Talk:Villains and Vigilantes

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Villains and Vigilantes article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

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.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

untitled[edit]

The article should definitely mention that in V&V you played yourself, as that sets it apart from most other games. If I remember correctly, it worked like that: You (in real life) are the "secret identity" of the superhero you play, so character generation is "guessing yourself" plus adding superpowers.

A mechanics sections should be added, summarizing the playing style of V&V. I'm sure a lot of readers would be interested, besides myself.

Added a note about the self-character bit as well as a note about the difficult self-assessment of characteristics (I never did figure out how you were supposed to form a game out of people who all had differing ideas of humility. It's just an invitation for someone to cause a fight by overestimating himself)24.165.210.213 15:03, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk Page Cleanup[edit]

There appears to have been a fair amount of fighting over this article, resulting in it being stuck in a very small, incomplete state. Just cleaned out a bunch of information from the talk page that relates to content no longer present, or issues no longer important.

I've begun some restructuring work and will try to gather source data and put together at least a decent starting point to get us on the way towards the next class. FraterNLST (talk) 10:08, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Features of the Game[edit]

Someone with a copy of the game should probably discuss in more detail:

1. Major features of the game:

    a. playing "yourself" with superpowers.
    b. random superpower generation
    c. The ability to have "ad hoc" superpowers
    d. The combat system

2. Proliferation of game adventures ("modules"), and the DNAgents licensed sourcebook.

3. Legal status (FGU vs. creators) from the late 80's until now.

4. Jeff Dee's Living Legends game as an unofficial successor.

Also, the Crisis in Crusader's Citadel module information should probably be pared down. Aside from being sold as part of the boxed set, it really doesn't warrant as much space as is devoted to it.

70.96.253.30 16:58, 5 April 2006 (UTC)Chefmark[reply]

Sourcing problems with the article and other edits[edit]

I've recently had a complaint at OTRS about the material in this article. In looking at it, most of it did not have a reference provided and in more than one place, the reference provided was a forum or a copy of a press release, neither of which are considered reliable sources, especially for disputed information. So, in trying to clean up the article to meet Wikipedia policies, I added a few high quality sources, removed information that didn't have a source (and I couldn't immediately find one) and cleaned up the external link section.

For some reason, these changes were reverted wholesale without fixing the problems - it certainly doesn't make sense that removing two high quality sources would be an improvement to the article. If anyone has concerns over the changes in the article, I would be happy to talk about them or discuss Wikipedia's rules for article content. I understand there is also a real world dispute over the ownership of this game; anyone involved in that may wish to review Wikipedia's guidelines on editing with a conflict of interest. Shell ^babelfish 02:14, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes there is a dispute about the ownership, and one of the owners is posting about it and we've gone and edited it out so that there is no POV in the piece at the expense of it being entirely inaccurate. I've reviewed the edits and while not perfect, they were quite a bit better than what we had on the page presently. 151.213.88.93 (talk) 11:57, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

V&V Publisher - Sources[edit]

Shell, I emailed you a list of many sources - not just press releases - indicating that my company, Monkey House Games, is now publishing V&V. If somebody would please update this page with acceptable sources to support this fact, that would be great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffreyalandee (talk • contribs) 14:07, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

Some of these 'references' just point back to Wikipedia articles. Neils51 (talk) 15:11, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]