| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Icelander |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 23:55:14
Honoured scribes of the hallowed hall of Candlekeep.
Is there any interest on seeing my ideas on how to reconcile the Costmology of 1e-4e, as well as tying the 4e Primordial/Gods-Abeir-Toril bits with together with prior lore, as well as balancing all the previous creation myths that can be found?
If there is, where should I post these scrolls?
I'm imagine that there will be at least one on the Cosmology, incorporating all the canon I can find, and adding stuff in the lacunae. So, not all canon lore, but all attempts to fit canon lore together into a cohesive whole. To do so, there will inevitably be original material there, though. So, Sages, Realms Chat or Running the Realms?
I'll also have one on Abeir-Toril's creation and pre-history (until recorded history). Corollary to that will be one on Abeir-Toril's climate and the cold/warm/ice/furnace eras therein.
No 'home-brew', in that nothing is meant to contradict lore, but a lot of adding to the lore in the hope of reconciling seeming contradictions. Where do these fit? |
| 10 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Jakk |
Posted - 18 Feb 2012 : 00:08:20
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
EDIT: After giving this new thread some thought, and inspired by some of Icelander's other recent threads, I had considered revisiting my 'history of the world' project. But then I realized, to do it right, we have to do a reboot a'la Star Trek. Since we know we are not getting one of those, and all the bad stuff is staying in (and I don't mean 4e - I mean all the CRAP, like the giantt lore, which needs a complete overhaul, etc, etc).
In other words, I am tired of trying to fix all the mistakes. I applaud Paul's efforts in this regard, but really, why bother? As a person who has been in the construction business their whole life, I can honestly say there is a point where 'fixing' no longer works, and you have to tear it all down and start over. Its actually a lot more work trying to keep the old version chugging along.
I think that's where I'm at too, Mark, at least as far as the more recent (1 DR-forward) history... but I'm still of the opinion that we can salvage something from each of the cosmologies and creation mythologies that the Realms have been presented with, and create something that works for all of them... then we can drop our rebooted Realms into the resulting synthesis. At least, that's what I plan to do... using Ed's Realms as the reboot... hopefully we see a lot more where that title came from. 
quote:
Either way, I will still be following this thread - I like seeing what others have 'done to the place'. 
As will I... and I'll probably continue to contribute if I have something useful to say (more useful than this post, at any rate). |
| Icelander |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 18:33:54
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Which brings me around to a question, Icelander - do you plan on trying to fudge everything, or will you try a more free-form approach, shifting things around to when they are better suited? I found when I right HB lore, its easier for me just to leave the dates out of everything; the second you put a number to something, tiny cracks start to appear.
I aim to contradict no canon. If something is completely and utterly impossible to reconcile, I will consider treating it as an error, but I would rather treat it as an incomplete understanding of events, i.e. true in a certain light.
So, GHothR will still stand. The unpublished stuff Brian wrote, I will regard as his working notes and if they contradict published canon somewhere else, I'll give priority to the official stuff. Also, if his working notes inhibit extrapolation from canon necessary to reconcile seeming inconsistencies or to explain something inadquately addressed in canon, I will go with what better fits the overall cohesive picture.
Thus, I'm throwing out Brian's map of the early spread of human ethinicites, as they are insufficient to provide explanations for some things, conflict with Kara-Tur and Maztica in some ways and do not tally too well with how actual ethnic groups and societies evolve.
In general, any ethnic groups of the earliest history of Faerun are not going to be culturally or aesthetically similar to modern ones, unless highly specific factors of isolation, rigid culture and reverence for traditions exist. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 17:57:26
LOL
In the timeline I was working on, I had the entries multi-colored, with black being canon (standard), red being entirely non-canon (home brew), and blue being 'based on canon' (so a mix of canon 'fluffed-up' with some minor homebrew).
For other projects, I had some other colors as well - I was working from Brian James' original GHotR, and I used Green for elven entries, Yellowish-Orange for eastern (Taan, K-T) entries, a brownish-red for Dwarves, Purple for Underdark, etc.
Then, because there was some cross-over, I had striped entries... it was getting very... ummmm... bright? (Maybe hideous would be better). 
EDIT: After giving this new thread some thought, and inspired by some of Icelander's other recent threads, I had considered revisiting my 'history of the world' project. But then I realized, to do it right, we have to do a reboot a'la Star Trek. Since we know we are not getting one of those, and all the bad stuff is staying in (and I don't mean 4e - I mean all the CRAP, like the giant & dragon lore, which needs a complete overhaul, etc, etc).
In other words, I am tired of trying to fix all the mistakes. I applaud Paul's efforts in this regard, but really, why bother? As a person who has been in the construction business their whole life, I can honestly say there is a point where 'fixing' no longer works, and you have to tear it all down and start over. Its actually a lot more work trying to keep the old version chugging along.
Which brings me around to a question, Icelander - do you plan on trying to fudge everything, or will you try a more free-form approach, shifting things around to when they are better suited? I found when I right HB lore, its easier for me just to leave the dates out of everything; the second you put a number to something, tiny cracks start to appear.
Either way, I will still be following this thread - I like seeing what others have 'done to the place'. |
| Wolfhound75 |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 17:48:42
I think it's a great idea and I've also been working on the same project that it appears you and Sage have been.
One possible request to take under consideration though: any chance you could somehow denote parts that are not canon? That way, anyone who is less familiar won't mistake the parts I'll term as fanon for actual TSR/WizBro/Ed supported canon?
Good Hunting! |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 15:29:55
It would be great!
|
| Nicolai Withander |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 09:02:37
I have always been a noob when it comes down to cosmology of the realms. I think there is so much that does not make sense.
So I will very much enjoy following this post, since I dont think I can contribute very much! |
| Icelander |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 06:36:00
I'll trust you wise loremasters to remind me whenever I contradict any established lore (1e-4e Realms, Planescape, anything else that relates) and/or forget to account for something.
Even a minor note about a climatic change or a 'dark age' of a generation or two is important. I really do want this to fit the canon in all ways.
I don't actually believe that anyone in authority will read this before 5e and take not of it, but if it influences a couple of Candlekeep's leading historical loremasters in their future D&D writings, I will be very content to have helped 5e lore to be consistent and relevant to my Realms. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 02:04:48
I've done all this before (as Gray Richardson has), but its always interesting to see what others have done. |
| Jakk |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 00:52:44
I am also very interested in seeing what you've come up with. I've been tinkering with my own cosmology myself, and so far I don't have anything presentable; I'm trying to combine the Great Wheel, the Great Tree, and the 4e cosmology into a single workable structure, and I'm having better luck than you might expect, but I haven't had much time to work on it lately. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 00:44:59
I think we could do with a new discussion on this. And I do believe the General shelf is appropriate enough.
Long-time scribes of Candlekeep will know that I've spent the better part of ten exhaustive years developing my own planar framework [I've the slightest inkling of what today's cosmologists must feel when working on their own models for the structure of our universe] -- which encompasses a vast cosmological structure and will [eventually, once I've defined a worthwhile definition for SageTime to work into my model] incorporate practically every published fictional world I can recall.
I've made allowances for the Great Wheel, the Planar Tree of 3e FR, the apparent uncertainties of the EBERRON cosmology, Ed's own take on the core Realms cosmology, real-world thinking, equations -- both fantastical and actual-astrophysics based, and the Gray of DARK SUN. I've incorporated the concepts embodied in the understanding of both the Phlogiston and the Crystal Spheres, the Far Realm, the Outside, the Uncreated, the Ruined, Faerie, Shadow, anti-Shadow, Time, Infinity, the Astral, the Drivespace of Star*Drive, KF-hyperspace of BattleTech, and the Negative Energy Plane [that's how I was able to allow the Capellan Confederation to form an alliance of mutual mutliversal totalitarianism with the Nariac Domain and the Harmonium], to name just a few examples.
As it stands now, if any particular planar-element has been mentioned just about anywhere, it has [or will have] a place in my cosmology. I don't expect I'll ever have a complete and workable model. But then that's the kind of legacy I'm leaving little Narnra -- whose already displaying an aptitude for planar mathematics that I would never have expected from one so young.
...
So, yeah, I'd love to see your own working, Icelander. |
|
|
