Talk:Generic role-playing game system

message: Generic Systems is a well written article that seems to cover exactly the grounds of this article. I think Generic role-playing game system is a better name (since it has "role-playing game" in it, which I think is important), but both articles say good things. I propose to merge the first into this second. GRuban 17:30, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm kind of reluctant, for one simple reason: this seems a much poorer article than the former and the two contradict each other on several points. It might better for both articles to be discarded and a new article written on the subject.Michael Hopcroft 05:37, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge from [[Generic Systems]] and [[Multi-genre role-playing game]] 

message: The RPG Article lead box was removed from this article on 10 May 2006.  May I ask why?  While this is not one of the RPG articles listed in the box, does that invalidate it as a candidate for the inclusion of the box? The Bearded One 19:19, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pretty much, yes.  It's a template for navigation among the articles listed on it. Percy Snoodle 14:29, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  RPG Article 

message: I must dispute the term "Generic" role playing system. Although GURPS and simialar game systems claim to be generic, they are in fact Proprietary and can only used in game publications under licence. I think this article is misleading and needs to be rewritten. --Gavin Collins (talk) 11:33, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There are several meanings of generic, and non-proprietary isn't the one used in the term "generic role-playing game".  Rather, it means that the game isn't tied to a specific genre.  This usage comes from GURPS.  I don't think your mistake is a common one; as the financial sense of "generic" would probably occur first only to those with a financial or pharmaceutical background, and since the lead section explains what it does mean quite clearly I don't think any change is needed.  Percy Snoodle (talk) 11:40, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the term that's used in this hobby to refer to this type of game. The article is not misleading and does not need to be rewritten. Rray (talk) 13:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

text: For that matter, you can also use many (if not most or all) of these systems in games of your own in any setting you like without needing a supplement specifically for it. I've run games set in Iain M Banks's Culture setting using GURPS and Elizabeth Moon's Familias Regnant setting using Silhouette. I didn't do anything strange, much less illegal, in doing so. SamBC(talk) 19:31, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Disputed

message: Is "Generic" an appropriate term for a role-playing game system that is licenced, as described in the above section? BOZ (talk) 17:44, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, I should have given this a different header than the previous section. :) BOZ (talk) 17:49, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey BOZ, if you check out the history of this page, you'll see that there has already been one RfC on this already.  That's the reason for the first section having this same title.  I don't really think that another RfC is warranted.  But the answer to your question is "yes, I think generic is appropriate" (provided, of course, it is a generic system).  I don't think there is any conflict in an RPG being both "generic" and "proprietary" (such as is the case with, say, the Hero system, BRP, which has been licensed, or something like Unisystem which, as I understand it, is completely "in-house" in the sense that it's only been used for games published by Eden Studios, Inc.).  --Craw-daddy | T | 00:30, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Unisystem is a licensed system. Only CJ Carella owns it, Eden publishes unde an exclusive license, other companies have published undera sub-license (for example Misfit Studios). More refs for "generic" are coming. Web Warlock (talk) 00:34, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, my bad.  Yeah, now that you reminded me I remember something to this effect.  :)  Thanks.  --Craw-daddy | T | 00:35, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No worries. Not that it is even THAT important to this discussion save that the varieties of games are far more complex than say your "average" person understands. Web Warlock (talk) 00:37, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

text: D'oh!  I had no idea, because the lightbulb thingy was gone. :) BOZ (talk) 12:25, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Generic an appropriate term for a role-playing game system that is licenced?