Template talk:Collectibles

Included Collectibles
Skull Spider Mask Earth Blue 1 included	Skull Spider Mask Earth Blue 1 included	Skull Spider Mask Earth Blue 1 included	Skull Spider Mask Earth Blue 1 included	Skull Spider Mask Earth Blue 1 included	Skull Spider Mask Earth Blue 1 included

Do you guys think this is worth using? It'd go on set pages, in the collectibles sections. •Shine 01:09, 23 January 2015 (CET)

I'm definitely on board for it. Heck, I might give collectibles its own page, y'know?

Edit: Nevermind you spelled collectibles wrong I'm ashamed of you you're fired.-- Dorek _Talk 01:11, 23 January 2015 (CET)

Apparently they're both correct. I should definitely change it to match all the other instances of "collectibles" though. •Shine 01:16, 23 January 2015 (CET)

Huh... I always use I and thought A was just a common misspelling. Whadda ya know? Cool beans, then, I'm definitely for it.

Maybe we can add some beveling too? :U -- Dorek _Talk 01:23, 23 January 2015 (CET)

Yeah, me too. I thought Firefox had just decided not to spellcheck what I'd typed.

Might be a bit too fancy, but I'll give it a shot. Maybe if I leave everything light gray.

Also, what's the highest number of collectibles any set has? Ignore stuff like the mask packs and Bohrok, which come with a couple random ones out of a larger group. I'm going to combine those. •Shine 01:29, 23 January 2015 (CET)

Honestly I want to say the new Toa, at three. Some of the Rahi had more actual collectibles, but fewer variations.

As for the mask packs, maybe use a greyed out/less opaque Hau or Krana or whatever with a question mark in the middle? Just a thought. -- Dorek _Talk 01:42, 23 January 2015 (CET)

Wait, five, the Takutanuva set. -- Dorek _Talk 01:52, 23 January 2015 (CET)

Okay, cool. Six possible should be fine then.

Maybe sometime like that but with the functionality of the Kraata checklist, where it colors whatever image is in the cell. So there'd be the question mark Krana image on Set:8554 and it would get colored yellow. •Shine 02:00, 23 January 2015 (CET)

Ah, okay, I'm getting it. Sounds pretty neat to me. -- Dorek _Talk 02:08, 23 January 2015 (CET)