Candlekeep Forum
Candlekeep Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Forgotten Realms Journals
 General Forgotten Realms Chat
 (Second Attempt) How should the canon be handled?
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire

USA
14197 Posts

Posted - 22 Jul 2017 :  00:15:10  Show Profile Send Markustay a Private Message  Reply with Quote
1500 DR sounds good to me - it appeals to my OCD.

Some of what is being said here - some of the lore examples - made me want to start commenting on that, and I had to bite my tongue, becuase thats NOT what this thread is for, and the where and how we actually do that IS what this thread is for (the discussions and editorial feedback).

But I think we can come up with something really cool for the Tree(s) of Life, Cormanthor, and the Elves. All we need to do is put some polish on all of that and it can come together nicely (and I love that WIP of your art, Adhriva). AND Evermeet (it can be connected, with a little nudging).

As for the Sundering providing a 'tabla rasa', I'm thinking moreso then we've come to realize. Since we have brought-up Marvel (and DC) continuities, we've actually undergone a bit of the same thing; a 'merger' of the different worlds, and yet, we can keep them separate (like how they did with their multiverses, but we don't even need to go that far - we already had a framework {over-cosmology} for that with planescape... and Spelljammer, and Ravenloft). That means, while each world is still 'its own thing', we CAN borrow bits of lore (or critters, phenomena, and even organizations and maybe NPCs) from elsewhere. This is nothing new - we had a little of that already, especially back in the 2e days, but we can run a bit more with it now, since it seems thats the way wotC wants to go as well.

Of course, if I had MY way, I'd stick The Flanaess (GH) over where Anchoromé was.
I doubt I could get the rest of you to agree to THAT.

Oh, and I'd be willing to stick Laerakond (Returned Abeir) anywhere you guys want on a map. I've already done a couple of mock-ups. I really like it down between chult, Lantan, and Nimbral, like what I did HERE, but I'd separate Lantan from it this time, moving it slightly west.

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone


Edited by - Markustay on 22 Jul 2017 00:19:45
Go to Top of Page

Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire

USA
14197 Posts

Posted - 22 Jul 2017 :  22:08:19  Show Profile Send Markustay a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Okay, played with it some more.
I know this isn't exactly the best thread for this, buuuuuuut... if we do decide to include Returned Abeir (Laerakond) in the CandleKanon, I think this placement would be optimal, for various reasons (read the notes below the map).

Returned Abeir near Chult, Lantan, & Nimbral.

The new eastern coast of Abeir is actual Nerath. I thought that would be a neat little thing to use (NOT Nerath itself - i just liked it's coast).

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone


Edited by - Markustay on 22 Jul 2017 22:08:48
Go to Top of Page

Zeromaru X
Senior Scribe

Colombia
722 Posts

Posted - 22 Jul 2017 :  23:15:31  Show Profile Send Zeromaru X a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Good map, as always. And yeah, Laerakond deserves love.

Long ago, in the distant past, they fell into decay. The philosopher’s path... The river of glory... Even the saints resting in the darkness rise up without response and block the way...
Go to Top of Page

Adhriva
Learned Scribe

USA
138 Posts

Posted - 23 Jul 2017 :  05:00:04  Show Profile  Visit Adhriva's Homepage  Send Adhriva an AOL message  Send Adhriva a Yahoo! Message Send Adhriva a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Some days, one forgets just how much information can be put into a graphic novel....Wikis are fun things, who knew? Well I suppose our friends over at the FR wiki did but Totally beside the point.

To get back to the purpose of the thread, how many people in the community will we require to sign off on something before an article becomes "valid"? And to take that thought a bit further, how will we mark it? A thread here on Candlekeep, something on the page itself, or a different way entirely?



Professional illustrator and comic book artist.
Artstation Portfolio
Go to Top of Page

Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire

USA
14197 Posts

Posted - 23 Jul 2017 :  05:19:33  Show Profile Send Markustay a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I actually ended up on the FR Wiki a couple of times today.

quote:
Originally posted by Zeromaru X

Good map, as always. And yeah, Laerakond deserves love.
Thanks.

Not so much a 'map' right now, as it is a quick mock-up to show what is possible (I just took parts of two different maps I have going on and spliced layers together).

I was going to add some detail, but I didn't want to get side-tracked yet again. Except for Returned Abeir itself, the rest of that is just a piece of the continent map I've been working on (my thoughts at this point are to use that as my 'master map', so all my FR maps moving forward will be compatible with each other - something I never bothered to do back when I was using the '3e style' of art).

If we decide to include Laerakond in the CandlKanon, then I can use that as a base for the detailed version.

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone

Go to Top of Page

Aldrick
Senior Scribe

909 Posts

Posted - 23 Jul 2017 :  05:43:07  Show Profile Send Aldrick a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Adhriva

To get back to the purpose of the thread, how many people in the community will we require to sign off on something before an article becomes "valid"?


I am unsure if we are looking for an exact number of people. The way I envisioned it was that a poll would remain open for a period of time and once that window closed the issue would be considered settled one way or another. How long it would remain open is something we have to discuss and debate amongst ourselves, and then ultimately vote on and decide. The way that I have done these polls is that I consider them active for at least a week, and after one week I consider the matter settled and then we move on to something else.

For most of our voting so far the issue has been lopsided and decisive in one direction or another, and the outcome was pretty clear from the beginning. It was quickly established that the community should come together for some group project to produce a non-WotC canon for the Realms. It was quickly established that we should use a Wiki to do it. It was only the last poll that was contentious, and it was basically neck and neck from the beginning and ended with a tie. The outcome of this poll already seems like a foregone conclusion, as everyone has voted in favor of it except one person who has declared themselves undecided. It is very unlikely over the course of the next week that the outcome changes since it is so lopsided.

So, generally speaking, my view is that we do not need everyone to vote, we just need to leave a poll open long enough to get a decent sampling of people. Because, after all--using this poll as an example--even if someone shows up two weeks later and votes against it, their vote will not change the outcome, and by that point more people will have also showed up to vote in favor of it as well.

With this line of thinking, I am contemplating putting forward a rule to be voted on something like, 'All votes on Candlekanon articles shall remain open for two weeks, and be closed if it achieves two-thirds of votes in favor. If the poll cannot gain two-thirds support in two weeks time, it shall remain open for one month. At the end of the month the majority vote shall decide.'

Something like that seems reasonable and fair. However, once again, this is something that we would have to discuss. We would have a policies page just like the FRWiki: http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Policies

All of the policies that we ultimately have to decide will go there.

quote:
Originally posted by Adhriva

And to take that thought a bit further, how will we mark it? A thread here on Candlekeep, something on the page itself, or a different way entirely?


I believe it will be marked in two ways. The first is the category that it will be placed in on the CKWiki. Everything in the Candlekanon will have its own special category on the Wiki. However, there will also be a banner at the top of each article marking it as Candlekanon. As an example of what the banner will look similar too, here is another example of the FRWiki and it's featured articles banner: http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Eilistraee
Go to Top of Page

Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire

USA
14197 Posts

Posted - 23 Jul 2017 :  21:59:49  Show Profile Send Markustay a Private Message  Reply with Quote
A week sounds good. Most folks check in here at least that often. Perhaps make it longer, just at first.
The only thing I worry about is people using multiple accounts to force their stuff into canon, or having friends register accounts just so they can vote for them. I suppose the mods could spot that sort of activity, if they were so inclined.

How about letting people vote later, on the Wiki itself? Is that possible? Like a 'thumbs up' (or down), that way, in time, a larger group of people can get to see ALL the articles and decide if it should be CandleKanon or not.

And at first, the activity is going to be LOW, so we won't really be getting large vote counts. Hopefully, if this thing takes off, we will be seeing more folks participate and voting, which will give us a MUCh better (accurate) 'slice' of the demographic opinion. People here may accidentally (subconsciously) be 'playing favorites', so thats why I'd want the vote to eventually go out to a broader audience (not that voting always works either, especially on an internet full of trolls).

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone


Edited by - Markustay on 23 Jul 2017 22:01:33
Go to Top of Page

Aldrick
Senior Scribe

909 Posts

Posted - 23 Jul 2017 :  22:33:43  Show Profile Send Aldrick a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay

And at first, the activity is going to be LOW, so we won't really be getting large vote counts. Hopefully, if this thing takes off, we will be seeing more folks participate and voting, which will give us a MUCh better (accurate) 'slice' of the demographic opinion.


That is my concern as well if we count the number of votes. There can also be a high degree of variance between polls. For example, the first poll I posted very quickly got over 40 votes. However, the subsequent polls got just over twenty each. This one will also likely get just over twenty once a week has passed.

A Wiki, just like Candlekeep, ebbs and flows with activity. There are some times when there is a lot of activity, and there are other times when there is very low activity. By setting a standard of putting stuff up for a vote every two weeks or so, then that should give everyone who has an active interest in the canon an opportunity to "check-in", look over proposed Candlekanon articles, and vote.

It's also one of the reasons I think we should have something like a 2/3rds rule. If you can persuade 75% of the voters within the first two weeks, then it is unlikely subsequent voters will change the outcome. If things are more evenly divided extending the voting time by a week or so allows more people to participate.

quote:
Originally posted by Markustay

The only thing I worry about is people using multiple accounts to force their stuff into canon, or having friends register accounts just so they can vote for them. I suppose the mods could spot that sort of activity, if they were so inclined.

How about letting people vote later, on the Wiki itself? Is that possible?


It is possible for the Wiki to host a poll, however, I do not think it takes into account unique individuals. (I do not think polling at Candlekeep does either.) One way to fix this is to have a "voice" poll. In other words, have a thread posted here, and link to it at the top of the article. In our policies we would outline who gets to vote. Maybe something like: You must have at least 25 posts on Candlekeep, have participated in the editorial process of at least 3 Candlekanon articles, or submitted one Candlekanon article to be reviewed and edited. Any one of these is acceptable to be considered an eligible voter.

Then on the forums here, each person would simply post under the original post something like this:

"Aye, AldrickTanith on the CKWiki."

or

"Nay, AldrickTanith on the CKWiki."

or

"Undecided / Abstain, AldrickTanith on the CKWiki."

This means we will all know exactly who is voting, and everything is 100% transparent. The downside is that votes are public and people seeing how others voted could create some hostility. The reverse of that is if people are also participating in the editorial process--which everyone should--the opinions of people will already be well known.

Edited by - Aldrick on 23 Jul 2017 22:35:52
Go to Top of Page

Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire

USA
14197 Posts

Posted - 24 Jul 2017 :  01:00:03  Show Profile Send Markustay a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Hmmmmm... I like it except for the 'total transparency' thing, but I don't see how we'd get around that. Unless...

There is a 'private' area here on the forums, and it could be used (Mods willing) to host the votes. The only problem with that is I don't know if they can separate it from the original project (and participants) who were involved. On the other hand, I think that thing is as dead as a doornail at this point. The mods would have to switch certain accounts 'ON' for that forum (or create a brand new one for voting, but then Alaundo would have to approve all that). That way, we know that only project-participants are voting.

But then... we will be back to square one, and we won't be able to expand the voting base. Maybe just do that (once again, mods willing) for the first few months, until we have an actual data-base and following? At that point, hopefully, no one person will be able to skew the votes.

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone


Edited by - Markustay on 24 Jul 2017 01:35:13
Go to Top of Page

Adhriva
Learned Scribe

USA
138 Posts

Posted - 24 Jul 2017 :  01:20:25  Show Profile  Visit Adhriva's Homepage  Send Adhriva an AOL message  Send Adhriva a Yahoo! Message Send Adhriva a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Personally, I like the idea of voice voting and the transparency it brings. Namely for the sake that reasons, feedback, and partial votes can happen and be discussed. This can be especially important with larger projects and submissions where elements w, x, and y are great but z may need to be changed before it is accepted.

Professional illustrator and comic book artist.
Artstation Portfolio
Go to Top of Page

CorellonsDevout
Great Reader

USA
2042 Posts

Posted - 24 Jul 2017 :  01:42:12  Show Profile  Send CorellonsDevout an AOL message Send CorellonsDevout a Private Message  Reply with Quote
In the hopes of getting a larger member turn-out, I think we should make some sort of announcement about the group (once we figure all this stuff out), and give people a chance to join before we actually start. I don't know the specific timeline for that, but maybe a few weeks. That way, people who want to contribute but aren't on as often will have a chance to see it.

If we start with only a few people, it might unintentionally turn others away, because we've already started, and they may have wanted to contribute to a certain element, but now feel they can't.

Sweet water and light laughter
Go to Top of Page

Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire

USA
14197 Posts

Posted - 24 Jul 2017 :  01:44:30  Show Profile Send Markustay a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Maybe use the Candlekeep FB page for that?

I was going to say we should create a new one for the CandleKanon, but why? We'd already have a base to start from with the existing page. And votes (polls) CAN be done with FB.

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone


Edited by - Markustay on 24 Jul 2017 01:44:49
Go to Top of Page

CorellonsDevout
Great Reader

USA
2042 Posts

Posted - 24 Jul 2017 :  02:03:30  Show Profile  Send CorellonsDevout an AOL message Send CorellonsDevout a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I totally forgot about that. I think I joined it, but never received notifications for it. I'm on the Forgotten Realms Archives FB page (a huge FB hub for FR fans), but I hardly ever go to the Candlekeep one. I went to it to see, and it says I had joined, but I hadn't been getting any notifications (so I changed the settings lol).

We could use that, if enough people are on it.

Sweet water and light laughter

Edited by - CorellonsDevout on 24 Jul 2017 02:06:22
Go to Top of Page

Adhriva
Learned Scribe

USA
138 Posts

Posted - 25 Jul 2017 :  17:52:20  Show Profile  Visit Adhriva's Homepage  Send Adhriva an AOL message  Send Adhriva a Yahoo! Message Send Adhriva a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The facebook group would work for the most part but I do have a few concerns. The group is small and sees little use. We ideally want to make this project accessible and a solid reference for the wider community, not just a niche. It is also easier to find the relative scrolls for any specific addition to add late votes - something a facebook group would make difficult. Of greater concern is that it could divorce the project further from this site and board, which is good for both promoting the resource and keeping the elements of the project condense for easy navigation. As such, I still am leaning to using voice voting on here.

Professional illustrator and comic book artist.
Artstation Portfolio
Go to Top of Page

Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire

USA
14197 Posts

Posted - 25 Jul 2017 :  18:50:38  Show Profile Send Markustay a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The way I see it, using the FB page would be a great way to 'boost the signal' of both - the project AND the page.

Once the project gets underway, the page's activity should increase exponentially. FB will give us the exposure we need for the project, and the project will make the page far more active. Its a win-win, IMO.

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone


Edited by - Markustay on 25 Jul 2017 18:50:55
Go to Top of Page

CorellonsDevout
Great Reader

USA
2042 Posts

Posted - 25 Jul 2017 :  19:12:06  Show Profile  Send CorellonsDevout an AOL message Send CorellonsDevout a Private Message  Reply with Quote
We could make the announcement here that we will be using the FB page (with the appropriate links).

Sweet water and light laughter
Go to Top of Page

Sylrae
Learned Scribe

Canada
306 Posts

Posted - 28 Jul 2017 :  12:43:30  Show Profile Send Sylrae a Private Message  Reply with Quote
To be clear, is this basically about making a new forgotten realms wiki, with added candle keep written lore and gaps filled in?

I'm hearing a lot of talk of what to include or exclude, and how to approach things, but lack the context of just what a candleKanon would actually be.

Is it an all-in-one campaign guide in wiki form, that will explain all the stuff from all previous sources?

What exactly are you proposing making?

One thing I think would make a song source fat more useful to me, is if, when you're posting lore from any given edition, that the lore be color coded to denote where it came from.

I can't even count the number of times before 5e where when I went to the fr wiki I had to roll everything back to before the 4e frcg to get setting info that had anything to do with what I was running.

Including everything is fine, but mark it clearly so we can clearly separate out the stuff we don't want to be forced to use.

I don't use any of the spellplague or post-spellplague stuff. Between the widespread destruction, and the time skip, they destroyed the majority of what I actually enjoyed in the realms that was around in "current day" and haven't provided any interesting new content to replace what was lost and hold my interest.

But then, I liked the realms because it was filled with interesting content, and now it's not filled with anything, it's vague and ill-defined, even if they have back pedaled on some of the world shattering retcons ; so I find myself still sticking to 1375-1380 or going full arcane age or earlier and relying on Phasai/snowblood's work to fill in the details.

Sylrae's Forgotten Realms Fan-Lore Index, with public commenting access to make for easier improvement (WIP)

Edited by - Sylrae on 28 Jul 2017 12:59:10
Go to Top of Page

Zeromaru X
Senior Scribe

Colombia
722 Posts

Posted - 28 Jul 2017 :  15:33:06  Show Profile Send Zeromaru X a Private Message  Reply with Quote
As I understand it, the CandleKanon project has three main objetives:

1. Create a current canon for the Realms (with current, as something that happens after 1491), as WotC isn't doing it anymore.

2 Filling up the gaps of the so-called "lost century" (1385-1478).

3. Try to logically explain stuff that doesn't make sense in the canon.

I don't know if there are more objetives than that. In words of Markustay, we want to make "modular stuff", so yes, is what you said: we will not force people to use all that we will produce.

As for include all canonical stuff, is because the potential that people like me (who started to play in the Realms in 4e or 5e) will be interested in the project, but they know the history of the Realms as is currently canon (so, they don't know about the stuff of the Grey Box and other sources), so they will not be confused because "hey, this candlecanon says that the Spellplague don't happened, but this official source says it happened... WTH is going on here?"

Because of the that, even the modular stuff need certain guidelines to follow (so, certain events to happen and stuff).

Long ago, in the distant past, they fell into decay. The philosopher’s path... The river of glory... Even the saints resting in the darkness rise up without response and block the way...

Edited by - Zeromaru X on 28 Jul 2017 15:47:00
Go to Top of Page

Zeromaru X
Senior Scribe

Colombia
722 Posts

Posted - 28 Jul 2017 :  15:45:59  Show Profile Send Zeromaru X a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Sylrae

I can't even count the number of times before 5e where when I went to the fr wiki I had to roll everything back to before the 4e frcg to get setting info that had anything to do with what I was running.

Including everything is fine, but mark it clearly so we can clearly separate out the stuff we don't want to be forced to use.


Are you talking about the Forgotten Realms Wiki? Well, that is our job there. To be faithful to canon, like it or not. But you're right about the sources stuff. I've proposed a solution (using the same kind of floating reference tags they use in the Dragon Age Wiki). I would do it myself if I was more proficient in Wiki code.

Long ago, in the distant past, they fell into decay. The philosopher’s path... The river of glory... Even the saints resting in the darkness rise up without response and block the way...

Edited by - Zeromaru X on 28 Jul 2017 15:46:22
Go to Top of Page

sleyvas
Great Reader

USA
5987 Posts

Posted - 28 Jul 2017 :  16:15:54  Show Profile Send sleyvas a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout

In the hopes of getting a larger member turn-out, I think we should make some sort of announcement about the group (once we figure all this stuff out), and give people a chance to join before we actually start. I don't know the specific timeline for that, but maybe a few weeks. That way, people who want to contribute but aren't on as often will have a chance to see it.

If we start with only a few people, it might unintentionally turn others away, because we've already started, and they may have wanted to contribute to a certain element, but now feel they can't.



There's also the saying about too many cooks in the kitchen. Already, in these other threads, we're running about with a lot of ideas. I had already started a bunch of concepts, so I'm trying to relay what I've kind of thought through in what are hopefully manageable bite size chunks. I'm then letting those ideas sink in and seeing what kind of feedback comes back (some of which is highly interesting to me... me and Markustay just discussing architecture of Pelevari is really fun to me right now... and he may want to go a totally different path from me on the use of Pelevari... but the core idea of "what was this city like" and "who built it and who were their allies" and "when did things happen with it" helps us all if we intend to improve upon the area).

Alavairthae, may your skill prevail

Phillip aka Sleyvas
Go to Top of Page

Sylrae
Learned Scribe

Canada
306 Posts

Posted - 28 Jul 2017 :  17:59:18  Show Profile Send Sylrae a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Zeromaru X
Are you talking about the Forgotten Realms Wiki? Well, that is our job there. To be faithful to canon, like it or not.



Oh. I'm aware that's how you see it. That the sites true purpose is to be faithful to current canon, with no regard for what was previously canon, no consideration for how current canon's reconsider maybe controversial. Not as a general reference tool for all Canon realmslore for users. Being useful for FR fans as a reference source for running games is a secondary concern for you guys.

That's why for nearly a decade (until 5e undid a bunch of the retcons and what was currently canon became vague enough that you started including both sets of info on pages), the only way to use the wiki for me was for me to go into each page's history and go back to the last post before September 2008.

I'm asking that whatever format this new Canon reference takes, that it puts its usability as a reference source first, visually delineates what edition any given realms lore comes from, and includes all of it, and visually highlights the retcons vs previous contradicted canon.

As an example, 1e realmslore might be in front of a grey background, 2e on a blue background, 3e on a green background, 4e on a purple background, and 5e on a brown background. Any time there is a contradiction, both sets of information are listed along with their edition source in front of a red background.

New stuff is still built on top of the current Canon, but if a bunch of the retcons reduce usability for the user, this approach means you haven't make it so much work to find relevant material that they simply have no use for the project.

Sylrae's Forgotten Realms Fan-Lore Index, with public commenting access to make for easier improvement (WIP)

Edited by - Sylrae on 28 Jul 2017 18:43:29
Go to Top of Page

Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire

USA
14197 Posts

Posted - 28 Jul 2017 :  18:25:54  Show Profile Send Markustay a Private Message  Reply with Quote
While I agree on the usefulness of the FR Wiki (I've had my own share of problems, looking for a specific piece of info, and all I could get was a 'whats there now' entry, which doesn't serve my purposes 90% of the time), I am also, strangely enough, one of the staunchest supporters of 'ALL FR canon IS canon', no matter when anyone sets their games. This is because the only way a project of this scope can be successful is if it has 100% inclusivity - "no one gets left behind".

Besides, half the fun s going to be smoothing all those rough edges.

quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas

quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout

In the hopes of getting a larger member turn-out, I think we should make some sort of announcement about the group (once we figure all this stuff out), and give people a chance to join before we actually start. I don't know the specific timeline for that, but maybe a few weeks. That way, people who want to contribute but aren't on as often will have a chance to see it.

If we start with only a few people, it might unintentionally turn others away, because we've already started, and they may have wanted to contribute to a certain element, but now feel they can't.



There's also the saying about too many cooks in the kitchen. Already, in these other threads, we're running about with a lot of ideas. I had already started a bunch of concepts, so I'm trying to relay what I've kind of thought through in what are hopefully manageable bite size chunks. I'm then letting those ideas sink in and seeing what kind of feedback comes back (some of which is highly interesting to me... me and Markustay just discussing architecture of Pelevari is really fun to me right now... and he may want to go a totally different path from me on the use of Pelevari... but the core idea of "what was this city like" and "who built it and who were their allies" and "when did things happen with it" helps us all if we intend to improve upon the area).
When it comes to the Old Empires, I leave that to others. Its certainly not one of my personal 'areas of interest' (except in how parts of it - like Murghôm - interact with the Taan, which IS a region I have major interest in). I am only discussing it because of the geographic problems. I'll go along with whatever the consensus is. I just like to toss ideas around for others to grab, or ignore.

Also, because I was in the construction business most of my life, I have a fairly unique understanding of how structures 'work', and how they interact with the terrain they are on. I say 'unique' because I was the guy that got called in when the engineers were scratching their heads. I don't except the word 'impossible', ever. LOL

So when I look at something like Pelevaran, its not so much of 'problem' to me, as it is a work of art waiting to be born. You take the so-called problems and turn them into design elements. Thats how I am seeing it all. Thats why I am interested in Pelevaran. As for how it all began, and whats there now, you guys can figure all that out. I only 'blame the dwarves' because it does appear to be a 'back door' into their realm, and I just can't see that slipping past them.

People may have noticed I 'switch sides' a lot during discussions. That's not me being wishy-washy, or being 'a troll'; thats just me playing Devil's Advocate. I want to punch-holes in any theories so others can patch them before they 'go public'. If your lore can't withstand a battery of questions, than it hasn't been well-conceived, IMHO. I also greatly appreciate it when others do the same for me - I often ask, "why can't {something} be {something else}?" The last thing I want to do is publish an article somewhere and find it has a major continuity gaff in it.

95% of the fanon I come up with is generated by me working on maps. They 'speak to me'. I see a river making a weird turn, I have to know why it did that. Sometimes I can find a canon answer (I just yesterday discovered a 'long lost' set of named cliffs!), but other times it makes no sense, so I feel impelled to provide an answer. the same goes for cultures and migrations of ethnic groups - people move for a reason. I want to know WHY. Thats the foundation of my approach to EVERYTHING FR - I want to look at the latest map, and know precisely why it looks the way it does (be it demographics, flora and fauna, terrain, settlements, etc, etc). The map is just the destination - I want to know about the journey.

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone


Edited by - Markustay on 28 Jul 2017 18:43:36
Go to Top of Page

Sylrae
Learned Scribe

Canada
306 Posts

Posted - 28 Jul 2017 :  18:42:29  Show Profile Send Sylrae a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I'm fine with including *everything*. I get that some people *like* spellplague. However, the wiki tends to exclude and be of limited use for people looking for any older realms lore due to its focus on " what is it according to wotc *now*", and I'd like to point out that it's not only people who like the new stuff that you should be careful not to exclude.

Sylrae's Forgotten Realms Fan-Lore Index, with public commenting access to make for easier improvement (WIP)

Edited by - Sylrae on 28 Jul 2017 18:47:06
Go to Top of Page

Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire

USA
14197 Posts

Posted - 28 Jul 2017 :  18:44:33  Show Profile Send Markustay a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I'm hoping we can get some sort of color-coding going on, or perhaps some other way of separating the bits that some people may find... unsavory.

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone

Go to Top of Page

Sylrae
Learned Scribe

Canada
306 Posts

Posted - 28 Jul 2017 :  18:52:35  Show Profile Send Sylrae a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Color coded backgrounds, highhlighting retcons and contradictions but including all sets of information and identifying the sources, is essential if you really intend to "include everybody" and that's not just a platitude to get the people who like the lived-in realms more than the post spellplague and time jump vaguery to shut up while you proceed to toss them out the window. .

Sylrae's Forgotten Realms Fan-Lore Index, with public commenting access to make for easier improvement (WIP)
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Candlekeep Forum © 1999-2017 Candlekeep.com Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000