Talk:Deadlands

Is it REALLY necessary that this article function as a condensed rulebook?
Looking over the article entries for other RPGs, none of them feature the same exacting level of detail with respect to the game rules as does the Deadlands article. I'm thinking that we should clean this article up a bit. Extreme Unction 15:06, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Go for it. This could really stand to be trimmed down; I seem to recall that an RPG became a Featured Article a while back, and that might make a good template. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 15:09, 26 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Good job revising the article! It's looking like an encyclopedia article, now. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 06:38, 29 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I been away for a while... and this is one of the reason why i left in the first place. I come back to an article and find all my stuff deleted without a vote or discussion. For the record - It wasn't a "condensed rulebook"! I never explained how to exactly do everything and you still need the game books to play. I explained all the mahor components of the agme and what separated it from other game systems. But no... just wipe it off and out of here, Good job. Thanks. SkeezerPumba 19:47, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Skeezer, don't pout dude... I returned the game mechanics sections to the article and slimmed them down by deleting all book numerical values and "examples" from the game. This might solve the problem of the copyrighted "condensed rulebook" thing. You still need the game books to play the game of course. Well see how this works. Cyberia23 22:14, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * The problem is not that the material is copyrighted. The problem is that an encyclopedia article aimed at the casual reader does not need a bunch of trival details about game mechanics.


 * Ideally, an article in Wikipedia should cover the important bits, without delving into too much trivial detail. The article should be meaty enough that people who have not encountered the subject of the article before can read the article and get a good overview of the subject, but not so filled with detail (especially trivial detail) that only enthusiasts of the subject would find it enjoyable or interesting to read.


 * Specifically to the Deadlands article, the entirety of the "Making Deadlands Characters" and "Overview of Game Mechanics" sections should be removed. These two sections are the very definition of "information only interesting to a fan of the setting."  The average reader will have no familiarity with Deadlands and little familiarity with role-playing games, and it serves no purpose to inundate them with trivial minutae. Ξxtreme Unction |yakkity yak 22:27, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I disagree on several points. First off, only an RPGer would even know what Deadlands is in the first place, therefore they are the only ones who would read about it. In general, and this was discussed on several websites: RPG companies cannot copyright their game mechanics. (I'm not sure right at this moment what article on here discussed this, I beleieve it was under the d20 System somewhere), but there is a link to the US Copyright Office article on the copyrights of game rules. So therefore it doesn't really violate copyright. This could be argued all night. Going back to my first point - since gamers would most likely be the ones reading this, those who haven't played the game might like to know what differences it has with other RPG game systems. Not including them would really make it sound like "just another RPG", except this one is Wild West Steampunk with Undead everywhere. It adds flavor to the article. But your right - not everything needs to be included but the big part of the Deadlands RPG is the unique way of making characters by drawing cards and not rolling dice. That should at least be mentioned somewhere. Cyberia23 22:47, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Oh and one more thing: A simple solution to the too much info thing... If you don't want to know ablout something THEN SKIP OVER IT! Cyberia23 22:51, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. The goal is to describe what the game is, not how to play it. Additionally, many of the details were different from other RPGs in only trivial ways. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:19, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I'll come back to this ina day or so when I have some time, and redit some points - at least the "trivial points" that make it different. Believe me you can't play the game with just the information here, and that wasn't my intention when I wrote it. Deadlands has a few concepts which separated it from other gaming systems, and I agree with Cyberia23, that at least those things should be mentioned. I just hate seeing a bunch of stuff I wrote flushed down the toilet because a few people disagree with it or think it's too much. SkeezerPumba 06:38, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * There is a warning in bold text at the bottom of the edit page which reads If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it. The nature of Wikipedia is such that anybody can come along and change (or remove) the text written by others.  That is an inherent and integral part of what Wikipedia is and how it grows organically.  Contributors to Wikipedia are expressly and explicitly told to Be Bold when editing an article.  We are further expressly cautioned against developing a sense of ownership over any article we write.  As it says at the top of Ownership of articles, "You agreed to allow others to modify your work.  So let them."


 * I'm sorry that you feel your efforts were "flushed down the toilet". But please understand that my goal is only to make an encyclopedia article that would be read from start to finish by a casual reader who happened to stumble across the article (perhaps by the "Random article" link, perhaps by a link from another page).  Listing out the various traits, and discussing (however briefly) target numbers and wound levels and fate chips and bounty points and on and on and on is trivial minutae that nobody cares about except for the people who have the rulebooks already.  And the people who have the rulebooks already don't need all that information in the article because...they have the rulebooks already.


 * I'm a Deadlands fan. Deadlands is my 2nd favorite setting for any RPG, ever.  When editing the article, I have to profoundly resist the urge to go into full-bore geek mode and just do a complete fanboy infodump on everything I know about the setting (which is considerable).  I refrain, however, because I remind myself that I'm writing an encyclopedia article.  I imagine that I am trying to write an article that would be read by thousands in a copy of the Encyclopedia Britannica.  And I try to imagine what such an article would look like.  And I just don't see such an article containing any information about the game mechanics except in the broadest possible sense.


 * All the best.
 * Ξxtreme Unction |yakkity yak 11:05, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I went ahead and cleaned up some of it. At least the unique aspects should be mentioned. Better? Cyberia23 23:11, 23 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Extreme: You don't have to quote me policy, I know the deal. I have no problem about people rewriting and changing mys stuff, but when EVERYTHING gets dumped and then some witty comment is made to go along with it - hopefully you can understand how annoying it gets. But whatever, I'm not going to start a fanboy argument - I deal with fanboys everytime I game, or walk into a comic book store. You guys can have it your way. SkeezerPumba 09:10, 24 December 2005 (UTC)


 * SKeezer: You're right in that I probably should have picked a less provocative subject heading for the comments I made above that started this whole discussion. That was uncalled for, and you have my apologies.


 * Cyberia23: I think we're getting close to a good compromise. I see your point that it would be useful to point out some of the distinctive and unique features of the Deadlands game as compared with other RPGs on the market.  I'm going to take a stab at rewriting what you've included in a manner that will hopefully satisfy both of us.  If not, you can always revert back to your version and we can go back to the drawing board.


 * All the best.
 * Ξxtreme Unction |yakkity yak 12:51, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Ghost Dance?
I just recently became acquainted with Deadlands, but I think I recall that it was something other than the Great Ghost Dance that released the Reckoners. I thought that was caused by Raven and his followers traveling into the Hunting Grounds, and the Great Ghost Dance came later. I've only read some of the source material, though, so I could be wrong. Morgan May 17:11, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * From memory: Raven used the Great Ghost Dance to access the Hunting Grounds. Once there he slew the elders who were keeping the Reckoners bound. — Alan De Smet | Talk 01:15, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Request for help
I'm trying to nail down the origins of the term Weird West. It may not be possible but it might be a be that one of the two introductions to For a Few Dead Guys More could help pin it down so I am looking for someone with a copy to hand who could check out both (especially the Joe R. Lansdale one). Or it may be that the origins are explained somewhere else in the Deadlands material. Thanks for any help you can provide. (Emperor 14:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC))

List of Deadlands books
I've done some work to expand the List of Deadlands books, placing them into tables and giving summaries of the contents of the books. I've done all the classic, d20 and Reloaded books, with a few bits of miscelleny to go. The list is now quite long, and I'm considering splitting it into two lists. I'm not sure if it would make more sense to split by ruleset, and thus have all the classic books (Weird West & Hell on Earth) on one page and all the Reloaded on another, or if it would be better to split by setting, and have all the Weird West books (classic and Savage Worlds rules) on one list and all the Hell on Earth on another. Thoughts? Euchrid (talk) 23:27, 7 November 2012 (UTC)