing I will agree with, however, is punishing crafters that repeatedly break the rules or are habitually overly nitpicky.

You make it sound like you need the design knocked off the queue before you can make amendments to the design. On the first rejection, the designer can always correct the design. Especially if the correction is merely cosmetic, the designer is likely to make the change then. There's no issue of it being excessive or unproductive. All it does it slow down the possibility of it being knocked off the queue, give them a chance to make corrections if they accede, and if not, open up the avenue for second opinions from other crafters.

About the Syndicate flags - the thing I will say about it is that I designed the flags. And despite what some may think, I never asked anyone to help me approve them. I actually felt so warm and fuzzy that day because it was a bunch of people, seeing what it was going through, deciding to band together and approve it - because they all thought the rejections were nonsense. Random crafters here and there sending me messages saying 'what the hell is this', and deciding to do something about it. I hadn't been the first to complain.

There should have been no issue with the flag. The rules were clear that flags were meant to be embroidered. Because it hadn't been coded in yet, the requirement for a needle had been waived. It was as simple as that. There was -nothing- to suggest it should then be treated as a woodcraft and have a 3-4 word limit. That was, in my opinion, a malicious reading of the rule on the part of the rejector.

So, you can see how this bad experience forms the backdrop to me wanting a balanced vote. Perhaps some of you were on the other side of the issue, and thus cannot see things through my eyes. But what I'm attempting to do is seeing things through both your eyes and mine - or a future designer in the same unsavoury position - to have a system that mitigates the problem, both ways.

Phoenecia · January 2013

I know corrections can be made while designs are in the queue, but honestly, what's the point in having three rejections? If a design gets rejected for errors, it's not that big a deal; you just correct it and resubmit, and move on. Once it's corrected, it'll get pushed through. If it gets knocked out of the queue because of a rejection, it's a minor inconvenience at best. It's not like it's that long of a walk to a crafting office, and if you have the crafting gnome, you don't even need to move.

It's fine to get upset at the rejections themselves. Everyone does. But if they're stupid/minor, you fix it or alter it to the point where they're not a problem anymore unless you're absolutely adamant that your design has to be a certain way, at which point Becue can be called in to give the final say on it. Most rejections are an inconvenience, not some big travesty.

In regards to the flags, my issue with the whole thing was that you didn't bother waiting for Becue's ruling. I've had designs contested for various reasons, and in those cases I've asked for the final say from Becue. If I'm given the OK, I stick the design back in with a comment saying it was OK'ed. If I'm told the design isn't okay, I either change it, delete it, or whatever and move on.

Sticking something back in the queue after the final word from Becue has been requested kind of undermines the point of asking in the first place, and seems like a huge middle-finger to everyone else if the design gets approved since Becue and the other admins can't/won't really touch designs after they've been approved.

Raeche · January 2013

Phoenecia said:

I know corrections can be made while designs are in the queue, but honestly, what's the point in having three rejections? If a design gets rejected for errors, it's not that big a deal; you just correct it and resubmit, and move on. Once it's corrected, it'll get pushed through. If it gets knocked out of the queue because of a rejection, it's a minor inconvenience at best. It's not like it's that long of a walk to a crafting office, and if you have the crafting gnome, you don't even need to move.

It's fine to get upset at the rejections themselves. Everyone does. But if they're stupid/minor, you fix it or alter it to the point where they're not a problem anymore unless you're absolutely adamant that your design has to be a certain way, at which point Becue can be called in to give the final say on it. Most rejections are an inconvenience, not some big travesty.

In regards to the flags, my issue with the whole thing was that you didn't bother waiting for Becue's ruling. I've had designs contested for various reasons, and in those cases I've asked for the final say from Becue. If I'm given the OK, I stick the design back in with a comment saying it was OK'ed. If I'm told the design isn't okay, I either change it, delete it, or whatever and move on.

Sticking something back in the queue after the final word from Becue has been requested kind of undermines the point of asking in the first place, and seems like a huge middle-finger to everyone else if the design gets approved since Becue and the other admins can't/won't really touch designs after they've been approved.

Well, reason why that was done was because of post #692, which stated abundantly clearly that the design was to be resubmitted. To me, thus, people who were taking it out the queue were going against an explicit instruction.

That said, the rule has changed now to wait for Becue. So hey.

I respect that some of you don't agree with my idea, but this is me putting the suggestion out there, at least. I hope that whoever is reading will see the arguments for and against, and come up with an opinion themselves on what they think would be better for the crafting community going ahead.

Peace! ,\/

Areka · January 2013

Alright, lengthy, so spoilering.

You can try to push for system adjustments, but the root issue is the community/people.

The Three Sides of the Problem/Dynamic
[spoiler]SIDE A: The Crafter
Invested in their trade and their writing. Rejections are either:
1. Self-created issues
- that require minor adjustments, such as punctuation missing or too frequent
- writing that you may think is clear but others might not, and so there are misunderstandings
- ignorance of crafting policy and rules, such as needing to include additional commodities
- simply trying to do what you want regardless of the system in place
- trying to make something do what the materials simply don't do (like the obsidian rapier)

2. System issues
- Unclear or vague rules that can go in several directions (when do you need an additional ingredient, just HOW many words, though this is now clarified)
- Conflicting feedback
- some things due to interpretation, especially with English being a primary, secondary, or tertiary language and so in different stages of understanding, use, colloquialism, or grasp of rules (even primary speakers have different understandings of grammar).
- What is appropriate for Aetolia: Material, term, name, etc.

3. Rejector issues
- Misunderstanding
- Disagreement over interpretation of rules
- Simply don't like it

SIDE B: The Approver/Rejector
Spending their time trying to both have others have their fun items, as well as keeping within the constraints of the system.
- There are grammar and spelling rejections, which can either be warranted or not, depending upon the situation and grasp of the language (and all of those sneaky 'not in the oxfordian-pythagorean clause' things).
- There are rejections for material, be it in too many, not enough, and so on.
- There are rejections when things simply don't seem -right-, and need Becue's hand (the sherwani terms, whether or not 'denim' is appropriate, even though we can *technically* make it, cashmere, and so on).
- Pushing personal interpretations of rules for the betterment of crafting, even when these interpretations are not the same with everyone (and thus it is the *rules* that need clarifying.
- Not wanting to touch questionable designs
- Not wanting to touch X's designs for N reason
- Prioritizing friends' work first
- Not wanting to touch Q types of design (all of that lingerie man).
--It goes on.

SIDE C: The System/Becue
- Trying to keep a cohesive and coherent atmosphere and world in Aetolia.
- Trying to keep things reasonable and understandable.
- Trying to please as many people as possible and allow for creation, creativity, and personalizing of the world.
-- This requires both open-endedness and constraints, both of which cause issues and have people complaining. Can't please everyone.
- Has to deal with extremely demanding people. [/spoiler]

Thoughts/Observations/Things
[spoiler]This comes with headbutting over who is right and who is wrong when BOTH have an investment: The designer and their entitlement with product, and the rejector, with either vague rules, clear rules, interpretation, or personal bias, and each having a stake in the overarching health of the crafting system.

There are problem children on BOTH sides - crafters who feel personally attacked with rejections, demand and sneak and try to get their versions through while skirting the system, not waiting for Becue, and so on (which there have been many blow-outs over, privs taken away, and it has left a really, really bitter taste in many mouths)...and there are rejectors who will not negotiate, discuss, or accept or acknowledge their own misjudgement or oopses, and so push equally as adamantly.

Both sides are guilty of this, and of getting nasty, and snippy, and pushy (recently there was a design that was using hyphens inappropriately in the appearance. A rejection stated it needed to be changed, and how it should be if to use the majority of current phrasing, and it was resubmitted unchanged with a comment of (paraphrased) "don't tell me how it 'should' I want my own style the way it is" - even when it was incorrect).

MOST designs go through with minimal issues. Having a special queue where things get kicked for Becue to look at, when they are in vague territory and no one can agree on how to handle it/against rules/within rules, etc, would help, but the root issue returns to the people.

That flag is an example: It was in a gray area, @raeche's interpretation of the rules dictated one thing, rejectors dictated another, both had support, while the written rules were outdated and unhelpful. The catalyst of that explosion was that, rather than letting Becue deal with it and ceasing the posting war and the back and forth, it was repeatedly thrown at the mix, both sides trying to headbutt a brick wall into submission, and it got stealth-approved. It circumvented the system. I admit I did not see/read all of the rejections after the first few - but what I saw was not malicious, simply a disagreement in interpretation and a repeated push to let Becue handle it rather than trying to get it stealth approved (which is typically the intention/what happens when you keep putting something in the queue that's been told to go to Becue). If the rejector was being rude, insulting and demeaning, yes, that can be malicious. That case in particular though? No. It was in a contended gray area.

And it's things like that, that in turn, agitate both sides more. There is responsibility on BOTH sides, crafters, and the approvers/rejectors, and EVERYONE needs to accept some of that. BOTH are responsible for the health and well-being of the crafting community, as we feed off of each other.
[/spoiler]

tl;dr (but still long, I'm sorry I'm so wordy!)
The root issue is the people. Crafters are entitled and invested in their designs, and can push, be demanding, or be overly sensitive to rejections, or negligent to the rules or sloppy. Rejectors can be short tempered, entitled to their own view of how things should be interpreted, be unclear, and disagree with each other. The system is difficult with needing to balance constraints and being open ended to allow for creativity that also makes sense and is cohesive with the world. Everyone needs to chill out and work together a bit more, for the sake of the entire crafting community. We feed off of each other, and nasty reflects nasty, just as patience reflects patience.

Daskalos · January 2013

Can people start losing their rights to not only reject, but participate in the crafting system altogether if they're rejecting for stupid stuff? Treat it like the forums - A warning, then a short suspension, then a ban. Maybe then people will quit being such morons about rejecting stuff because they don't like the -message- on the item.

Eleanor · January 2013

So what we're saying is, the system's great but it's full of humans and they're messing it up.

Seriously though, it's highly unlikely that we'll get the kind of policing that the crafting system would need to make it a utopia of peace and love. There's way too much going on upstairs that needs more dedicated attention than crafting.

Daskalos · January 2013

I dunno, set a few public examples and you might see some turnaround. Also, I think if you took out the anonymity of who rejects\approves it might help. People can't hide behind it anymore.

Areka · January 2013

Would need to do the same for submissions as well. Crafters can be equally as abusive (note Veritas' latest post, not to mention some rather notable historic occurrences a-la Moirean).

EDIT: Veritas' post.
[spoiler] CRAFTS NEWS #703
Date: 1/5/2013 at 3:38
From: Senior Administrator Veritas
To : Everyone
Subj: Design Comments

Since this doesn't seem to be clear to some individuals, let me refer
to Becue's previous post:

-----------------

Insults, profanity, and otherwise abusive behavior conducted via the
comments of a design will be extremely frowned upon, and offenders can
and will have their design submission and approval privileges revoked.

-----------------

I will be very blunt, I am not Becue, I do not have time to deal with
petty squabbles about how something should or should not be worded
grammatically. That's not my job to do.

However I am charged with upholding a level of decency within the
playerbase of this game. If you cannot follow the crafting policy as
has been re-outlined for you in THIS particular regard, I will have
to personally step in and deal with you.

I don't want to, YOU don't want me to. Knock it off and handle
yourselves with a level of maturity I know you all are capable of.

Penned by my hand on the 18th of Khepary, in the year 380 MA. [/spoiler]

Example of unnecessary nasty:
[spoiler] "2013/01/05 02:54: Just a suggestion- "A golden sun has been embroidered along the left side, while the words "Seek the Light, Abandon Artifice!" have been intrinsically stitched into the flag." or "A golden sun along the left side, and the words "Seek the Light, Abandon Artifice!" have been intrinsically stitched into the flag.
2013/01/05 03:05: it should be 'six-foot-by-two-foot'.
2013/01/05 03:16: "six foot by 2 foot" should be "two", a word instead of a number.
Comments from the Creator:
2013/01/05 03:11: You are incorrect on the previous rejection, as I am following the Associate Press stylebook and nothing in HELP DESIGNGUIDELINESS indicates that the text should be hyphenated. Please stop rejecting based on your own intuitions and use HELP DESIGNGUIDELINES as your basis, per the previous post by Becue. Should you find the rule in that file, then I will happily change it, however, six-foot-by-two-foot is just silly IMO and you should not be rejecting based off of opinions.
2013/01/05 03:15: Of note, had I used the numeral 2 instead of spelling out two (because according to AP writing style, you spell out numbers less than 10, you would be correct in '2-foot' or '4-foot' but as the numerals are spelled out, 'six foot by two foot' is the proper usage of the hyphen.
2013/01/05 03:16: It -is-. Are you even reading things before rejecting them? I hope Becue smacks the living shit out of whoever you are." [/spoiler]

Raeche · January 2013

Daskalos said:

I dunno, set a few public examples and you might see some turnaround. Also, I think if you took out the anonymity of who rejects\approves it might help. People can't hide behind it anymore.

Tentatively agreeing with non-anonymous rejecting/approval.

It would help alert one to sneak-approvals, if you note a bunch of friends approving a design at once.

It would help expose the unprofessional rejectors.

This benefit is weighed against the potential of unsavoury repercussions on rejectors/approvers. I think, however, that if the rejector/approver is fair or polite, it is unlikely that there will be negative consequences for it. Empirically speaking, the guise of anonymity tends to bring out the worst of people. See internet trolls and in general, the internet.

Personally, I agree that it should be '6-foot by 2-foot' or 'six foot by two foot'. This is one of those instances where I think having second and third opinions from other rejectors would have come in handy.

Elwyn · January 2013

I'd still really like to see rejections/comments disappear after an item gets approved and paid for. Sometimes they end up being as long as the design itself, so we have to scroll up to see what components we need ect and it's just a pain, imo.

Mastema · January 2013

I have only really had a few issues with rejecters, almost all have been nice about it. Still I am all for showing their name to stop the few trolls spoiling it for us all.

Haven · January 2013

Leave submitter anonymous - make all comments visible. If creator chooses to expose themselves then they can.

Alexina · January 2013

I sort of don't like the idea of seeing peoples' names with approvals/rejections. In the end, it'd probably just make me as a crafter bitter towards specific people for making rejections that I don't think are necessary. It would also probably mean that I wouldn't go over the queue at all, because people get heavily invested into the way they write their designs, and I don't want to be 'that person that ruined my design' (and with 'ruined', I mean 'rejected'). I mean, I'm still that person even if they can't see my name, but at least now it doesn't tell them I did it.

I don't know. Maybe it would work out great. I am still feeling a bit skeptic.

Eleanor · January 2013

Yeah, another 'no' on killing the anonymity, here. I'm confident I'd be cool about it, but it's already been proven that some people really wouldn't and it'd generate so much more drama and bullying and headache if people knew who to snarl at for rejections they were irritated by.

Konnorn · January 2013

Is it a bug that you can't luster all kinds of jewelry, or are there certain items that can't be lustered? I have this cufflinks that I planned on getting permanenced, but when I tried, it wasn't possible.

Eleanor · January 2013

When it comes to crafting it's not so much 'bug' as 'oops, missed one'. You could jab becue about it and see what it gets you.

Saybre · January 2013

Forgers still don't have ability to permanence designs. This makes me a sad..sad panda.

Lin · January 2013

They've stated, before, that they want you to have to renew your armor and weapons from time to time. It's the same reason we no longer have artifact versions of either.

Phoenecia · January 2013

I think he means making the custom designs permanent like you can with other tradeskills, not the actual weapons. Forging is the only one where you can't make the designs permanent at trans.

Lin · January 2013

Ahhhh. Yeah, that'd definitely be good.

Erzsebet · January 2013

-I'd still like a NEWD ALLOW ALL NAME/ORG command for the sharing of designs.

-And a config option that defaults all new designs to autopay

- Settable categories for crafting, maybe? Like one could do NEWD LIST OUTFIT1 and it'd list all the things you associated with said outfit type?

-An option that let's us search designs in a way similar to the way wares in shops works? I.E.

NEWD LIST DIAMOND-DUSTED
10371 a pair of silver-accented w... Unpaid      Erzsebet        150
10372 a soft diamond-dusted white... Unpaid      Erzsebet        150
10373 a pair of diamond-dusted wh... Unpaid      Erzsebet        150
10374 a simple diamond-dusted whi... Autopay     Erzsebet        117
10375 a diamond-dusted and silver... Unpaid      Erzsebet        150
10376 a soft, diamond-dusted whit... Autopay     Erzsebet         83
10377 a pair of diamond-dusted wh... Autopay     Erzsebet         83
10381 a diamond-dusted pouch of w... Unpaid      Erzsebet        150

** It's not so big a deal when they're all in order like this, but I have a few things meant to go together that are like 46, 624, 5493, 6993, 12005 and so on. Not exact numbers, but spread out like that.

- Possibly also a Newd list all? Which would show you all of YOUR designs a la newd list AND all of the designs shown on NEWD LIST ACCESS

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Categories

In this Discussion

Crafting Ideas

Comments