Talk:Unisystem

	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.

Discussion

From what I can gather, Unisystem is a rip off of Mike Pondsmith's Interlock. Am I mistaken? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.251.154.24 (talk • contribs) January 9, 2007.

You are mistaken. They have no more similarities than Interlok and GURPS have. Web Warlock 04:10, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, upon closer examination is a very efficient hybrid of Interlock and GURPS. I mean, you have to admit it is derived from them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.251.154.24 (talk • contribs) January 11, 2007.

From GURPS maybe, as CJ Carella worked on GURPS books prior to building Unisystem. Interlok is a GURPS derived game as well. So they have similar elements (point builds, emphasis on skills and the like) for the same reason languages are related to a root language. Also it is custom to sign ones edits. Anonymous edits are not given much weight or credit. Web Warlock 11:47, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have much more reason to believe that a great deal of Unisystem is, without any wrongdoing, a symplification of my own unpublished "Glory Road Roleplaying System." I believe that because C.J. often ran campaigns where one set of rules merged into the other. I know _that__ because I played in them. He used the Glory Road system for playtesting settings that he developed for other systems. And then he would playtest them again using the system they were designed for. Then he came up with the Unisystem. My intellectual property rights were not violated because I was there all the time, encouraging him and making suggestions. I certainly have used ideas from Unisystem in my Glory Road campaigns since then. Will in New Haven —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.79.173.135 (talk) 17:50, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This page is actually for discussion of the article. It's not a general forum to chat about Unisystem in general. Accusing the game of being a "ripoff" of anything would be highly inappropriate here anyway, unless there's a reliable source and you're interested in adding this information to the article. Rray (talk) 18:23, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't have said anything except for the preceding comments. Where were you in January when the "rippoff" comment was made. Will in New Haven —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.79.173.135 (talk) 19:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure where I was in January, but it looks like I wasn't watching this particular page at the time. :) Rray (talk) 21:36, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Classic versus Cinematic

Should the page also mention the two flavors of Unisystem (classic versus cinematic) and maybe touch on the differences some? Tgemma 18:39, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great idea! Web Warlock 20:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External Links

I added a link to the Unisystem page at Eden Studios and the interview with CJ Carella

Notability Disputed

I dispute that the Unisystem rules (ISBN 9781891153679) are notable, as the the sources cited are not reliable enough to meet the requirements of WP:BK or any other notability guidelines. --Gavin Collins (talk) 14:17, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding templates indiscriminately serves no benefit. It seems that you know you'd lose an AFD, so you added this tags because it's something you can make stick without need for consensus. A quick look at your own talk page shows that you are not doing this in good faith, though I would much rather prefer to assume that. Adding it in again will be taken as vandalism.

Kairos (talk) 14:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is not even the correct book. Since you can't support your claim with proper research the tag is being removed. Web Warlock (talk) 14:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good work removing the incorrectly placed template, and thanks. Just to clarify, the notability template should be used when a topic has unclear notability. Other templates address lack of sourcing. (Refimprove and unreferenced are two templates that might apply to an article with reference issues.) Rray (talk) 15:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The notability tag has not been placed there as a precursor to AFD. It is my observation that this article is about the Unisystem, a system of rules based on....? This article is not very clear on this point. My view is that Unisystem is a set of rules covered in several books [1][2], although this article does not mention them. As a consequence, the article talks about other games and their notability, but evidence of notability of the game system itself seem missing. I admit to be no specialist in this field, but I do think this article is both missing reference to the source books on which it is based, and secondary sources specifically relating to these books and hence the rule system itself.--Gavin Collins (talk) 17:44, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does not mention them? Second sentence reads: "It is used in All Flesh Must Be Eaten,[1] the Buffyverse role-playing games, CJ Carella's WitchCraft, Conspiracy X (2nd Ed.),[2] and several other games." Web Warlock (talk) 17:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I read that too, but there is no mention of the origin of the rule system itself, which may be the baisis of these games, dending on where the rule books came first or after. --Gavin Collins (talk) 17:56, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep reading then. "Unisystem was developed by C.J. Carella for the first editions of his WitchCraft[5] and Armageddon role-playing games," Web Warlock (talk) 18:25, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

These are citations from RPG.net, which is not classed as a reliable source. In that article, there is not mention of source of this statement. Can you be sure this is true? --Gavin Collins (talk) 22:25, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this not "classed" as reliable source? Rray (talk) 22:55, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can I be sure? Of course I can, beyond a shadow of a doubt, I know this system and it's history inside and out. RPGNet is a good resource. Web Warlock (talk) 23:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"The notability tag has not been placed there as a precursor to AFD." is true, though what I stated was that it was placed there instead of AfD. Can everyone else in this subject please check out Gaven Collins talk page. This isn't the only article he has done this too.Kairos (talk) 05:21, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the source cited so far, none of them are actually about Unisystem per se. Perhaps if I go throught the references one by one, perhaps this issue will become clearer. --Gavin Collins (talk) 08:32, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond Human

I removed the reference to Beyond Human, I would like see it published but the relaease date is in "to be announced" status for many year.--Moroboshi (talk) 12:06, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]