Talk:The Dark Eye

People of Aventuria

Started to flesh out and correct the section, but forgot the Edit summary, sorry. Furthermore, how big should this article become? I'm a fan, and i'm German, so i might have bigger insight than many of you, and i would like to write here from time to time, but only if it's wanted 129.13.72.197 (talk) 00:03, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, Elves don't have nations, but maybe i didn't choose the right word. They cann be associated into 4 groups, so maybe people is a better word than folks? 129.13.72.197 (talk) 16:44, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Realms of Arkania

ahm, Cdang RoA belongs to the 3rd Edition not the 2nd, if you had played any of the computer games you'd noticed that a character had 7 positive and 7 negative stats. noctrun (09:58, 14 March 2006 87.123.223.234)

Well, I trusted an anonymous edit on fr:, I think it was the guy is Alpha Ursae Minoris (who corrected the number of spells, see below). As the edit seemd very consistent, I thought the person knew very well the topic.

Sorry for this.

cdang|write me 09:24, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Sword Masters: 1st edition, not 2nd

"Second edition — The Sword Masters

In 1988 and [1989]] were published two sets, called DSA-Professional — Schwertmeister Set I ("TDE Professional — Sword Master Set I") and DSA-Professional II — Das Fest der Schwertmeister ("TDE Professional II — The Sword Master Feast"). This edition was published as advanced rules for the first edition, but is usualy refered to as the second edition.

It was written for advanced level characters (typically 15th level characters). The sets describe a new world, Tharun (pronunced "taroon"), a hollow world: it is the inside of Ethra, lightened by a central sun. The sets also provide an epic campaign, a divine quest.

Tharun was abandonned and no further publication refere to it."

The Sword Masters is in noway the second édition. They both were released in 1988. But they aren't the same at all!

Sword Masters are the avanced rules set of the 1st edition.

Rohal

That's the way Wikipedia works. You see an error, you correct it. No use to be rude. Thanks for your help.

cdang|write me 20:28, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Oops, sorry my friend, really, I didn't mean to be rude.I'm just awkward when speaking english sometimes. I just didn't realize my tone might sound offensive. Sorry again!

It's OK. The "Get informed!" that seemed too much for me was removed... By the hand of Boron maybe ?

cdang|write me 15:29, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Come on, of course it was removed by me. :lol: I thought that went without saying

No use to be sarcastic ;) the removing wasn't made out of some intellectual dishonesty or something (if that's what you believe) but rather out of consideration for you... really!

After your comment I read back mine and realized it could indeed sound offensive the way it was written, whereas I actually wanted to say

something like "in case you would doubt what I'm saying, just check by yourself" (implying that a verified information might appear even more reliable if found by yourself) that's what the "get informed" comment basically meant, but certainly not something like "you're such an ignorant, son" or something as I realized it could sound like. So I removed it.Really I just was awkward and hurry when writing it. English isn't my mother tongue...

How many spells in the 2nd edition?

I saw your edits on The Dark Eye article and that your edits created an inconsitency. Which of 11×11 and the earlier over two hundred is correct? I haven't played the game.

"A character also features over eighty skills, called "talents" (the use of a talent requires testing three attributes) and if the character is able to cast spells over two hundred spells (11×11)." - Jeltz talk 18:40, 2 March 2006 (UTC) (on user talk:cdang)

Yes, you're right, I didn't notice.

The 11×11 was picked from fr:, and was written by an editor who seems to know very well the topic (the problem is that those editions were never published outside Germany).

I'll ask him to write his explainations on the talk:The Dark Eye. It would be interesting to have the point of view from the editor who wrote "more than two hundred".

cdang|write me 20:28, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi guys,

concerning the question about the number of spells in the second edition, there is no doubt: I can assure you the number of spells was basically 121.

The "11 x 11 spells" is even a distinctive and famous element of the 2nd edition.

By the way the rule book 2(the spell book) from the 2nd ed. box Die Magie des Schwarzen Auges was even titled " Das große Buch der elf mal elf magischen Formeln (Regelbuch II)” ( "the big book of the eleven x eleven magical spells")

However let’s specify one thing: back to the time the limitations between the editions weren't that distinct as it is today and this very box could be used as a large extension to the first edition rules as well.

Greetings

Fred

Alpha Ursae Minoris 22:50, 10 March 2006

Beginner's RPG?

In Germany, Das Schwarze Auge was seen as a beginner's role-playing game for a long time, from which people would move on to systems with more freedom in character creation and more sophisticated combat systems (this might have changed with the release of the fourth edition). Was this view also prevalent internationally?

CohenTheBavarian, 17:59, 30 May 2006

In France too. The basic rules of the 1^st edition are very simple, and very, very well explained with a lot of examples. The adventures contain a lot of sections the GM can read to the player. The first adventures are design for non-magician characters so the players are not obliged to read all the rules. Etc.

In France, there were two similar editions (different only by the book size), one was by Schmidt France (Schmidt Spiele), the other one by the publisher of the Fighting Fantasy with the obvious aim to drag the gamebooks (young) players; the adventures were presented as usual gamebooks.

cdang|write me 17:41, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Mobile Adventure

Why is there no mention of The Dark Eye Mobile Adventure series?

IrnBru001, 03:12, 20 July 2006

Please create the section if you have any informaiton about this.

cdang|write me 17:43, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:TDE.png

Image:TDE.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:44, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Vinsalt link in the german link part should be deleted

This site is very outdated and the link should be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.140.72.87 (talk) 11:34, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

understandable

I seriously doubt everybody knows what a d6 or d20 ist --84.158.232.137 (talk) 10:59, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Fixed with a reference to dice notation on things like 1d6+7, etc. 79.79.75.132 (talk) 21:41, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

character information

no more up-to-date. Since 2002(?), 4th edition, hero attribute and skill values are no longer rolled. A point-buy system has been introduced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.181.120.204 (talk) 22:37, 5 April 2010 (UTC)