This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.
From Tabletop Gamess Discussion
phantomreader42: Added link to Failed a Spot Check (based on an Order Of The Stick gag, rooted in a Dungeons And Dragons mechanic). Ironically, put it in the wrong list for a moment, after failing my OWN spot check.
Fast Eddie: This should be renamed Tabletop Games, so wikiword will form correctly. Any objections? Hmm. I see there is already a redirect.
Ununnilium: No real objections, I suppose. I made the redirect, so...
Burai: Does "open game content" really need an entry? It's not really a trope, in the sense of being one of the internal tools used to create stories. It's as if we wrote up "blast processing" as a videogame trope.
Entries like Game Master strike me as borderline cases (which is why I went ahead and wrote one up for it), in that to a degree they're prerequisite terms that may need to be common knowledge before actual tropes can be explained/discussed. But not all gamer jargon is going to be relevant here, right?
Ununnilium: Well, maybe not. But I'd say it's a good idea to explain the whole "open gaming" thing and how it's changed stuff. Dunno what the trope title should be.
Fast Eddie: There is certainly precedent. The Fan-Speak and Script Speak indexes are all about the jargon. Sounds like Open Gaming would be an item on a Gamer-Speak list.
Yoshi348: Two of these entries (Space Opera and Toons) are clashing with existing entries that should probably take precedence. I guess we're probably going to have to set up a separate namespace like with comics, but what to call it?
Fast Eddie: Seems like Space Opera is pretty straightforward.
Ununnilium: At this point, don't add any other examples unless you're actually going to make an entry for them. >>v Otherwise we'll be drowning in red links.
Burai: I hope putting the red links in a float box helps us tread water a bit better. I'd have pared down the list but I'm not feeling hubristic ;-) enough to judge "This game is truly Notable, but this one is just cruft."
Seth: I like it this way, i had almost forgotten we had floatboxes, its been a while since ive had to make one.
Duckluck: Regarding whether we want an Open Game Content (or whatever you want to call it) entry, I'd like to remind people that There Is No Such Thing As Notability. Of course, the real test is whether anyone actually makes an entry for this.
Burai: Well, yes, but I'd like to remind people that "notability" is not the same as relevance; in fact, that very article (There Is No Such Thing As Notability) implies the distinction, to whit:
- If it fits the trope description, then it can be put in.
Sci Vo: I honestly don't see the distinction between Role Playing Settings and Settings, and I really don't want to duplicate that huge index here, so I changed it to that.
Susan Davis: Nuked all the red links on the grounds that we can just add games to the list as we actually write pages for them. For that matter, the list really ought to be its own index page rather than a sidebar here.
Large Blunt Object: doop de doop, for posterity: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/discussion.php?id=98on9k5k
(copied for the ykttw) The reason TabletopRPGs doesn't have its own page right now is because either Fast Eddie's magic didn't do a complete job or people are putting wicks for TabletopRPGs back in. Since the need for a unified category to put examples under was what caused the name change (D&D examples being put under the header Tabletop Games is okay, Warhammer40k being put under TabletopRPGs is not) and since there are still messy wicks about, TabletopRPGs was made into a redirect. We can still have a page, but that would either need every wick to Tabletop RPG, TabletopRPGs et cetera (which currently point to a category) being changed or for the page to a different name of its own (say, Tabletop Roleplaying Games.)
Etrangere: I'm not sure I follow you. Does that mean that once the messy wicks are dealt with, we'll go back to having a separate page for RPGs and other kinds of Tabletop games? If that's the case, I'm fine with it and if you need help for dealing with the messy wicks point them out to me! I'm surprised Warhammer40k wasn't a rpg actually, I thought it was, if only recently. Maybe this is also fairly about worldbuilding? That is to say even if Warhammer40k isn't a RPG, it's got a fairly complex world which is detailed with a history etc. so do some CCG (although some of them do lead to RPG anyway ^^). I wonder if there was a way to deal with world building related tropes on its own...
Large Blunt Object: I don't care either way about pages, what I care about is the heading under the example sections on trope pages. That being Tabletop RPG has to be changed. It should be linked under Tabletop Games. From there, you can have pages for as many different kinds of tabletop game as you like, but Tabletop Games should be the catch-all heading. It seems some tropers are still treating Tabletop RPG as a catch-all term for tabletop strategy and RPG alike, which is just... wrong.
Logical Dash: Card games come in two flavors, collectible/trading and dedicated deck
Um... Hearts and Bridge are both played with the same deck...
