Forum:Spell pages, combining editions

{{Forum post|I still think most spells would be more or less the same in flavour and description across editions, like your scatterspray example. The description is still applicable in each edition of the spell. Where there are significant variations, rather than making separate subpages, it may be better to make subsections to express the differences while still having the one article on the page. For example:

Scatterspray was an alteration or transmutation spell in general use throughout the Realms.

Effects
This spell caused a....

2nd edition
etc.

3rd edition
etc.

Broadly, I'm against split-pages or pages with two separate articles on it if we can help it.

If two spells are wholly different in nature between editions, such as disrupt undead in 2e and 3e (high-level spell to a cantrip; see devastate undead), then a separate page with disambiguation may be more appropriate. This is especially the case where 4e made major changes to how spells functioned.


 * — BadCatMan (talk) 07:21, July 8, 2013 (UTC)}}