Talk:Castles & Crusades
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] NPoV
Article seems a tad bit PoV, would anybody mind taking a stab at a rewrite to neutralize that? Iceberg3k 21:06, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
- I did a pretty serious overhaul. I think it resolves all of the PoV issues I saw. — Alan De Smet | Talk 05:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- "The minimalistic approach to the rules gives both the players and the game master, in this game called the Castle Keeper, wide freedom to act on the imagination, unhindered by codified mechanics." still reads of PoV.User talk:Crypt King 08:10, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- "The shared lineage and resulting similarity in rules between Dungeons & Dragons, Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, Hackmaster, and Castles & Crusades simplify conversion of rules and statistics between the games."
-
-
-
- I prefer the way I originally phrased it because different people have different opinions on this. e.g. I find d20D&D ↔ C&C just as difficult as d20D&D ↔ AD&D, yet I've read lots of people who have found otherwise. On the other hand, I think the fact that a great many people find conversion between C&C & at least one of these other systems an important strength of C&C bears remaining in the article.
-
-
-
- I'll admit I wasn't particularly happy with my use of "some people", but I feel it is now less NPOV than it was. —Malirath 15:08, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
-
This article still reads as PoV and, for as brief as it is, it contains several inaccuracies. The repeated comparisons to d20 indicate that it has yet to be edited by someone who has actually read the C&C rules. I'll spend a little time editing it later and clarify the limited role that the open gaming license plays in C&C. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.218.224.59 (talk) 17:24, 18 January 2008 (UTC)