Talk:Legend of the Red Dragon

Cleaning up and expanding

Alright, I've been working on and cleaning up this article and well, due to an upcoming change in version 4.07 (as noted here), the weapons and armor are going to become editable. The reason I note this is that someone has done a full list of both in the article. For now, I am going to delete the list, replacing it instead with a note about the upcoming change. Eric42 03:52, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Celebrities

Wow! We've had both Seth Robinson and Micheal Preslar here at Wiki editing this entry. For those who don't know (and thus, never read the actual entry), Seth Robinson is the creator of the game and Micheal Preslar is the current maintainer. Quite nifty actually.

Actually, this is a problem. Before today this article contained many sections which were either POV, software documentation, or arguably self-promotional in nature. Please review Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not -- it is highly problematic for either the original creator of LORD or for its current maintainer to contribute to this article without it becoming biased or unencyclopedic. While I deeply appreciate the contributions that Robinson and Preslar have made to the LORD software (and indeed to the history of bulletin board systems), it is not appropriate for them to contribute to this article. --G0zer 10:16, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Can you point to any particular change which is attributable to Michael or Seth that exhibits the sort of problems you describe? --Hawke666 00:59, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm mostly referring to the addition of unverifiable claims about future versions of the software. —ptk✰fgs 01:07, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Memories

Oh, corks! I remember this game. The twelve levels, the ShadowStormWarrior, the armor and weapons, scribbling in the Dark Cloak Tavern, using the fairy to pick the lock...has it been so long? I only have the most fleeting of memories of LORD. Evidently, some people are still selling it (?!). I'm surprised that the original is not freely available, or else I would have downloaded it straightaway and run it on dosemu. --Ardonik 18:41, 2004 Aug 4 (UTC)

---

Lord was a very special doorgame, in a very special time.

I met friends while playing lord, that i still have today.

It probably goes without saying that lord was the most successful doorgame of all time [in many aspects].

-oblivious-

Unfortunately, 24.209.116.148, your recent edits have completely ravaged this article. Instead of cleaning up its content, you removed most of it, turning the article back into a stub. I'm going to revert your change

and put a cleanup tag on the top of the article.

(doesn't look like cleanup is necessary; the article looks okay to me, if a little rough around the edges.) --Ardonik.talk()^* 15:37, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

---

i'm sorry you feel that way ardonik, but having played the doorgame since 1992, i felt that preslar's recent additions to the entry were extremely biased and 'chocked full' of redundant content.. ie:pasting the entire weapon/armor/etc lists...

i was also unhappy about him slamming the igms[in game modules] which really made the l.o.r.d doorgame so very interesting and popular! without them, all you could do is visit the forest, kill something there, kill sleeping players, goto the bank..buy new weapons and armor.... not much to it, if you want to play it more than once! :D

but i sort of agree with you, i did chop out a bit too much, i was feeling a little bit guilty and i loaded up the wayback machine, and i was going cut and paste the original here... but i see you reverted the article, so all is well..

sometimes i let my anger get the best out of me... l.o.r.d was a great way to meet people in my area, and we had a lot of fun. i feel bad that it's developement has been taking over by someone that i truly believe does not care about the project. [sorry z, that's the way other lord lovers and i've really felt about it all along]

---

Dont care about the game? I care about it a lot more than anyone could ever realize. Something else that a lot of people dont realize is that I have a family and a dayjob that both take priority over my hobby programming. Lord does, and always will, hold a special place in my heart, but paying my bills, and spending time with my 1.5 year old son are more important to me right now.

But for those that are wondering. 4.07 dos/win32/nix are very close to being done. It all depends on beta testing. People that run the binaries never report problems. (I'll leave one in on purpose just to see if theyre paying attention).. So really. Once I know that they game is as bug free as I can make it for now, it will be released.

Michael

---

I too have memories of playing LORD. It was back in the time when MBNet (MikroBitti's BBS) still ran on a telephone-based system instead of the Internet. So I set my modem to dial to the BBS and played LORD. I remember being quite an irritating newbie at it... JIP | Talk 08:28, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

where to download and play the game

http://lord.lordlegacy.com/downloads/ is the download site on Michael's website. Also on Michael's website at http://lord.lordlegacy.com/converse.php is a link to a place where you can play the game!

Most bbses have this excellent doorgame installed. Here's some bbs lists and bbs related sites to get you started:

thebbs.org:THE largest bbs related site (l.o.r.d author is involved with operators)

Synchronet BBS software's networked bbs list (updated daily)

The BBS Corner's telnet bbs list (over 400 listings but not all have L.O.R.D.)

Over 100 Telnettable BBSs with registered L.O.R.D. John Elson★3Dham★ WF6I A.P.O.I. 22:43, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Legend of the Green Dragon

What happened to the Legend of the Green Dragon article? I can't find any deletion logs or any evidence that it even existed. X-Kal 07:50, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh. COuld we start a new one? It's a popular game, after all. 124.189.211.26 (talk) 22:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Aha, someone replied! There used to be one that was deleted, due to a lack of notability. Unfortunately, I can't seem to get a firm enough understanding of Wikipedia's policies to know more detailed reasons than that, and I would fear that the new article would be deleted faster than I can say "create new article." Perhaps someone more experienced in Wikipedia could help me work on how to get the article back, and how to change it so that it stays? It is certainly notable enough - it just needs to meet guidelines and policies. X-Kal (talk) 08:26, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

That'd be because the people that run wikipedia are idiots. More people (nowdays) have probably heard of LotGD over LotRD, but who cares? as long as it makes sense to the 5 or so people in charge, what does it matter what 5000 odd people think? Wikipedia is a free range website for all ideas and good things? bollocks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.0.217.95 (talk) 04:25, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

There is a big article in the german wikipedia (de:Legend of the Green Dragon), a wiki that is known for quick deletion of everything that is not relevant enough. The green dragon should also be relevant enough for the english wikipeda (no, it isn't a german game). However, this shouldn't be decided by somebody judging by the very similar name, that the games are nearly identical, which is nonsense. I am a native speaker of german, but I have not enough insight in the topic to re-create the article Legend of the Green Dragon. By the way, I found out about this issue beeing forwared from the green dragon to the red one, without even mentioning the green dragon in the introduction. --JonnyJD (talk) 14:45, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually, there is a quite good version here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Legend_of_the_Green_Dragon&oldid=168365447 I just don't have the time now to argue the relevancy. --JonnyJD (talk) 11:59, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Legend_of_the_Green_Dragon_(second_nomination) the LoGD article was supposed to be merged into this one. I think anyone should feel free to add a LoGD section to this article, but don't recreate an article just for it. PuerExMachina (talk) 19:18, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I'll gladly merge any LoGD information that can be attributed to an independent, reliable source (WP:V). Marasmusine (talk) 19:49, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

It is pretty obvious that it is notable enough to justify a separate article, and a link from this article "see also" , not merely a section within this article. The game is quite different from LORD, and it has to be so that it doesn't violate any LORD copyrights. You'll note that Kool-Aid and Flavor Aid have separate articles even though they are essentially the same thing, just made by different companies. LOGD and LORD are different not only in name but in game play as well and are made by different people. There is far more difference between LOGD and LORD than between Kool-Aid and Flavor Aid! Note also that TLORD and WTLORD are variations authorized the original author and have similar gameplay, whereas the game play of LOGD is deliberately different because it was neither written nor authorized by the original author and it has to be substantially different for legal reasons. John Alan Elson★ WF6I A.P.O.I. 21:48, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

External Links

While I understand that privately-run "unofficial" servers are totally legal, I do question the placement of links to unofficial servers in the Wikipedia article. I'm not sure if there is an "official" LORD site to use, but in terms of LotGD, I think we should remove all except the real deal, unless someone highly objects to this. X-Kal (talk) 05:37, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

---

i think your understanding of l.o.r.d and how it works is a bit off, x-kal. lord does not run on one official server, a consumer purchases it and then runs it on their system.

the official lord site IS http://lord.lordlegacy.com

i totally agree with you regarding the posting of links. there are several hundred systems that host the game l.o.r.d and posting links to Systems is really not acceptable or necessary Bbsjoey (talk) 22:40, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, because otherwise, I'd post a link to Improbable Island, which is a very not official LotRD spinoff. It's a Green Dragon-based clone. While it's a unique variation, it doesn't belong in the links. :cool: 71.196.246.113 (talk) 05:49, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Open-source status of Legend of the Green Dragon

Due to the recent revert, I feel that I need an explanation as to why Legend of the Green Dragon is no longer open source. The license agreement requires that all source code of the software and third-party modifications be available upon request, and it is publicly available at the modding community's site, http://dragonprime.net - since when did Creative Commons and open source negate each other? X-Kal (talk) 06:46, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Creative Commons is not definitely open source or free, since it includes even licenses which prohibit modification (or only minor modifications, like CC Sampling+) and commercial use at the same time.

See Open source, Open source software and item 1 of the definition[1].

--AVRS (talk) 11:31, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Check, check, check. Legend of the Green Dragon fits all criteria listed in the definition, and upon skimming the other two articles, it seems to fit those, too. What about this specific software appears that it's not open-source, then? The Creative Commons licenses have variations that allow for closed-source projects, for projects that do not allow modifications and derivations, but also do seem to have room for open-source projects such as this one. You're citing that it's possible to prohibit modifications under certain variations of the Creative Commons license, but this instance doesn't even have that kind of restriction. The *only* thing I might come up with is that the Creative Commons by-nc-sa license prohibits commercial use - "You may not exercise any of the rights granted to You in Section 3 above in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation." If that's it, I don't think that's enough to revoke it's open source status. If there's something else going on, I'm clearly missing it. X-Kal (talk) 07:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

OSD criterion (sp?) #1 is what I mean — the software must be sellable royalty-free as a part of an aggregate distribution. Also criterion #6: “may not restrict the program from being used in a business” --AVRS (talk) 10:16, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Removal of notability tag

Removed the notability tag, as it was most likely placed by someone who never used BBSes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.3.119.155 (talk) 09:20, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I have re-added the notability tag, as the article still does not explain how this game meets the general notability guideline. Marasmusine (talk) 10:04, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia idiocy

I love how wikipedia claims to be the sum total of all human knowledge, yet for some reason pursues an endless quest to remove all knowledge. This game is notable. Ask ANYONE who has ever used a BBS in the 1990's, they will know what LORD is. I'm sorry if all the publications from back then are practically impossible to find now, and I'm sorry that BBS's flew under the mainstream radar for a long time, but it's notable, and the notability tag will only lead to one thing: deletion. I've seen it a hundred times. To those of you who keep putting the tag on, you're destroying wikipedia. So go ahead and keep deleting articles, you're only ruining the site. And yet somehow the thousands of unsourced pokemon pages remain... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.251.160.34 (talk) 01:45, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

If it's notable, then WP:PROVEIT. Notability and Verifiability are inclusion criteria on Wikipedia. This means that every article must be based on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, whether or not the subject's notability is blatantly obvious to you or anyone else. And for what it's worth, I used BBSs in the 1990s and I've never heard of this game. Anyone else feel like reverting? I don't want to run afoul of WP:3RR. Wyatt Riot (talk) 05:39, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Removing the notability template is harmful to the article, as it means that it's less likely that someone will add a citation to one of the "publications from back then". Also note that "word of mouth" isn't a notability criteria, and no-one is currently thinking of taking the article to deletion discussion. Would you prefer the less-harsh Template:Importance. ? Marasmusine (talk) 18:20, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Platforms

The article states "The software is compatible with DOS, Microsoft Windows, and OS/2." - yet later in the article it is mentioned that an extension was being made first for Amiga. A quick search on Google and I find information about Robinson having indeed released an Amiga version. Does anyone with more definite knowledge feel like adding which platforms it was made available for? 87.157.44.134 (talk) 11:53, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Single female players giving birth

Although it doesn't happen often, single female players do sometimes give birth, though male players they've flirted with don't get any children that way. John Elson★3Dham★ WF6I A.P.O.I. 22:38, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

WTLORD features incorporated into DOS L.O.R.D.? *not*

Robinson was impressed with this port and used some of its features in later releases of LORD. Though the reference does actually say that I would like to know what, if any, features from WTLORD were incorporated into DOS L.O.R.D. My FAQ highlights differences between the two and also notes the fact that several features of DOS L.O.R.D are missing in WTLORD (such as Olivia and Jennie codes).

Olivia herself was an advertisement for a 3rd party IGM called "Wizardstone" which never came out and at least one game feature, the Blackjack game, was from that IGM, but I have yet to come across a feature from WTLORD that was incorporated into DOS L.O.R.D. John Elson★3Dham★ WF6I A.P.O.I. 20:20, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Since there is no discussion on this it would appear that there is little interest, but I have done further research and believe it is time this was changed. To make this discussion better organized I will present it as "points"

1. The source given is an article in an online magazine and although parts of it appear to be based on an actual interview, containing quotes from Robinson, much of it appears to be from memory, and is thus no more authoritative than a blog entry from a seasoned veteran player. The statement in question in particular, gives no references and seems to have come out of thin air.
2. The statement is way too vague and is not elaborated on. Though it says "several features" it doesn't name the features or even give a single example.
3. The actual statement in the article is: "The second was written by Joe Marcelletti in 1996 for Wildcat BBS systems. Marcelletti's implementation was so good that Robinson ended up using some features from it in his next version." Version 3.55 came out on 12/17/95, with the Olivia and the men/maidens in distress events already included. WTLORD didn't come out until 1996, so no feature in that version could have come from WTLORD. The next version produced by Robinson was version 4.0.
4. The only new feature (aside from tweaks and bug fixes) in 4.0 is the Black Jack game event which came from the never released IGM "Wizard Stone" The statement by Robinson on this is: Took a REALLY nice BlackJack game that Shawn Teal made for his IGM Wizardstone (he has scrapped the IGM since) and made it a random event in LORD. I recolored some stuff to make the color scheme fit and changed a few small things in it.
5. The only other version produced by Robinson after WTLORD was released was 4.0a, the last Robinson version, which contained no new features aside from tweaks and bug fixes. So the only new feature introduced by Robinson after the release of WTLORD was the blackjack game which Robinson himself attributes to Wizardstone, not WTLORD. In fact, the game docs don't even mention WTLORD, let alone credit it for inspiring new features.
6. The next version after 4.0a was 4.02, which was not written by Robinson, but by Michael Preslar as were all subsequent versions.

Thus we can see that, aside from being poorly sourced and vague, the statement is demonstrably false. Accordingly, it will be deleted. John Alan Elson★ WF6I A.P.O.I. 16:38, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Note that the article only says "next version" it doesn't say next version what! It entirely possible that the article was referring to the next version of TLORD rather than the next version of LORD, since TLORD does contain the Jabber room, which doesn't exist in LORD and it also lacks Jennie codes, just like WTLORD. The article is vague not only in regard to the features it references but also in whether it was talking about TLORD or LORD. However, if you look at the statement in the context of the article, it is clear that is is, indeed, talking about TLORD, not LORD. John Alan Elson★ WF6I A.P.O.I. 21:00, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Here is what the article actually says:

The game soon spawned numerous spin-offs. The first was a tournament version Robinson wrote for MBBS/Worldgroup named Tournament LoRD, which sold for $300 per copy. The second was written by Joe Marcelletti in 1996 for Wildcat BBS systems. Marcelletti's implementation was so good that Robinson ended up using some features from it in his next version.

So you can see that the most obvious interpretation is that the author is referring to the next version of TLORD, not LORD and that makes sense because the last version of TLORD has several features found in WTLORD but not in LORD. John Alan Elson★ WF6I A.P.O.I. 21:18, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

References

Hey, Seth here. Yeah, I think the interviewer misunderstood what I said about WTLORD. I think I've only ever played it once, for maybe 10 minutes as I called Joe's website to test it. His implementation was good enough that I would allow it to be an official port. (We'd signed a contract where I had to give an OK before that could happen) I didn't play it enough to know how well it handled the tricky live duel/chat that T-LORD could though, I suspect given the limitations of wcCode (I later wrote something with wcCode, it's...bad) it couldn't hold a candle to T-LORD for Worldgroup which was written in C though.

I think a single feature of T-LORD DID come from WTLORD though. The "horse event", where you could get a horse and sometimes it would help you out in battle at the cost of its life. I won't edit the article (bad form because I'm in it!) and I don't know if a comment on here means anything (probably not), but there ya go, my two cents. Mrfun (talk) 03:22, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Please Mrfun, tell me what you know about the horse event? It's been so long, I don't know if I remember it correctly.

ProphetZarquon (talk) 03:09, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

HiProphetZarquon, there are a few 'horse events' in the game. Sometimes, in the forest, you run across someone who will offer to buy or sell you a horse. Sometimes, you'll get a horse from a fairy blessing. You can use your horse to get to Dark Horse Tavern in the woods any time you want. Horses don't really help in battle, though. If you have one, occasionally, an enemy will throw a "crystal" at you and your horse will step in to block it. When that happens, your horse dies and you, in a blind rage, will kill whatever it is that you were fighting. This is really just a way for the game to take your horse away. Sometimes it happens when fighting the Red Dragon, which makes the battle very easy. Players call this an HK, for 'horse kill', but this was patched in version 4.07 76.190.231.25 (talk) 21:37, 10 September 2021 (UTC)