The Campaign Builder's Guild

[ooc=] Check out this page first:  Lexicon (http://www.20by20room.com/2003/11/lexicon_an_rpg.html)

    What I propose is a CBG go at this. It looks fun and I've found a couple interesting sessions of the game mostly run on wiki's across the web. If anyone is interested go ahead and post here with your comments. If enough interest is mustered, I'll make another thread. Thanks for reading.
[/ooc]

[ooc=DISCUSS!]
  Issues Up for Debate:

 Genre
 Time Frame? a week per letter? A month? No limit?

   

  Resolved Issues:
  The game will be hosted on the WIKI. The OOC will be on the FORUMS.
 
  [/ooc]

Should there be some predefined limits as to the general tech level, scope, supernatural elements etc? If we go with complete freedom to invent stuff then it's probably going to turn into a major kitchen sink. Which is not necessarily a bad thing, but would be best acknowledged beforehand.

What kind of pace should this be run at? A letter per week perhaps? If someone misses a letter or enters the game late, should they be allowed to submit entries for letters that were covered in the past?

Good questions. Some of the Lexicon wiki's I've read are restricted to a genre.  As for pace of the game...depends on the word count per entry. 200 words + time to come up with an idea in a week sounds good to me. Of course entries can be edited/expanded later. As for late participants/missed Letters, I would say it's OK to add entries at a later time-but probably restrict the citation aspect of it a little.

Here is a very good Lexicon:  
Steampunk (http://lexicon-rpg.wikispaces.com/)

I'd give it a shot, though I'd prefer to know the specifics before I throw down any guarantees.

I love this idea.  It's actually quite similar to Salacious Angel's an my "MYTHOS" experiment in some ways.  If you started a thread I would definitely participate.

EDIT: Possible genres (though any would be fine): post-apocalyptic fantasy; planetary romance; fantastic multiverse (i.e. similar to Planescape in overall concept); pulpy sword and sorcery, perhaps with some kind of twist.

@Weave: We will definitely work out specifics before we begin.

@Steerpike: MYTHOS came to mind almost immediately after reading Lexicon. Glad to have you on board with this.

For genre I'm thinking a mix of fantasy/horror. I would like to avoid Science Fiction simply because of the 1000 Worlds thread...
  I'd like to do a letter each week but that is probably unlikely. Maybe twice a month? Ultimately I would like to get the whole thing ported over to the CBG wiki as a community wide world project.  

I'm all for a fantasy lexicon, and I'd be fine with horror. What springs to mind is something awash with Tim Burton or Neil Gaiman-esque entries... which sounds very fun to me!

Of course, "different strokes for different folks," I'd be okay with most anything.

I'm tentatively in.

I'll throw in when I can.

Oh yeah, shit, MYTHOS. Should get on that...

Also, this Lexicon thing is dope.

So we all agree on a decidedly dark Horror/Fantasy genre?

  My thoughts were that some event or cataclysm occurred in recent history and the Lexicon is the work of a man(or woman) attempting to 'make sense of it all' and to possibly bring some knowledge and learning into an otherwise dark world.
   Thoughts on this?

 

I'd encourage you to, like the thing suggested, to run it on the wiki, rather than as a thread.

I'm not sure how much I can participate in the actual thing but I'd be happy to help out with some of the wiki issues to keep the thing running smoothly.

Quote from: SarisaMy thoughts were that some event or cataclysm occurred in recent history and the Lexicon is the work of a man(or woman) attempting to 'make sense of it all' and to possibly bring some knowledge and learning into an otherwise dark world.

If all the entries are supposed to have been penned by the same character, how do we ensure a consistent style of writing? Or consistent bias regarding the things in the world for that matter? It might be easier and more fun for us if the lexicon was a patchwork of collected articles from various authors.

I'd also prefer this to be played on the forum, although we could still put copies into the wiki.

I'm into the dark fantasy type setting. Also, would prefer the forum, just as I've never really used the wiki before so it would be easier for me to stick with what I know :)

Either the wiki or the forum is fine by me, though if we have at least a portion on the forum I bet more people would participate.

I like the cataclysm/reconstruction idea.  What kind of apocalypse should it have been?  Technological?  Magical?  Metaphysical?

The forum makes the whole thing a little more disorganized, because it'll end up as a series of posts, rather than the intended encyclopedia. It also means citations, cross-links, etc., are not automatic.

Is there a good reason to do it on the forum?

QuoteThe basic idea is that each player takes on the role of a scholar, from before scholarly pursuits became professionalized (or possibly after they ceased to be). You are cranky, opinionated, prejudiced and eccentric. You are also collaborating with a number of your peers -- the other players -- on the construction of an encyclopedia describing some historical period (possibly of a fantastic world).

Lol, I don't even have to try on this one. :3

Quote from: limetom

Quote from: GhostmanIf all the entries are supposed to have been penned by the same character, how do we ensure a consistent style of writing? Or consistent bias regarding the things in the world for that matter? It might be easier and more fun for us if the lexicon was a patchwork of collected articles from various authors.

I'd encourage you to, like the thing suggested, to run it on the wiki, rather than as a thread.

I'm not sure how much I can participate in the actual thing but I'd be happy to help out with some of the wiki issues to keep the thing running smoothly.

  My plan sparkletwist was to do this thing on the forums for a few reasons.

ONE: new members would see we are quite active and might even GASP join in the community. This project would provide a quick way for some new members to jump right in and get a general feel for the community.

TWO: There is no sense in starting a bunch of wiki pages for a project that ultimately dies out after a month (save someone some work somewhere). My intention is to see this thing thru, and then port it over to the CBG wiki.

THREE: Many of us are more comfortable with the relatively basic coding on the threads and would find it easier/more casual to pop in an entry on the threads rather than the wiki.

  But if your up for helping us move entries over to the wiki after it is all said and done that would be most helpful.

 

 

QuoteONE: new members would see we are quite active and might even GASP join in the community. This project would provide a quick way for some new members to jump right in and get a general feel for the community.

TWO: There is no sense in starting a bunch of wiki pages for a project that ultimately dies out after a month[/quote]My intention is to see this thing thru, and then port it over to the CBG wiki.[/quote]THREE: Many of us are more comfortable with the relatively basic coding on the threads and would find it easier/more casual to pop in an entry on the threads rather than the wiki.[/quote]The whole exercise would be an excellent excuse for people to finally get familiar with the wiki. Syntax there is no more difficult than markup in a forum post, and in fact, many things (such as freely interlinking between a large number of interrelated articles, which is apparently a pretty important part of Lexicon), are so much easier to do on a wiki that it boggles the mind.

But the wiki just feels so far away.

Not to mention less interactive. It's not so immediately apparent over there who posted what content, any comments will be hidden in the "discussion" pages, and finding new additions through the "recent changes" interface is far less user friendly than checking the latest posts on the forum.

Not to mention that *I* for one only rarely visit the wiki, but read the forum pretty much daily. Can't help the feeling that content restricted to the wiki would end up having far less of an audience.

I've never used the wiki, but I'd be interested to get my feet wet, so to speak. Forum or wiki, I'll do either.

This is all getting pretty circular.

I have two CBG bookmarks: the main page, and the wiki's Recent Changes page. When I want to check the site, I visit both. (Yay, tabbed browsing!) It's not as if the Recent Changes page on the wiki is somehow less informative than the Latest Forum Posts window on the main page.

Recent Changes makes it immediately plain who posts what (and in the rare, rare event that multiple users are both editing a single page, and they're not signing their edits deliberately, you can still very easily check and see who has contributed every individual comma. Not hard to do.)

Recent Changes shows discussion pages along with all other
edits, and they're automatically much more seamlessly integrated with normal content than our pretty common practice of "discussion threads" vs. "setting threads" on the forums.

I have no idea what you mean by the wiki being "less interactive." In no way is that even the case.

Anyplace on the internet "feels far away" if you never go there. A lot of people seem to have a pretty self-defeating "I never check the wiki, because I never check the wiki" thing going on, and I feel that this prevailing attitude is unfortunate because of the way a key resource on this site is getting underused.

Look, we've got a platform easily available to all of us which is explicitly designed to facilitate multiple people working collaboratively on large projects (the wiki). We've got a really cool project (Lexicon) that requires multiple people working collaboratively, and which is explicitly designed to be done on a wiki. The wiki is pretty much ideally suited to the task at hand; I honestly don't see why "wiki or forums?" is even a topic for discussion in this case.

It's like, "I've got this drinking straw in one hand, and this pair of chopsticks in the other hand... now, what's the best way for me to consume this delicious milkshake?"

Ed: Look, I'm not trying to harp on anybody, really I'm not.

Honestly, I feel like a lot more people would use the wiki if they had more familiarity with it. A lot of the blocks to more regular wiki usage mentioned in this thread (people not being in the habit of checking it, people not being comfortable with navigating it, people not being comfortable with the wiki markup language) would disappear if more people used the wiki.

I think a group project like this would be a great way to gently introduce a lot of people to the wiki for the first time, and once they've got their feet wet, as Weave so eloquently puts it, they'd be a lot less adverse to doing more stuff on the wiki in the future. Lexicon is a great wiki icebreaker, and I'd be sort of bummed to see this project lose that potential to energize the wiki as a whole by hosting it on the forums instead.

Here's my suggestion.  We use the wiki to actually make the project.  We also have a thread on the forum to discuss the project, bounce ideas off one another, and bridge the gap to those who don't check the wiki frequently.  The wiki is the "in character" part of the project and the forum is the "out of character" part.  We'd informally exchange concepts for Lexicon on the forum, but actually play the game on the wiki.

Does that sound good to everyone?

That'd be precisely my ideal setup, personally.

Yeah I can agree with that Steerpike. Well said Luminous.

  Ghostman, I totally get the 'faraway' feeling from the wiki...I've looked at it only a handful of times. But this project might get us more involved over with it.
   Edit:  
Ive placed the forums/wiki issue in the first post of this thread on the Resolved Issue section. I hope this is cool with everyone...

Great! I'm looking forward to seeing what we can come up with.

Personally I'd go with a 1/week time frame.  It would then take us 6 months or so to get through the entire alphabet.

Some philosophies of this world to ponder...

   Ascension: Breakdown in relatively 'good' society and unleashing of teh 'bad' powers on the world. The archivists of the Lexicon offer up varying reasons for the ultimate fall and eventual Ascension of the evil. The society is reflected in the naming convention...they call it the Ascension instead of the Fall...they lean towards a positive or even inevitable/unchangeable outlook on things. I.e. it is what it is. Fate?

  Duality: Mortals are dual creatures. The physical and the spiritual/mystical.

  Life is hard. Death is worse. When you die thats it. No salvation or eternal glory. You pretty much suck mud and eat dirt.

  Thoughts?

I like the idea of a universe that's been colonized by the force of darkness, and the citizens have to just sort of shrug and move on.  Maybe domination by malevolent, indomitable powers has its unexpected perks as well as its obvious downsides?

Quote from: SarisaSome philosophies of this world to ponder...

I am good to go with whatever, although I'm not sure how much of this stuff needs to be explicitly decided here at the outset. (I assume, though, that the answer is "not much".) I'm pretty convinced that concepts like those will arise naturally as we all write our entries and riff off of each other.

QuoteAscension: Breakdown in relatively 'good' society and unleashing of teh 'bad' powers on the world. The archivists of the Lexicon offer up varying reasons for the ultimate fall and eventual Ascension of the evil. The society is reflected in the naming convention...they call it the Ascension instead of the Fall...they lean towards a positive or even inevitable/unchangeable outlook on things. I.e. it is what it is. Fate?

Life is hard. Death is worse. When you die thats it. No salvation or eternal glory. You pretty much suck mud and eat dirt
[/quote]
I think that is a bit limiting. IF these are scholars, I don't see why they couldn't differ on issues like this. Of the three Ideas, I am most against that one.

-
I'm more for the view of building an organic structure as LC suggested.

[blockquote=Light Dragon]I don't actually understand what you are saying here. There was a fall and now it's an ascension toward something good? Or do they think that evil ascended? It seems complicated.[/blockquote]I think the idea is that the "bad guys" won, but because the victors write the history books they term their coming-to-power an "Ancension," and the inhabitants of the world have been so beaten down that they don't consider rebellion an option, instead embracing a fatalistic sort of view, accepting their lot in life with a shrug.  While the archive entries might view the deeds of the "bad guys" with resignation - or even glorify their atrocities - an outside reader would be able to see the horror behind the layer of propaganda and complacency.  Is that the gist of it, Sarisa?

I may just through my hat in here too, kinda needing a break from Discworld and its cliche 80s fantasy troups, and dark fantasy i likey.

As far as the wiki, althought the issue seems settled, I was in the same boat as some (eewww the wiki part of the CBG, its far away and complicated) about a month ago, took me half an hour to do up my first page, and within a couple of days (with sparkles precision feedback) I had it figured out. I got two bookmarks for the CBG and wiki and open them both up now too like LC, starting to make me feel like its one site with two different member lists tho... In other words, as a someone who was just in the "Wiki? I'll pass" boat, come jump in the water! Its easier than i thought.

I like the multiple sources part the most. Maybe if some of the sources are pro-evil, some pro-good, some nostalgic neutral, and some optimistic neutral instead of generally accepting? Some call it ascension, some call it a change or new chapter, and some call it a catastrophy.

 "inhabitants of the world have been so beaten down that they don't consider rebellion an option, instead embracing a fatalistic sort of view," I cant imagine everyone feeling this way. Being beaten down to the point of non-rebellion/giving up is depression. Also anyone attached (benifited from) the old regime would want the old days back... even if there ok with the rampant sex, blood and subjecation (evil).

Hmm...Sorry guys I should clarify.

  The point of the Lexicon exercise is to get people to develop a scholar character, remain in that character and then make up a world as that character sees it-but keeping within the rules of scholarly honor.
 
  Steerpike, your right on with the fatalistic viewpoint assessment, albeit with clearer wording than I could have put forward.
 
   I suppose these are ideas that I'm throwing out there...Possible viewpoints for characters or the general inhabitants of the world. The other day I went to write my first article entitled "Ascension" and I realized how many things I would be cementing in the world with the first writ.
   
   Per Lightdragons view on the sucking mud and eating dirt-this is to supplement the fatalistic view that Steerpike so eloquently put it.
   
    Kaptn'Lath glad to have you on-board with this!

  The question remains for me ....how to start?

I think the "old world" (or whats still known about it anyways) and the "Event" should be a group thing. ie the first letter, make it short and too the point, but make it together.

So its looking more like a conquering than a destruction cataclysm? The big bad locked in the prision for eons finally broke free? Demons/Undead/Vampires using the mortal race(s) as food? The Gods literally fell from the sky and crashed on the world? dying gods release alot of energy you know. Some wizard in a tower finally went too far, like WAY to far? ummm any other ways for a world to end?

Quote from: Steerpike[blockquote=Light Dragon]I don't actually understand what you are saying here. There was a fall and now it's an ascension toward something good? Or do they think that evil ascended? It seems complicated.[/blockquote]I think the idea is that the "bad guys" won, but because the victors write the history books they term their coming-to-power an "Ancension," and the inhabitants of the world have been so beaten down that they don't consider rebellion an option, instead embracing a fatalistic sort of view, accepting their lot in life with a shrug.  While the archive entries might view the deeds of the "bad guys" with resignation - or even glorify their atrocities - an outside reader would be able to see the horror behind the layer of propaganda and complacency.  Is that the gist of it, Sarisa?

Ok. That sounds decent-a little complicated and not exactly my ideal setting, but I think I can work with that, maybe one entry or two. Thank you(!)

Quote from: Kaptn'LathI think the "old world" (or whats still known about it anyways) and the "Event" should be a group thing. ie the first letter, make it short and too the point, but make it together.

So its looking more like a conquering than a destruction cataclysm? The big bad locked in the prision for eons finally broke free? Demons/Undead/Vampires using the mortal race(s) as food? The Gods literally fell from the sky and crashed on the world? dying gods release alot of energy you know. Some wizard in a tower finally went too far, like WAY to far? ummm any other ways for a world to end?

  Yea pretty much...Instead look at this stuff:

[spoiler=Inspiration]
 One (http://macfantasie.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/kekai-kotaki_gw2_riven-earth.jpg)
 Two (http://fantasyartdesign.com/3dgallery/a-digital/3D-images/0612jgarrid/3d-dark-fantasy01.jpg)
 Three (http://www.tuomaskorpi.com/site/?p=15&i=95)
 Four (http://www.tuomaskorpi.com/site/?p=15&i=81)
 Five (http://www.tuomaskorpi.com/site/?p=15&i=128)
 Six (http://www.kirsisalonen.com/surrealism.htm)
 Seven (http://www.wallpaperbase.com/wallpapers/videogames/guildwars/guild_wars_7.jpg)
 
[/spoiler]
 


 

So basically build a standard fantasy setting, then break its spine, corrupt its soul, eat its kids, and leave it crying in a pool of its own blood and deficant?



I am in.

Lets take the "Marvel Zombies" approach. They did stuff to the marvel world fully expecting their boss would cut most of it out, saying they cant go that far. They kept all of it, and it is great. lets go ALITTLE adult.

Wait, so, basically... Midnight? Lol.

I'm still not sure if I'll participate in this, but I just wanted to say, about the suggestion that no-one's really into resisting the oppression or whatever... where's the fun in that? Where will conflict and tension come from if no-one is opposing the evilly evil Evil? Even if the opponents themselves are also evil, there should surely be some opponents, no?

I would prefer that we avoid introducing definite earthly "bad guys" as the cause of the changes in the world. I'd much rather if it was treated as a metaphysical event, like the opening of Pandora's box. I like the idea of an intangible, unnamable cosmic "evil" that's been slowly flooding the world, subtly influencing everything within it, gradually strenghtening elements sympathetic to it's nature and decaying elements antithetic to it's nature. Thus eg. the rise into power of any particular tyrant of the day, would simply be a manifestation of this unseen but everywhere-reaching influence - an effect rather than the cause of the problems.

Some advantages to this approach:

* The evil is universal. It's not particular to any one culture or philosophy, and effects the entire world.
* The manifestations can take virtually any form imaginable, and thus easily mesh with any local aesthetic. You could see vampiric warlords laying waste to one land, a monstrous jungle of flesh-eating flora overgrowing another, and a madness-inducing plague sweeping across a third - and they could

all be empowered by the same faceless cataclysm.
* The effects could also be mythical in feel, such as droughts, great floods, the wombs of the women becoming barren, the sun no longer rising, or all manner of vices settling in the hearts of men.
* Making the source of the troubles cosmic can keep it beyond the means of mortals to deal with. They cannot hope to stop it any more than they could hope to make death disappear.
* The intentional vagueness of the cause leaves it open for interpretation. While astrologers and the like may be able to identify that some horrendous doom has befallen the world, they might be unable to truly explain it. Scholars from different cultures and religions would then be likely to come up with very different theories about the nature of the disaster, and whether or not there is hope for better.[/list]

It might no longer make much sense to term it as "ascension", though.

Quote from: GhostmanI would prefer that we avoid introducing definite earthly "bad guys" as the cause of the changes in the world. I'd much rather if it was treated as a metaphysical event, like the opening of Pandora's box.

Some advantages to this approach:

* The evil is universal. It's not particular to any one culture or philosophy, and effects the entire world.
* The manifestations can take virtually any form imaginable, and thus easily mesh with any local aesthetic. You could see vampiric warlords laying waste to one land, a monstrous jungle of flesh-eating flora overgrowing another, and a madness-inducing plague sweeping across a third - and they could

all be empowered by the same faceless cataclysm.
* The effects could also be mythical in feel, such as droughts, great floods, the wombs of the women becoming barren, the sun no longer rising, or all manner of vices settling in the hearts of men.
* Making the source of the troubles cosmic can keep it beyond the means of mortals to deal with. They cannot hope to stop it any more than they could hope to make death disappear.
* The intentional vagueness of the cause leaves it open for interpretation. While astrologers and the like may be able to identify that some horrendous doom has befallen the world, they might be unable to truly explain it. Scholars from different cultures and religions would then be likely to come up with very different theories about the nature of the disaster, and whether or not there is hope for better.[/list]

It might no longer make much sense to term it as "ascension", though.

   I really like these ideas Ghostman!

so things just go to shit, and no one really knows why or how... i am sure there will be lots of theories from different letters, but leaving no official reason is good. We can work more on the world after and not really need to worry why or how. And lots of variation in effects which is good with this type of project.

Lets start the first week this Monday guys...as a sort of 'test' run. Write some articles...try to get into a comfortable persona-we'll see how it goes.

So...has this been started?

Quote from: Light DragonSo...has this been started?

 Sure. Test run letter "A"

  Apocraphili
  Apotheosis (spontaneous)
  Alaca (spell)
 
 er....

? So what exactly are we supposed to do? I admit that my understanding is sort of unclear about what to do. Are you intending that we write an entry based on the words that you list and mention other words in it that others can go off of? I saw the sites that you linked to in the first post, but admit that I am a bit confused. I admit that I seem to be confused a lot here, but considering that no one "started" on Monday it appears that others may also be a bit unclear about what has been decided to be done.

You are pretty much free to write whatever you want I was just throwing out some words for fun. Yes you are supposed to 'cite' articles that have not been written yet. At least two for other people to write at a later time. Sorry your confused, maybe interest in this has died?

We should get a new thread up for this (one that isn't called "pregame discussion") where the first post contains an introduction to the game (nailing down the genre and other necessary framework) and any up-to-date announcements (eg. on which alphabet is currently to be worked on, and when's the deadline for it). Of corse, we'll also need an index page for the wiki, which should be linked to from the new thread.

That should be the bare minimum to get this thing started...

I've taken the liberty of getting a bare minimum wiki setup started. Take a look: http://www.thecbg.org/wiki/index.php?title=Lexicon

Please feel free to go ahead and add pages. As long as each page you add begins with the following line:

{{Lexicon_Banner}}

...it will automatically be added to the auto-updating index of articles, and it will have the orange Lexicon navigation banner with links to the main page, the index, and the list of scholars.

(Please add your character name to the list of scholars, too. :yumm:)

I'll whip up a quick template we can all use to "sign" our articles, too.

Also, the site linked in the first post is down, but the wikipedia article for Lexicon (game) has the rules: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexicon_(game)

My "A" article is up: http://www.thecbg.org/wiki/index.php?title=Avarice_Vine_(Lexicon)

Note the {{Scholar}} template: you can use it to sign your pages. It works like this:

{{Scholar|YOUR NAME|YOUR COMMENT}}

The comment does nothing except append some quote of yours or saying or whatever you like to the box at the bottom of the page.

Your name becomes a link to your entry on the Scholars page, and I think I can work it out so that it also automatically includes your article in a special category, containing all the articles you have written.

Quote from: Kaptn'Lath"inhabitants of the world have been so beaten down that they don't consider rebellion an option, instead embracing a fatalistic sort of view," I cant imagine everyone feeling this way. Being beaten down to the point of non-rebellion/giving up is depression. Also anyone attached (benifited from) the old regime would want the old days back... even if there ok with the rampant sex, blood and subjecation (evil).

I completely agree with this Lath. There needs to be some texture to the world. If everyone accepts what is going on, then where is the opportunity for scholarly debate and/or dispute.

--
Note for nomadic- It's really unclear how to create a new page in the wiki (not just by following the empty links, but a page completely from scratch?) On most wikis I know there is a link on the left bar that says CREATE NEW ARTICLE. I don't see such a link on the CBG wiki. It's non-intuitive.

Posted an entry. http://www.thecbg.org/wiki/index.php?title=Ab_Men
The nefarious Ab-Men,  and menaces of Civilization.

Small issue though, linking to Ascension links to something else entirely--that has nothing to do with Lexicon.

And thanks again for setting up the very nice Wiki intro, LC!

I really like your "sources"; that makes it feel really awesomely real.

[note]What this does:

A link like {{L|Ascension}} will direct to a page called "Ascension (Lexicon)" if that exists, and if not, it will link to the page called "Ascension" as a fallback. The "Ascension" page lists all the pages called "Ascension" anywhere on the wiki-- currently just the one for Wake. When/If a page called "Ascension (Lexicon)" is created, the {{L|Ascension}} link will automatically point directly there.

The Magic page is a better example for study, because there are more "Magic (Whatever)" pages scattered around the wiki-- I have at least two all by myself.[/note]I have fixed the issue of the Ascension link. That will happen when multiple settings need to use the same word as a thread title (see also: the wiki page for "Magic"). Sparkletwist's fantastic link code takes care of it more or less automatically, as long as somebody (in this case, today, me) untangles the knot the first time.

Because of the autodisambiguating link code, you do need to make your links {{L|Like This}}, instead of [[Like This]]. I've changed the link formatting in your Ab-Men article to follow that guideline.

I wonder why you're linking not-yet-existing pages that start with A (Ab-Cess, Ascension, and Andromeda Strage). Since we're going through the alphabet in order, aren't the A pages ones that no one is ever going to go back and fill in?

>>I wonder why you're linking not-yet-existing pages that start with A (Ab-Cess, Ascension, and Andromeda Strage). Since we're going through the alphabet in order, aren't the A pages ones that no one is ever going to go back and fill in?

Perhaps I misunderstood, but I based my decision on two things:

1. People can write as many A articles this week as they feel like. Therefore, someone is free to use any of my A articles as jumping off points. In fact, having A articles may help people get started, since they don't have to begin from scratch. For example, I was only able to come up with an idea after seeing Sarisa's second picture prompt above.

2. We go thru the alphabet every 26 weeks and start back at A again, correct?

--
Re links: Okay, I'll do my best to write my links in that fashion in the future.

Thanks,
LD.

Those are certainly possibilities. I get the impression that "standard" Lexicon involves each participant writing exactly 26 articles-- one for each letter, and after we all do Z, it's finished. I suppose that whether we decide to wraparound to A again is up to the group (as are most things).

One of the nice things about a wiki is being able to edit each others' pages, so that we can all tweak each others' structure if there are formatting errors, spelling glitches, etc. So if you forget about the link formatting, some fastidious stickler (probably me) can always go back and implement it for you. (With a quick copy/paste into wordpad and two simple find/replaces, I can do the whole page in seconds.)

Luminous, can't thank you enough for setting all of that up.
Nice article LightDragon! Very glad to see my inspiration pic used. (that was one of my favorites)

I suppose if people want to write more than one article a week there is really no reason to make it against the rules.
I leave it to you fair and judging public of the CBG.

I've got my character started for use in the game...kind of bland-but I was intrigued to see my homeland (Westin) enslaved in the recent past by the Ab-men.
coool.

I must admit I'm a bit awkward with the wiki code but I think I can get the hang of it after a while.

Thanks again LC and LD.

Personally, I will restrain myself to one article per week, and see about making sure the various wiki issues run smoothly. If others want to make articles at a faster pace, I'm thrilled.

Sarisa, I'll set up a category page for your Scholar once you get your first A article up. (I don't want to set up a category that'll be empty.)

Now that Lexicon is actually going, do you think it's time to set up a new thread for it? One that's not "Pregame Discussion", that might hook a few more participants in and make it clear to everybody that it's time to start writing articles?

Posted my first entry, The Abariad (http://www.thecbg.org/wiki/index.php?title=Abariad%2C_The). I also post a copy here in a spoiler for your convenience. I'm assuming that we can treat any articles with names starting with 'the' as being alphabetically categorized by the first letter after the 'the'.

[spoiler=The Abariad]An ancient and obscure codex known in the occult circles by many names, but most commonly as the Abariad. It chronicles the queer and despotic reigns of the ur-kings of Abarion, that fabled city which some scholars believe to have cast it's accursed shadow upon the Plains of Gemen-Kol during archaic epochs beyond modern recall, but which certain disreputable sources interprete as a prophetic foretelling of terrors ahead in some unknown future.

Besides the endless litany of verses praising the strange and blasphemous deeds of the ur-kings and the lurid rites in fealty to their abominable gods, the opus is reputedly littered with scores of inscrutable riddles and lengthy passages invoking phantasmic vistas of otherwordly realms, simultaneously paradisiac and infernal in their character.

Most notoriously, secrets of awful and ineffable power are said to be wowen into that perplexing cascade of rime, craftily hidden but discernible to the keen eye of one who knows to search for it betwixt the lines. Where such temptation has led imprudent men to intense studies of this book over candle-lit hours into the night, a ghastly and disturbing influence has been observed to seep from those bedeviled pages into their very souls, transforming their personages in ways unwholesome.

Though each recorded case I have managed to enquire has been unique in the details of the apparent effect upon the reader, all have culminated in suicidal mania stemming from preternatural despair - as if the victim felt crushed beneath the burden of some dark revelation of incomprehensible enormity.

It is indeed fortuneous that few copies of the Abariad exist, as most civilized lands have wisely placed a strict ban upon it. A good thing too, that most of these surviving copies are likely to be classical translations in the old tongue of the Lumarians, no longer spoken or understood by people other than those of the scholastic vocation. But even this being so, I must doubt if it is well enough.

Through my past experiences scouring through various centres of learning and depositories of knowledge, I have regrettably witnessed the sorrowful state of librarianship to which much of the once-laudable scholarly world has fallen. Dusty and over-loaded shelves abound with time-worn, barely recognizable volumes, ill-organized and neglected. Demented old men who dare call themselves archivists are all too frequently unable to produce up-to-date catalogues of the contents of the very vaults they're tasked to maintain! With such audacious negligence, who knows what overlooked tomes lie forgotten amidst the myriad libraries of the world, awaiting accidental discovery by some impressionable young scholar who heeds not sound warnings about the dangers of forbidden knowledge?
[/spoiler]

Yeah, I'd absolutely call that an A article.

Actually, you might want to change the article name to simply "Abariad", to make it easier for other articles to link to this one. (Otherwise, you'd have to say: "I was leafing through my copy of {{L|Abariad,_The|The Abariad}} the other day..." to get it to display correctly.)

I see you've set up your category page and everything. Fantastic.

Luminous I'll make another thread for Lexicon with all kinds of relevant links and official looking stuff. Which section of the forums should that be in?

Roleplaying forum, don't you think?

Say, for my Ab-Men article, how would I go about changing its title so that it has the hyphen. I didn't realize that was possible until I saw ghostman's link to ur-men.

Quote from: Light DragonSay, for my Ab-Men article, how would I go about changing its title so that it has the hyphen. I didn't realize that was possible until I saw ghostman's link to ur-men.

To retitle a page, go to that page and click the "Move" tab at the top. It will move the contents of that page to a blank page with the new title.

The old page will become a redirect page pointing to the new page.

Thank you. That worked.

Also, I couldn't help myself but I wanted to do a tie in with Ghostman's Abariad: http://www.thecbg.org/wiki/index.php?title=Aadamite It's a small nod, but one nonetheless.

Quote from: Luminous CrayonActually, you might want to change the article name to simply "Abariad", to make it easier for other articles to link to this one. (Otherwise, you'd have to say: "I was leafing through my copy of {{L|Abariad,_The|The Abariad}} the other day..." to get it to display correctly.)

I'm keeping the current article name, but I've set both "Abariad" and "The Abariad" to automatically redirect to it. That should ensure that links work without tweaking.