Shivering talk:Summon

The UESPWiki – Your source for The Elder Scrolls since 1995

[edit] Need for Page

All of this information is redundant, it's in the OB page. Lukish_ Tlk Cnt 07:33, 30 December 2008 (EST)

I guess we were splitting that page and nobody told me. The OB page should probably be updated now. Lukish_ Tlk Cnt 08:08, 30 December 2008 (EST)

I edited this Oblivion:Summon page to include some of the ones from SI. However, I feel that they should have their own page along with the other summonable creatures in the Shivering:Magic page. I put them on the OB page because I felt that they should at least be up somewhere. I'm very new so I'm having trouble making the page and I guess it doesn't help that I dont have all the information I need to complete it. :( (Gadianzero 08:17, 30 December 2008 (EST))

All the info should be covered on the Oblivion page, and this should be a redirect to it. This follows the pattern used by Morrowind:Summon, which includes summons found in Tribunal and Bloodmoon. The problem with having the page here is that it creates a large number of red-links which will never be pages, since all the base pages for magical effects exist only in the non-expansion namespace. The other possibility would be to edit the template such that it can be pointed at another namespace, but given that there are so few effects added by expansions (and almost all of them are summons, thus covered on a single page), this seems a bit unnecessary. --TheRealLurlock ^Talk 09:52, 30 December 2008 (EST)

Thanks, that helps a lot(Gadianzero 10:17, 30 December 2008 (EST))

I fixed this up and removed redundant content on OB page, I would have let this die if it weren't for this comment and the lack of a few details there. Lukish_ Tlk Cnt 10:51, 30 December 2008 (EST)

In response to Lurlock's comment, I don't think we can make universal rules that "all pages named X always get expansion pages" but "all pages named Y never get expansion pages". Rather, what needs an expansion page needs to be determined based upon the individual page. Does the expansion add enough of that particular content to create a meaningful, non-permastub page? Would adding that content into the original page make the original page overly long/difficult to use? So creating a Tribunal:Summon page would be somewhat silly, given that Tribunal only adds one summon effect. On the other hand, SI adds a dozen new summon effects. They weren't previously documented anywhere (the effects weren't documented), so adding them here makes sense to me. --Nephele^Talk 03:39, 4 January 2009 (EST)

[edit] Haskill

Is the second N/A in Haskill's effect ID necessary? (Gadianzero 10:14, 1 January 2009 (EST))

My bad. Fixed. –Rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 13:42, 1 January 2009 (EST)

The game uses the number 0 for his magical cost. Is this the same thing as Base Effect Cost and if so shouldn't we keep it as 0? (Gadianzero 14:38, 1 January 2009 (EST))

The cost of casting the spell is not the same as the effect base cost. The effect base cost is a fixed value for every magical effect; it then gets plugged into the spell cost equations to determine, based on that particular spell's magnitude, duration, and area, how much that particular version of the spell will cost. So it costs far more to cast Flame Tempest than to cast a simple Flare spell -- but the effect base cost is exactly the same in both cases, because both spells use the same effect, namely Fire Damage. Or as another example, the greater power Dragon Skin costs 0 magicka to cast -- but that doesn't mean that all Shield spells have zero cost.

For summoning Haskill, the cost of casting the spell is not relevant on this article -- which is about the base effects not the spells. The spells, and their spell costs, are documented elsewhere. Because Haskill is a script effect, it does not have a true base effect. You can't go to the spellmaking altar and create a 2 second version of the spell. So N/A is the appropriate value. --Nephele^Talk 03:29, 4 January 2009 (EST)

His attack is listed as sarcasm. I don't have a problem with that, I'm just bringing it up. 68.199.249.139 18:19, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

I've removed the entire effect. It's already covered at Shivering:Magic so it's not lost. Most info values were "N/A", and it isn't a seperate magic effect, so the entry wasn't particulary useful. --Timenn < talk > 09:05, 16 June 2009 (EDT)

[edit] Greater Powers

Do the Greater Power summons really cost 1 magicka? I would think they would be free like the other Greater Powers in the game.

As above, this article documents the effects' base costs, not the cost of a particular spell using the effect. The base cost for each of those three effects is 1. --Nephele^Talk 03:29, 4 January 2009 (EST)