h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Otherwise known as "things to do stuff with" are often a preoccupation of wizards. Many spells require, or at least can be aided, by the presence of some specific item, for instance the eyeball of a lizard, or a bit of cobweb, or a cheap transistor radio. Such being the case, wizards tend to acumulate such objects in large quantities, on the off chance that they might need them at some undefined point in the future. These assorted materials tend to collect in large quantities until a wizards home may be lined with shelves each stacked four deep and three high with a bewildering array of seemingly useless (if not actually useless) objects.

However, whereas a normal human might find such a massive collection overwhelming, a wizard can keep a perfect mental catologue of the contents of this collection, and with a few minutes (hours, days) rummaging can produce the exact object required for whatever spell the wizard has been called upon to cast. The ability to find anything (eventually) in a completely unorganized system of the wizard's own creation is one of the prime traits of a good wizard.

Naturally, if presented with a well-organized system of storage or filing that was not created by the wizard, a typical wizard willl be befuddled, if not by an inability to comprehend and use the system, then by the effort anyone would bother to put into doing such a thing.

Damn. I completely forgot about objects of magical focus AND spell books. I appreciate your attempt to assimilate my writing style, but it's not worthy of emulation I assure you, not that you didn't do a good job. The world would be a better place if more people tried to be just like me. It could use a little editing of it's own, but I see no reason why that shouldn't be shoved into the already far too thorough entry.

*shrug* It was just an impromptu rendition. As you say, it could use a little editing. As for style, yours does not lie too far from my own, and it was as much a result of my sense of humor as yours, I think.

Then how come none of your entries are as funny as what you wrote just now? I like my theory better. The funniest things are impromptu, it's not like you can go back and edit in humor the way you can edit in proper prose.

I can be funny! Honest!

No, actually you're right in this case. Though I deny any responsibility for the style of the Beowulf article (I only wrote a fragment of it) most of my other articles are basically "How To" manuals, which leave very little room for humor.

I still maintain at least a portion of the humor in my addendum about material components was mine. It's impossible to emulate humor without having some of your own. For an example, go to my Red Rover article, and if you haven't already, check what is cross-referenced under "padding." It's not something a dead serious researcher would put, I can assure you. I do what I can with the topics I choose--my main problem is not coming up with more open-ended topics like modern wizards.