Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1

    Cool Threads i feel that need to be added.

    Well, im of the old school. That means that i still play 2nd edition. And me and my rp group will continue doing it. Ive meet pretty many people thru the internet who also does. and we feel that birthright have ditched us. We would appreciated a completely new thread that have focus on 2nd edition and everything about it. Im sure that would drawn more people to the forums and br wiki.

    There is to much focus on the new things, when the old stuff still rocks for people like me

    Regards, aldrin

  2. #2
    Ehrshegh of Spelling Thelandrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,084
    Downloads
    64
    Uploads
    0
    Start one then. Just be warned that any "my Birthright is better than yours" posts will be summarily edited or deleted.

  3. #3
    Site Moderator AndrewTall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Chelmsford, Essex, England
    Posts
    2,305
    Downloads
    25
    Uploads
    0
    Well quite a lot of talk on br.net is about fluff rather than mechanics which is as much 2e as 3e - or 4e.

    The wiki can easily have pages for 2e added, I try to add crunch in whatever looks to be the most common system used simply b/c that maximises the number of people who can ignore it.

    In terms of 2e vs 3e I'm still getting to grips with the realm mechanics, but I'd add house-rules to both anyway Given that the chapter in the BRCS is unsanctioned if you want to argue for a better way make your case!

    On more general 2e stuff like PC stats, etc making spin-off pages for the wiki is easy, and similarly there is nothing stopping 2e people chatting to other 2e people on one thread while 3e's talk to other 3e's on another. Frankly the more the merrier as there is bound to be cross pollination of ideas to the benefit of both.

  4. #4
    I'll confess that I'm still fond of the 2E version. The full-color pages and beautiful illustrations, for instance. Those books were way ahead of their time. Then there's the nostalgia factor.

    I've had a bear of a time recruiting my current 3.5 group. Probably going to just cancel it. Most of the group would rather play generic DnD. *sigh*
    Look for me by moonlight
    Watch for me by moonlight
    I'll come to thee by moonlight
    Though Hell should bar the way

  5. #5
    Site Moderator AndrewTall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Chelmsford, Essex, England
    Posts
    2,305
    Downloads
    25
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by prince_dios View Post
    I'll confess that I'm still fond of the 2E version. The full-color pages and beautiful illustrations, for instance. Those books were way ahead of their time. Then there's the nostalgia factor.

    I've had a bear of a time recruiting my current 3.5 group. Probably going to just cancel it. Most of the group would rather play generic DnD. *sigh*
    Try playing in Cerilia with the setting in the background (no regent PC's, possibly no scions) and just alluding to the grand political side of things the PC's are bit players in, bloodlines etc - even if the current campaign doesn't delve deeper, in a later campaign some of the players may be interested in investigating more - and will be at least a little familiar with the setting!

    I agree on the beauty of the BR books, but 3e could be just as good - I'll post the draft PS of Danigau where Kay has done a great job emulating the traditional style.

  6. #6

    hehe

    hehe well ill will keep that in mind. Im not saying that 2nd is best, but personally i like it best=)

    Sounds good to add a own section on wiki, and we can add stuff.

    But to be honest. Not everyone do their part in community, and some would prefer if everything was allready written and they could just read and get the infomation their lookin for. (im no angel, but i try my best )

    But a own section for 2nd edition would be a good start. Since allmost all lines are like "offical 3.5 stuff".

    And yes, i agree, crossing over and talking about things that are the same in all editions and stuff that can help players and dms in all editions are very nice, and i have myself gotten some ideas from those sections.

    But for instance, there comes a guy in, wanting to know more about the birthright characters, powers and things that are different from 3.5 edition, he will just google for some other side. And thats sad, think if all BR players where registered on the same page

    Thanks for all the replys.

    Peace out

  7. #7
    Site Moderator AndrewTall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Chelmsford, Essex, England
    Posts
    2,305
    Downloads
    25
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Aldrin View Post
    But to be honest. Not everyone do their part in community, and some would prefer if everything was allready written and they could just read and get the infomation their lookin for. (im no angel, but i try my best )

    But a own section for 2nd edition would be a good start. Since allmost all lines are like "offical 3.5 stuff".
    It's a time thing - I've been busy lately so haven't done much at all for instance. The BRCS and SRD were directly uploaded by Arjan so that was pretty quick and they form the bulk of the page count - the '3e domination' is therefore the result more of convenience than some dire plot.

    I'll see if I can set up some 2e links on the main page over the weekend - would it be better to have a single '2e' link clearly visible that led to a separate set of subpages, or to have a link from the rules pages to the 2e version?

    The latter would be easy, but does imply subordination. The former risks cluttering an already busy page. Some areas might be better with the crunch on a page being consolidated into sections for 2e and 3e leaving the bulk of the page common to both (write ups of the gods for example).

  8. #8
    Ehrshegh of Spelling Thelandrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,084
    Downloads
    64
    Uploads
    0
    We should always have the fluff at the top of the page. That is what is most readable and what people are more likely to come for.

    We can always list the 3.5 rules and then the 2nd Ed rules as necessary.

  9. #9
    Site Moderator Sorontar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    3,942
    Downloads
    23
    Uploads
    1
    Some pages are "platform-independent". Some NPCs are AD&DII, some are rewrites into D&D3.5 (ie. the AD&DII version has already been published by WotC) or brand-new D&D3.5 ones. I think that all we need is a category for AD&D2ed, since that is presently the minority. If need be, this can have subcategories NPC (AD&D2ed), Magic (AD&D2ed) etc which can also be subcategories of the larger NPC categories etc.

    Then all you need is one link to the top category on the front page.

    Of course, sometimes a page has details for AD&DII and D&D3.5.

    Sorontar

  10. #10
    i liked sorontars ide. 1 main link on the front page, and make sub links under that one. Since its a minority there will not be millions of threads.

    And its a good start!
    btw thanks for all the respond, pretty amassing and i appreciate it alot.

    tyty. but please, do Ad&d :P

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Multilanguage support added
    By Arjan in forum BRWiki Discussions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-27-2010, 11:09 PM
  2. Novels with a BR feel?
    By Eyeless One in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 05-28-2004, 04:42 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ©2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.