Talk:Expedition to the Barrier Peaks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons, which collaborates on Dungeons & Dragons-related articles. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
This article is part of The World of Greyhawk Wikiproject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the World of Greyhawk campaign setting for the Dungeons & Dragons roleplaying game on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Contents

[edit] Not linked

Modules S1 thru S4 were not related modules, even though there was a "super module" reprint of S1 thru S4. The only thing they have in common is a module code that starts with S. See Talk:Tomb_of_Horrors#Not_linked for discussion. Wendell 02:08, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The Greatest/Worst Module Ever

In those days before the internet it was easier to avoid spoilers. Most of us had no idea what was going to happen in ETTBP. It was a huge surprise and very cool. Of course carrying blasters etc. into the next module proved very irritating for all concerned.

Hmmm, I wish I could say the same. As I recall, most of the people in my D&D circle knew a lot about all of the modules. Once they'd been out for a day or two, everyone read them and everyone talked. And S3 was probably talked about more than any other. Druff 21:46, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
This is the only module I have a clear recollection of playing. We played tons of others, but none stick out in my mind like this one. Played it several times, but was always surprised by something new each time I played it. — Frecklefoot | Talk 14:21, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The starshipWarden

The ship in S3 is not the Warden, according to an interview with Gygax in Oerth Journal #12 (pages 8-9) [1]. I'm therefore removing the "Trivia" section.--Robbstrd 13:42, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

You beat me by two hours -- I just finished tracking down a messageboard thread where Jim Ward says the same thing. [2] I guess that's settled, then! Michael Bauser 16:24, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I find it interesting that message boards like this spend time complaining how inacurate wikipedia is but no one takes a few seconds to remove the inacuracy or at least hit it with a Template:Verify source - Waza 01:05, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gamma World

My recollection of this module, from its original publication, is that the "high-tech" elements were crossover imports from Gamma World. I don't have access to the material any longer; can anyone verify this connection and note on it? (I will if I can.) Gnoitall 16:13, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I owned both this module and Gamma World. I don't recall the weapons being crossovers at all. The weapons were fairly unique. But Gamma World was so open-ended, it's possible someone created a scenario with S3 weapons in it and then the S3 developers incorporated them. But I know the weapons were not included in the core Gamma World rules. — Frecklefoot | Talk 16:22, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Well, it was long ago and far away. But I could have sworn the tech elements in this module (in its original 1980 incarnation) were borrowings from 1st Edition Gamma World. I was playing both at the time. That tears it; I have got to track down my copies of both of those and verify (or disprove) it for myself. — Gnoitall 22:55, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I believe it was based not on Gamma World but Metamorphosis Alpha, which in turn developed into Gamma World. Gary Gygax' foreword to the module indicates this.Gilbertine goldmark (talk) 21:35, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Spacing

I'm not going to start an edit war here, but Robbstrd just re-added all the extra spacing I took out. I really don't see the point. As a coder, I'm a big fan of whitespace. But I don't see a need for it in HTML lists, where everything is clearly discernible. Look at most of the articles on Wikipedia: most extern links and references lists are single spaced. The extra spacing isn't necessary, requires more HTML (not wikimarkup however) and just plain hurts my eyes. Can't we stick to the standards here? — Frecklefoot | Talk 12:13, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Is this in the MOS?--Robbstrd 23:37, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Good question. I couldn't find anything on it in the MoS (this doesn't mean it isn't in there, it just means I can't find it), however every list in the MoS uses the single-space style I advocate. — Frecklefoot | Talk 13:05, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay, after several revertions and unrevertions, I think it's time we discuss this again. Several other editors hate the extra spaces, Robbstrd is the only one who seems to like them. With his last reversion, he cited the Manual of Style, with this comment:
"I was the 1st to add multiple refs (see 20:42, 20 July 2006), & there were spaces--see Wikipedia:Manual of Style#National varieties of English: "Follow the variety established by the first c".
Actually, it was one other editor, not "several"--User:Armedtrader, who seems more interested in being a dick[3] than in making useful contributions.--Robbstrd 23:40, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
While it was nice of him to provide a reference, that rule only applies to spelling, not to spacing. Unless someone can provide overwhelming evidence as to why we shouldn't, I vote we just revert the spaces. No one likes them but Robbstrd. — Frecklefoot | Talk 17:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
That's rather disingenuous, as I don't recall anyone taking a poll. I think the proper place to discuss this would be the Wikiproject talk pages.--Robbstrd 23:40, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Okay, just prepare to be disappointed.—Preceding unsigned comment added by user:Armedtrader (talk • contribs)
Okay, which WikiProject? — Frecklefoot | Talk 17:06, 12 June 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Extra Sources

- A mention in the D&D movie "Wrath of the Dragon God" and a detailed review and companion article in White Dwarf #26. Web Warlock (talk) 14:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC)