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

Entry: Dungeons and Dragons - A2935802
Author: Wargamer (The Wanderer) - U188882

The old DandD entry needs replacing, it's way out of date!

Oh, original entry is A209062.

Entry is incorrect about classes available, and generally lacks detail on said classes. Also makes no mention of other races available. In short, it needs changing.

As an entry about the original D&D game, though, it is perfectly adequate - so I'm not sure whether an update is necessarily in order - unless you care to cover the previous versions of the game as well? The original D&D (with the five sets of rules - Basic, Expert, Companion, Master and Immortal); the different versions of AD&D; the decision by TSR/Wizards to merge the two into one; the huges number of expensive books that suddenly became non-compatible when v3.5 was introduced. Etc.

Unless you're going to go for a complete historical overview - I think, perhaps, renaming the existing entry (Classic Dungeons & Dragons - the Game???) and then adding a new one about th development of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons into the current incarnation?



The Apprentice

On the other hand, the original entry has a wonderful sarcastic style which makes it very readable and very suitable for h2g2. Your entry is a little too enthusiastic about the game, which gives the impression that you are not being entirely objective about it. I think the ideal entry would be somewhere in between.

I agree with Gnomon on this one.


Mikey

I found it a little too enthusiastic too
Avalon Hill and SPI were making table-top wargames before D&D came along, historical rather than fantasy
It is a good overview of the current state of D&D

I would say don't combine the two, but instead call yours "how to play D and D", add a bit more detail and put it through PR. Include a reference to the old one in the thread.

sprout

I too join the chorus of dissenters. To me, this does not read as an Update, it seems to be an advertisement, and this is a no-no. The original entry is just fine in describing the original game. The Wizards of the Coast version seems to be rather different than what I remember D&D being like. Perhaps your article should be submitted to Peer Review under a different title. I am pretty sure the Researchers there will also insist it be toned down.

Just to bump this up the pile again, does anyone have any specific suggestions on how this might work as an update? It also needs a lot of help with GuideMl...

I think an update would perhaps be better off by sticking a little more closely to the original -- adding new information, but refraining as much as possible from editing for style or tone.


Mikey

The general consensus seems to be that this update should not go ahead, and the author hasn't commented here since 22 Aug 2004, so should this be moved out of the Update Forum?

Yup!

It should be removed.

I can't think of an Update we have rejected besides this one; there doesn't seem to be formal procedure for this like in Peer Review. We've been seatofpantsing this forum, so I think us just agreeing that it should be removed should be OK for now.

Jimster only drops into the Update Forum about once a month, but I'm sure he'll clear this one out next time he's passing.