Talk:Storytelling System

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Role-playing games Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Role-playing games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of role-playing games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Role-playing gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Role-playing gamesTemplate:WikiProject Role-playing gamesrole-playing game articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Storytelling System should be the main article for this page, with this page working as a #redirect Storytelling System since this article, and the current system is called that title. "Storyteller System" is a defunct name. -WildElf 19:13, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In fact the

. In discussion forums they are frequently referred to as new World of Darkness (nWoD) and old World of Darkness (oWod) respectively, as these are the settings both systems are mainly used in. -RoadRunner84 18:48, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I think the system describtion should be larger, like in the Storytelling System article. I'll start, but would aprechiate, if someone would pick up. Heinrich k 09:43, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing both articles, I think they should be consolidated into one, showing the history of the evolution of the system. A redirect should be from the

]

Agreed, especially since this article is small and one is an extension of the other. Web Warlock 14:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the fact that the Storyteller System and Storytelling system are two distinct systems needs to be made clearer. The Storyteller system is NOT a 'defunct' system, it is merely an earlier and different system, but one that is still played by a large fraction percentage of gamers. As such (and since they are different in significant ways) the wiki should, imho, contain information about both systems, and not simply ignore the earlier system in favor of the newer one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.224.153.22 (talk) 03:53, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the differences should be highlighted in the description of the system. Right now, I am working on writing up the history with references to show notability. Turlo Lomon 05:46, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The character creation and game mechanics sections currently contain rules and mechanics from both systems with no distinction between the two. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 06:41, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've cleaned up the character creation section. I'll let someone more familiar with the Storyteller System clean up the game mechanics section. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 07:40, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With the resurrection of Vampire: the Masquerade as a gameline (with the 20th Anniversary Edition and the Onyx Path supplements -- an upcoming NPC book for instance -- and the arrival of the White Wolf Print on Demand business model, as well as the upcoming 20th Anniversary edition of Werewolf: the Apocalypse, I think it's safe to say that both the Storyteller and Storytelling systems are "active". Neither is defunct or discontinued at this point. How do we reflect that in the article? -- heavenquake (talk) 13:16, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I remember, the Aeon Trinity RPG was meant to be based on content from people with each getting a % of the sale, and possibly under some sort of open source ruleset. Anyone have a better memor than me, access to the original advertising material or documentation that might shed some light ??
16:03, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Is there some reason this article repeatedly put the qualifier 'In the Storytelling System'? The article is about the Storytelling System, so the heavy use of the qualifier is odd. Oh, and 'Exclusive to the Storytelling System' is also odd since other game systems do use things like Initiative and Size. PerlKnitter (talk) 19:05, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Having done more reading in this and Scion, I see the distinction that is being made. But it is still a bit confusing if you are coming in from outside and trying to understand. I still think that the use of qualifiers on sentence after sentence is not a good approach. PerlKnitter (talk) 19:23, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We could reorganize the article's heading structure, giving Storyteller System and Storytelling System top-level headings rather than combining information from the two versions in the same paragraphs. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 23:20, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Almost the entire page screams WoD this and WoD that, but this page is about storytelling and the storytellers. Exalted does NOT fit into the WoD what-so-ever; but like all the other games, it is created by White Wolf and thus the "GM" is called the Storyteller. This, however, does NOT mean all the games play exactly the same. For example, In WoD you need to roll 8-10 for a success but in the world of Exalted 7-10 is what is required for a success. There are many more differences, big and small, from game to game but it is all still called Storytelling. This page focuses on WoD Storytelling and nothing more.

Also in the "Book" section of the article, every book there is based on oWoD and nWoD but completely forgets that other games do not use WoD rules; so it leaves them out of the "Books" section.

This page should be cleaned up quite a bit, remove the WoD slant that is written there (because it seems to be more focused on WoD than the Storyteller and Storytelling) and both oWoD and nWoD can be noted with a linked to their respective locations on Wikipedia. Frosset Mareritt
07:57, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It definitely needs cleared out especially since some of the information is wrong. This White Wolf blog entry is a good summary http://forums.white-wolf.com/cs/blogs/production/archive/2009/02/20/behind-the-lines-engineering-34.aspx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.160.77 (talk) 20:18, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]