| Thumbs Up: |
| Received: 0 |
| Thumbs Up: |
| Received: 1 |
With all our theories floating around and being mentioned like fact alot of time I see it as confusing to seperate fact from theory for a newcomer. For example the Margonites being an ancient branch of the Luxons. We don't have any information to really prove this, yet it is mentioned as though it is fact. And if we continually do this many newcomers will not be able to see the difference between what is known fact and a simple theory. Especially for those that do not know much of the lore already it will become very confusing.
While it can be fixed through a simple asking of a question, not many will do this because they think it's proven fact. I just thought that this should be a sticky or something to help newcomers learn that not everything in the Lore Forum is proven fact..
| Thumbs Up: |
| Received: 16 |
The problem, my friend, is that, regardless of what I sticky, or what we do, people won't listen. The best way to handle this is to just gently handle those who do it, and try not to be too rude. It's hard I know.
|||Quintus Antonius Adepphius Philologus Tyrianicus Canthacus Elonacus Durheimus|||
| Thumbs Up: |
| Received: 1 |
Eh,I just thought it should be mentioned because alot of people assume that the Margonites actually were an ancient branch of the Luxon armada. I mean,we just don't know/don't have any evidence to prove this. Sure,that's just one example,but I've noticed it's one of the most recently mentioned-as-fact ones.
Sadly though you are right (as usual. >_>) that people will not listen and honestly they probably wouldn't even read the sticky if you did do so. Oh well,take care of one misunderstanding at a time,right?
| Thumbs Up: |
| Received: 16 |
That's all we can really do, Leon.
|||Quintus Antonius Adepphius Philologus Tyrianicus Canthacus Elonacus Durheimus|||
| Thumbs Up: |
| Received: 0 |
I love what you've done with the place!
I don't know if this has been brought up before and I wasn't sure exactly where to put it so here goes...
Ive been reading this forum for awhile and never really posted. Im having a really hard time forming any sort of definitive opinion on any of the lore or storyline for one reason. Arena.net seems to have a serious 'word problem' and I think this is where those of us who visit here mostly differ.
By 'word problem' I simply mean, they do not have a cohesive way of presenting the same information everywhere. Take for example the skills. How they word them varies widely even if they're presenting the same concept. I'm not sure how to resolve it aside from Anet hiring one person/team to rework it (well, just about everything really).
Has there been any headway made as far as the lore is concerned that I havent seen or are we just making do with the tainted information as we've found it?
| Thumbs Up: |
| Received: 0 |
I'm not sure what you're asking. The lore forum doesn't include anyone from ANET's story dept so we don't have confirmation on anything, but there are plenty of theories that give more insight then the words you'll find ingame. Logic has helped draw conclusions from scattered facts.
This isn't the lore forum, though... posting what you'd like to be true is not encouraged, only what the facts seem to point to (at most!).
Proud Member of the GWO Guild
Brin Kalahon - Very Important Warrior
Mako Derina - Monk : Ejana Kirana - Ranger
Drec Sutal - Necromancer : Salvador Rizzi - Paragon
| Thumbs Up: |
| Received: 16 |
Um..what? I thought this was the Lore Forum......Originally Posted by Drec Sutal
|||Quintus Antonius Adepphius Philologus Tyrianicus Canthacus Elonacus Durheimus|||
| Thumbs Up: |
| Received: 0 |
Right... and this is the lore forum.
But what Im saying is that in trying to put 2 and 2 together one needs to know the definition of 2 and if Anet is using it in many different contexts (read: using different definitions) then it makes it extremely difficult to put those 2's together with any certainty. We know (Ive seen it posted time and time again) that the timeline is (from all sources) not accurate. So, what I'm asking is if there's any general consensus on which parts/definitions/contexts these various concepts are being used are correct.
I guess the shortest way would be to ask is if there is or has anyone started a Lore Encyclopedia (for lack of a better term) so that everyone can be on the same page about (at least the agreed upon/most likely) concepts, places, people, etc.?
| Thumbs Up: |
| Received: 16 |
That be a hefty task! I believe a few people are working on a glossary though.
|||Quintus Antonius Adepphius Philologus Tyrianicus Canthacus Elonacus Durheimus|||
Reply With Quote
