| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| CorellonsDevout |
Posted - 17 Nov 2014 : 02:51:17
On a scale of 1-10, 10 being very well-versed, and 1 being a novice, where would you rate your knowledge of Realms lore? I would say I am a 5-6. I am not a complete novice, but there is a lot I don't know. There are scribes on here who know far more than I. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| jerrod |
Posted - 20 Dec 2014 : 13:12:59
5 on general faerun knowledge 7 on elven lore,7 on deity knowledge ,7on wizards of the realms,9 on drow lore. |
| Nicolai Withander |
Posted - 28 Nov 2014 : 18:45:31
Hmm... I would say, that pre-spell plague around 6, post spellplague 0. |
| Thrasymachus |
Posted - 28 Nov 2014 : 03:33:10
Waterdeep, Daggerford, Skullport & Undermountain Circa 10 Years within the Time of Troubles: 5
I degrade the further you get away from that area and time period.
But with access to my stuff on searchable PDF; Boxed sets, novels, ect I get a +3.
EDIT:
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Hmm, how to respond without sounding egotistical? 8-9.
-- George Krashos
Oh, nuts! We’re using the Krashos bellcurve?
Well then -3, so back to a 5.
*mutters to self*  |
| Zireael |
Posted - 27 Nov 2014 : 08:41:51
For George's question: having to hunt for scraps of info on the net, with many 1e-2e-4e-5e stuff simply not available where I live. I'm lucky enough to own most of the 3e stuff.
Seconding the interactive list/map ideas. |
| Jeremy Grenemyer |
Posted - 26 Nov 2014 : 19:03:33
Adding to Markus' idea: the interactive atlas ought to have a dial that lets you move forward or back in time so the features on the map change and the information does as well.
For George's question: the biggest impediment for me is having a reason (as a DM or player) to be interested in the lore being presented. I think for a lot of gamers the minutia is irrelevant to their games (which is perfectly fine). So if usefull-to-these-kinds-of-gamers information is buried behind other lore then Realms products are perceived as not useful. They're encyclopedias that nobody wants to read. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 26 Nov 2014 : 16:36:57
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Thinking some more about this topic, what do people thing are some of the difficulties or impediments to "knowing your lore".
Do you think that there is anything that WotC could do to fix any issues identified?
As someone who is fortunate to have just about every FR resource I forget that people haven't been reading Ed's Dragon magazine articles since the 80's.
-- George Krashos
I dream of interactive map on their site, and when you click on a realm (country/region) it takes you to a smaller regional map with some brief description of the place (a paragraph or three). Then you can click on things on that map, and they take you to further descriptions, following the same format. Then - if warranted - even more detailed maps for things like cities with more clickable links.
Thus, you would have a true interactive atlas - maps connected to (very brief) information on each locale, and then a list of 'other sources' one can pursue for more lore (and THAT is how you sell sourcebooks). You ever go to wikipedia looking for something, and windup spending hours there following links? LIKE THAT.
I haven't said it in awhile, so its over-due... "You want to catch a fish (fan), you have to bait your hook correctly". Nothing a fantasy/RPG fanboi loves more then pouring over interesting maps and reading about 'far-away places' and odd characters. You wet their appetites, they'll come a'running. Even Paizo has nothing like that.
RPG designers are 'the Sandmen' - they give people the tools to dream. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 26 Nov 2014 : 12:37:59
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
Well they could stop releasing information only in novels (which is becoming increasingly prevalent of late).
If an event is important and included in a novel then it should be given page time in a sourcebook as well, or an internet article etc so that those of us who have no time, money, or inclination for novels will still know whats going on.
Actually, until 4E, that was the practice.
But you're missing out on a lot of good stuff by dismissing novels. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 26 Nov 2014 : 09:43:36
Well they could stop releasing information only in novels (which is becoming increasingly prevalent of late).
If an event is important and included in a novel then it should be given page time in a sourcebook as well, or an internet article etc so that those of us who have no time, money, or inclination for novels will still know whats going on. |
| George Krashos |
Posted - 26 Nov 2014 : 09:33:48
Thinking some more about this topic, what do people thing are some of the difficulties or impediments to "knowing your lore".
Do you think that there is anything that WotC could do to fix any issues identified?
As someone who is fortunate to have just about every FR resource I forget that people haven't been reading Ed's Dragon magazine articles since the 80's.
-- George Krashos |
| Drustan Dwnhaedan |
Posted - 24 Nov 2014 : 22:40:41
Well, going off of Aldrick's scale, I'd say I'm probably a 4, or a 1 in regards to some of the other official FR settings (Al-Qadim, Malatra, and Maztica, to be specific) . I'm not really specialized in any significant way, as I find pretty much everything about the Forgotten Realms fascinating, and try to gather as much information on various countries/cultures/deities/races/important characters/NPC's as possible. Most of what I know comes from either sourcebooks or poking around Candlekeep's archives. I haven't read many of the novels (20-25, at most), but I'm hoping to change that soon. |
| Zireael |
Posted - 23 Nov 2014 : 17:21:01
I'd say 4-5 (I have bought or read a lot of Realmslore), the higher note applying to elves/drow/Underdark/Cormyr and the lower to everything else.
Lower to 2 for everything I don't care about (far East) |
| Delandil Aenar |
Posted - 20 Nov 2014 : 09:31:29
I think I'm about 6 as regards the Silver Marches, which drops to 5 for nearby Northerern regions. I reach 6 again when we talk about the Moonshae Isles and the Damara (in which my new campaigns are set), but the rest of Faerun I'm around 3-4 depending on the region. |
| Dark Wizard |
Posted - 19 Nov 2014 : 01:12:29
Certainly I'd say I wouldn't exceed a 3, going by Aldrick's scale (which I think presents a good gradation of familiarity tiers applicable to any setting). I'm very much a casual fan nowadays, but would love the opportunity and the time to dive in like I used to.
A few years ago, I would say probably a 4, but I haven't been following the setting material or novels with the same devotion and with that comes a growing unfamiliarity even with topics of interest to me before.
|
| Bladewind |
Posted - 18 Nov 2014 : 18:02:39
Overall I'd give myself a solid 5; I own alot of material (most 3.5 and a plethora of novels set in the era) and know most of its contents by heart.
I have played in the realms since 1992, but became more obsessed with realms lore when I connected to the internet during my studies and found forums such as these. Candlekeep and the FR forums on WotC's site are/were true fountains of realmslore, with dozens of scribes working on worldbuilding or dissemination of novels, a thing thas been the provided me oodles of work material for campaigns I ran in the Realms.
I tend to favor planar lore, especially when thinking of a larger interconnected multiverse. I also like the 3.5 mechanics of some systems introduced by the realms, be they feats, prc's, diety stats, spells or magic items. FR's particular otherworldy flavor of elven lore I like the best; I have a fondness for the realms religions both ancient and current, and I adore Zakhara.
|
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 18 Nov 2014 : 17:42:47
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Hmm, how to respond without sounding egotistical? 8-9.
-- George Krashos
LOL - I was going to say 9 for myself!
Since you know at least twice what I know, I guess I'm only a 4.5. 
But we all have our 'specialties' - not even Ed knows everything.
And it also depends on what you would term 'The Realms' - are we including all of Realmspace? Just the planet?
Realmspace contains 7 official settings:
Forgotten Realms
Kara-Tur
Al-Qadim
Maztica
The Horde
Malatra (Living Jungle RPGA)
Realmspace.
I don't count RPGA Raven's Bluff because its included in the FR setting (so is 1/2 The Horde, but there's enough new material there for it to stand on its own).
I also don't count Planescape, even though it does have quite a bit of bearing on the setting(s).
And there have been cross-overs to Ravensloft, but I wouldn't count that either - that's too much of a stretch.
So, yeah... it all depends... 
I'd definitely agree with this. While most people only focus on the FR direct material, there is a lot more. Plus, based largely on Ed's 'Wizards Three' articles I always put the whole D&D multiverse together in the 2nd Ed. fashion.
I loved Al-Qadim/Spelljammer/Planescape/Ravenloft... didn't much care for the Horde or Maztica, and only ever played 1 campaign in Kara-Tur.
In all cases however, the campaigns were Realms based and then expanded to include the planes or far regions of Toril/Realmspace. |
| CorellonsDevout |
Posted - 18 Nov 2014 : 17:22:01
Thanks everyone :) going by Aldrick's scale, I would classify myself as a 4. I am a big FR fan, my specialization being elves/drow amd deities, but as I mentioned, there are gaps there, too. I try to keep up to date on what is going on I. The Realms, which is why I stuck with 4e even though I didn't like it. I haven't read all the novels, but I have read a good majority.
It's great to hear everyone's responses! I am curious to see how other scribes rate themselves, as I know there are some on herr who have a deep grasp of the lore, far more than I. |
| BEAST |
Posted - 18 Nov 2014 : 17:20:28
I'd say a 9 on stuff immediately, directly related to RAS's tales.
Outside that, though, I'd say a 3. |
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 18 Nov 2014 : 17:12:49
I'd say 6 on that scale - as long as I have access to my notes, but every once in a while I have a proud moment where I get to remind Krash or another sage of something old and obscure that I once obsessed over... though its more common for GK or Wooly to point out something I've missed, or remind me that my interpretation of events is not the only one possible. If left to my own devices and my terrible memory for names it would be 4-5 with incorrect spelling :)
As far as regions of interest, unlike most others, I tend to avoid the big publishing areas of Waterdeep and Cormyr - while I've read it all at least a couple times I never focus there for campaigns and so they are akin to the Far East in the real world - I have knowledge and some understanding but have never been there...
For me, lore is most easily divided not by geographical region, but instead by order of publication. I was a hardcore Realms fan as it pushed from 1st to 2nd Ed; in high school I could have much more easily quoted from Volo than anything teachers would have preferred I read. I kept up to a lesser degree as 3rd Ed expanded on that information and built a wider history for the realms... I have little or no 4th E knowledge outside of the novels of the period I've read - maybe a 2 on that list if I'm generous.
My biggest problem with lore is keeping straight what comes from a published source, what comes straight from Ed (like his responses here), what comes from other fans here and elsewhere online, and what came from my old campaigns. The next biggest is keeping straight the order of publication... often in my mind, I go back to a 1st E source rather than 3rd which altered or amended that lore. |
| Renin |
Posted - 18 Nov 2014 : 13:42:18
Interesting topic.
I've played in the Realms for 22 years. Have owned or read almost all the modules and box sets, and read all the novels-great and terrible.
Looking at Aldrick's scale, I would say I'm at a 6-7.
However, I would honestly question that (for myself).
Can I instantly recall numerous lords and families of Suzail? Beyond Azoun's Obarskyr line and Truesilvers and Crownsilvers or Cormaeril, that's it.
Do I intimately know all about each founding event of the Dales? Naw, not really.
Can I name more than 2-3 Zulkirs? (during the best time to play, that is :D)
Do I know 5 different Realms names for sellswords? If I struggled at it.
Do I know alot? A little speciality? Sure!
But errata? The purest, deepest parts of errata that Ed, and many others here, humble me with knowing or giving back to me? Like what particular ingredients are in Berdusk Red or something? I'm sure someone could tell ya, but I don't know!
So, I guess I'd like to say a 6-7. However, if I compare myself to Ed or George Krashos, I'd say a 2-3! |
| kysus |
Posted - 18 Nov 2014 : 11:14:22
Figure i would chime in here since this seems like a very interesting topic, especially since it allows the other scribes see what everyone else likes to focus on in their prefered parts of faerun. So i try to have as a complete collection of the forgotten realms as i can and would say i have probally about a good 80% of all the source books and novels, and even magazines with forgotten realms lore in them.( still working on finishing my collection). Though i would have to say most of my knowledge centers on the Elven lore and the areas that deal with that like the dalelands or the north. And using Aldrik's ranking if i may i would say my knowledge on elves is probably around a 7 or 8, even though i dont post as much as i should on that topic. I would say almost everything else is probally closer to a 4 or 5 with areas like chult or haluraa far less, actually the only real thing i can remember about those two are the source books has pretty pictures. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 18 Nov 2014 : 02:26:34
Depends on how long its been since I've "restudied" the lore on an area. There's so much I've learned and forgotten, relearned, and then promptly reforgotten. General realms knowledge, I'd give myself a 6 or 7 right now. Unapproachable East, Bloodstone Lands, and wild theories on deities, I'd give myself an 8 or 9.... with the occasional 7 when I slip away from messing with it for a while. |
| silverwolfer |
Posted - 18 Nov 2014 : 02:19:49
Well true, the new stuff isn't lore, it is current news :P Lore is older stuff. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 17 Nov 2014 : 21:30:00
Well I guess that makes me a 3 then. I don't do novels or 4th edition or 5th edition so that will just rule out more and more lore (if you can call the new stuff that). |
| Aldrick |
Posted - 17 Nov 2014 : 20:54:24
Like everyone else, it depends on the region and the lore. It also depends on how the scale is weighed.
1 - New to the Realms.
2 - Some Realms knowledge, but huge gaps remain--often gets things wrong by accident and is easily confused.
3 - Casual Fan. Decent knowledge, but not specialized.
4 - Hardcore fan. Decent knowledge, with some specialization.
5 - Lore Master. Strong grasp of the setting and its lore, with some specialization.
6 - Scholar, deep grasp of the setting and its lore, with specialization in multiple areas of the setting on par with the designers who made them.
7 - Owns most, if not all Realms material (source books, novels, etc.) and knows most of their material.
8 - Owns most, if not all Realms material (source books, novels, etc.), and knows it so well that they can even correct those who designed the areas when they screw up the lore.
9 - Steven Schend / Eric L. Boyd
10 - Ed Greenwood
Using the above scale, I would place myself at roughly a 5 or 6 in general, but when it comes to the deities I easily rank a 7--possibly an 8 when it comes to some deities.
I would say that pretty much everyone who frequently posts on Candlekeep is a 4 at a minimum, with most ranging between 5 and 8 depending on the subject. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 17 Nov 2014 : 15:31:38
quote:
Originally posted by Baltas
I think around 4-5, as I didn't read a large number of novels(which I will try to remed), but read quite a bit of sourcebook, and stuff on internet, especialy the Candlekeep Forum . But I still have a lot to learn.
I'm about in the same situation, so I'd say 4-5 for myself as well.
|
| Markustay |
Posted - 17 Nov 2014 : 15:28:08
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Hmm, how to respond without sounding egotistical? 8-9.
-- George Krashos
LOL - I was going to say 9 for myself!
Since you know at least twice what I know, I guess I'm only a 4.5.
But we all have our 'specialties' - not even Ed knows everything.
And it also depends on what you would term 'The Realms' - are we including all of Realmspace? Just the planet?
Realmspace contains 7 official settings:
Forgotten Realms
Kara-Tur
Al-Qadim
Maztica
The Horde
Malatra (Living Jungle RPGA)
Realmspace.
I don't count RPGA Raven's Bluff because its included in the FR setting (so is 1/2 The Horde, but there's enough new material there for it to stand on its own).
I also don't count Planescape, even though it does have quite a bit of bearing on the setting(s).
And there have been cross-overs to Ravensloft, but I wouldn't count that either - that's too much of a stretch.
So, yeah... it all depends... |
| Baltas |
Posted - 17 Nov 2014 : 15:25:52
I think around 4-5, as I didn't read a large number of novels(which I will try to remed), but read quite a bit of sourcebook, and stuff on internet, especialy the Candlekeep Forum . But I still have a lot to learn. I even missed once a answer on a question I wrote about to George Krashos, which he aanwered allready aswered 2 years ago... |
| CorellonsDevout |
Posted - 17 Nov 2014 : 15:20:26
Hehe I am kind of the opposite. I have mainly read the novels, so that is where most of my knowledge comes from, though I do have some source books. I haven't read all the way through them, but they are ver good for lore (like Demihuman Deities, Grand History of the Realms, Lost Empires of Faerun, campaign setting guides, and of course Elminster's Forgotten Realms). But like I said, I haven't read all the way through them. My main interest are gods and elves, but there are gaps there as well, which is why I would say I am a 5. |
| hashimashadoo |
Posted - 17 Nov 2014 : 14:20:06
I'm very well-rounded in terms of areas and I have access to a lot of resources but there's still a tonne of novels I've not read. I think I know more about Loudwater and Melvaunt than most though and I'm more willing to talk about lore from editions after 3rd than a lot of people here.
I'd give myself a 7 because of the lack of novel knowledge. |
| SaMoCon |
Posted - 17 Nov 2014 : 09:31:28
Hmm... I don't do Dragon Magazines, have read the gray box Forgotten Realms, a couple Elminsters Ecologies, a pair of Volo's Guides, half the 3/3.5e FRCS books, 21 of the Cormanthor/Crown Kingdom Guide Books, and 2nd Ed Under Illefarn. I think that puts me at a solid 4. |
|
|
