User talk:Lhynard

__NEWSECTIONLINK__

The Hierarchies of Mount Celestia
Hello Lhynard! I have seen that you have used a citation Template:Cite book/Planes of Law/The Hierarchies of Mount Celestia a few times. Might this actually be Template:Cite book/Planes of Law/Mount Celestia? Thanks for letting me know! Daranios (talk) 20:45, January 15, 2019 (UTC)


 * No, it's actually a poster found in the boxed set that includes information not found in the Mount Celestia book itself. It's a giant chart. ~ Lhynard (talk) 21:17, January 15, 2019 (UTC)


 * Ah, cool, I did not remember that one. Just today someone has created a citation template for the poster, thinking from the map side: Template:Cite book/Planes of Law/Map-Mount Celestia Would it make sense to use that one? Daranios (talk) 18:35, January 16, 2019 (UTC)


 * It is a separate poster from the map, if that is what you are asking. ~ Lhynard (talk) 18:42, January 18, 2019 (UTC)


 * Aehm, in my print the Hierarchies are on the back side of the Mount Celestia map, so I am wondering if it is enough to use the map template, oder if we need to separate ones for the two sides. Daranios (talk) 18:57, January 18, 2019 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see. I didn't remember them being on the same sheet. I still think that they should be separate, because posters don't actually have page numbers. ~ Lhynard (talk) 19:43, January 18, 2019 (UTC)


 * And done: I have created the citation template (and removed the "(boxed set)" within, according to this discussion). Daranios (talk) 15:49, January 19, 2019 (UTC)

Nose horns in the Forgotten Realms
I'm curious as to what parts of the Forgotten Realms have nose horns living in the wild. Zoos don't count.

Gringo300 (talk) 18:32, April 3, 2019 (UTC)


 * Rhinoceroses? I know that Chult does. I think that ancient Calimshan also did. ~ Lhynard (talk) 19:17, April 3, 2019 (UTC)

Midani
Thanks for adding that source! (I don't have access to Dragon Magazine Annual 1999.) Just trying to understand completely: I figured Semitic was a group of languages. Does "Speaking in Tongues" indeed say, that Midani is based on Semitic, or would the equivalent rather be the Midani language group? Thanks again for letting me know! Daranios (talk) 19:59, April 15, 2019 (UTC)

Translation Request
Hello,

My name is Fernandez Cyril. There some years I play at DD (Ghelspad), and i very impress by your collective work about the Forgotten Realms !

I contact you and all has wish for a personnal project. With my familly, we would like create a time capsule, and we would like input a little text in various real and fictive languages.

Could you help us for translate the text in some Forgotten language please? If you want to help me, the text in english is : "Hello, my name is Bakou Hearthless!! Nice to meet you ! I am exploring space with my weather balloon. If you want to send me back home, could you contact Mr.FERNANDEZ Cyril by e-mail at mr.fernandez@live.fr or by phone on +336 22 69 46 44 / +333 80 47 55 38 or by mail at this address 4 rue de la tournelle 21560 Couternon France. Thank you for your help! " For unexistant word you can creat neologism, I know the DD languages are not very large vocabulare !

Thank you for your help 82.67.64.135 09:58, May 5, 2019 (UTC) M.Fernandez


 * Hello, Fernandez,


 * Time capsules are something that I have always found fascinating; it sounds like fun.


 * Your request, however, is not something that is really possible. All of the so-called "langauges" in the Realms are simply pretend. A few of them, such as Alzhedo, Dwarvish, Elvish, Draconic, and Drow, have a relatively large list of vocabulary words, but the fact that multiple authors have contributed words means that there is little agreement or pattern among them. Also, most of the word lists are very focused on DnD-type things, and, even with neologisms, it would be hard to come up with enough words to do any word-for-word "translation", which, as I'll note below, is not really a translation at all. The big problem is actually all of the missing "tiny" grammatical words, like linking verbs and pronoun forms, which simply don't exist in any of the Realm's sourcebooks. In your little message, "Hello, my name is Bakou Hearthless," might be able to be translated, but that's about it.


 * The problem is that there is no actual syntax or grammar for these "languages" at all. Replacing a word with a word from another language doesn't work. Real languages have rules about word order and word endings, and we are not given any such information for any Realm's language.


 * There are a few cases, however, where a Realm's language is actually a real life language. Midani words almost all are real Arabic words,Shou words are almost all Chinese words, and Giant words are all from Scandinavian languages. What I do when I DM is simply use these real-life languages to "translate" things. For example, if I want my PCs to find a Giant inscription, I plug it into Google translate for Norwegian and tweak it a bit. I use Icelandic instead if I am dealing with the frost giant dialect.


 * But, if this is for a time capsule, the discovers would just think it Icelandic, not Frost Giant.


 * Here's another idea for you: Some settings do indeed have "real" languages, meaning functional, true languages. These are called constructed languages. Tolkien created several "conlangs". I know that the Klingon language of Star Trek is another functional language. I, however, do not know any of these languages, but I am sure that there are online communities that could help you translate your passage into Klingon or Quenya. Game of Thrones supposedly uses a functional language or two on its show also. Those are only three possibilities. "Conlanging" is a hobby for many—I have worked on a few myself—and Wikipedia has a huge list of made-up languages here: List of constructed languages.


 * Also, I am curious why you wish for a Forgotten Realms language. Ghelspad is a very different setting. Does it have any communities who might be able to help you make a message that fits within that setting?


 * I hope that these give you some ideas. Thanks for your message, and I wish you the best. I am sorry that I cannot be of any more direct help.


 * ~ Lhynard (talk) 18:06, May 7, 2019 (UTC)


 * Hello,


 * I'm interesting not only by Forgotten Realms language, I try to find Ghelspad language too. But without minus success !

Forgotten Realms are differente to Ghelspad but we had play with Forgotten Realms univers too, we have use a lot of univers :D. We had a people from Eberon, my characters come from to Forgotten Realms (the dragon forest), an other to Krynn, Ghelspad was only "the main Univers".


 * We have a Klingon traduction! For Tolken's langages my request was not obtain a really good welcoming :D.
 * If you are interesting, we are interesting by a traduction on your own colanguage :D.


 * Sincerly


 * M.Fernandez82.67.64.135 05:47, May 22, 2019 (UTC)

Citation and Canono Conflict Help
Sorry to bother you but I seem to require a bit of help. I've been going over certain monster pages, updating them and trying to use the sources provided to improve them. I have reached two roadblocks that the citation pages haven't adequately explained to me.

1. Vegepygmy. I need to add a source to the list at the bottom, but I can't seem to figure out how.

2. Meazel. I don't quite grasp the contradiction rules in this case. In previous editions they were clawed swamp monsters whose skin was diseased (hence the name). But Mordekain's version are shadowfell hermits who use gurrot wires and becaon shadow monsters to their victims. I don't see either as overwriting the other but I don't know how I would mend these two different concepts.

Thanks for your help. 184.88.10.180 03:07, June 17, 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi! I've left some answers your at your own Talk page, User talk:184.88.10.180. — BadCatMan (talk) 07:03, June 17, 2019 (UTC)


 * Hello,


 * There's no need to apologize about asking a question here. Welcome.


 * BadCatMan did a great job answering for me, so I don't have much more to add here. Regarding Meazel in particular, the 3e source is specifically about meazel in the Realms. Since this is a Realms wiki, that material takes precedence if there are any true conflicts, even though the 5e sourcebook is newer.


 * ~ Lhynard (talk) 15:58, June 17, 2019 (UTC)

Oryndoll Oddities
Yes. It actually is a building, or at least a carved out cave. Actual lore based place. Oryndoll has alot of horrors like that.Gem Hound (talk) 23:08, June 22, 2019 (UTC)

On top of this, can you please revert moving the Thrall Caverns (Oryndoll) page to Thrall Caverns and the Ring Caverns (Oryndoll) page to Ring Caverns? Both locations names are exceedingly generic, and having these pages be pages with unspecified locations will screw up work that I am going to do once I am finished with Oryndoll. Ring Caverns and Thrall Caverns are both future pages once I have Oryndoll and Ch'Chitl completed. Gem Hound (talk) 18:18, June 23, 2019 (UTC)

Going to add this as well. When I am working on Ch'Chitl, Ch'Chitl's Inner Ring will also be titled Inner Ring (Ch'Chitl), as it is different from the Inner Rings of most mind flayer colonies. Gem Hound (talk) 18:25, June 23, 2019 (UTC)


 * As I noted on your talk page, there is a difference between "inner rings" and "Inner Ring". Looking in the sourcebook, I only see Ch'Chitl having an "Inner Ring". Wiki titles, except for the first letter, are case-sensitive. So you can have inner ring and Inner Ring articles without the need for disambiguation parentheticals. ~ Lhynard (talk) 18:31, June 23, 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I'll take that into consideration for the future. I have alot more work to do. Gem Hound (talk) 18:33, June 23, 2019 (UTC)


 * Ring Caverns (Oryndoll) is now fixed. ~ Lhynard (talk) 18:40, June 23, 2019 (UTC)


 * Thankyou. Now onward to the Cenotaph of Maanzecorian.Gem Hound (talk) 18:53, June 23, 2019 (UTC)


 * I just thought of something. Can you add categories for temples to Maanzecorian and Ilsensine incase I find more of them during my project? Thanks. Gem Hound (talk) 21:57, June 23, 2019 (UTC)


 * Sure, I just added the one for Maanzecorian, but you can do this yourself too. There are a bunch of ways. Easiest is to scroll to the bottom of any page where the categories are listed and click "Add category". Type on in, hit Enter, and click "Save". That adds the category to the page.


 * Alternatively, you can edit the page—not with the Visual Editor, which is the spawn of Bhaal anyhow—and then you have two methods. You can type at the very bottom of all the markup code  or you can open the right sidebar of the edit page and the Categories section and add a category by typing in a new one and hitting Enter there.


 * After adding the category by any of these three methods, you can also make the category page itself. Simply click on the category link. You should see the page already there in the list. It should say at the top, "Start this page!" Click that and you can edit it just like any other page.


 * Many category pages simply look like this:


 * The first line tells how to sort the page when it is itself placed within another category in the hierarchy of categories.
 * The second line is a shortcut for linking to the appropriate article.
 * The third line is the "parent" category.


 * I hope that that all makes sense. I'll let you make the one for Ilsensine. Have fun, but be careful with your new powers.


 * ~ Lhynard (talk) 22:27, June 23, 2019 (UTC)

Navboxes
I would like to add the searechter to the beholderkin tab. How do you do so?


 * You need to edit the template page: Template:Beholders.


 * (If you are curious, they are called "navboxes" or "navigation boxes" in wiki lingo.)


 * ~ Lhynard (talk) 18:22, June 23, 2019 (UTC)

It seems you put a tag on the Searechter as irrelevent. I can't seem to find any place they were mentioned besides the magazine. Should I remove it?


 * If you mean, "Should I remove the tag?" no. The Unrelated tag is for articles that have no clear connection to the Forgotten Realms. If you mean, "Should the page be deleted?" that is up to you. We strongly discourage adding such articles, but they are not forbidden. In the future though, please do not add pages that are not about the Forgotten Realms in some way. This is a Forgotten Realms wiki about the lore of the Forgotten Realms. It is not a catalog of every monster ever appearing somewhere in a Dungeons and Dragons source. ~ Lhynard (talk) 19:39, June 23, 2019 (UTC)


 * P.S.: Try to remember to sign your name on talk pages using.


 * Alright. Feel a bit like I wasted time but that's more my fault. I saved the code, so if they ever come back I can restart the page but for now you can delete it. I assume that I can't because I can't find any page delete function.


 * Vegepygmy (talk) 19:45, June 23, 2019 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I know exactly how you feel. I once made a gigantic page about some abyssal monster because I found it in a big list, only to realize that it had nothing to do with the Realms. I decided to have it deleted also.


 * Yes, regular users cannot delete pages directly, but you can mark them for deletion with the Deletion tag.


 * ~ Lhynard (talk) 19:53, June 23, 2019 (UTC)


 * Also, if you ever discover a connection to the Realms after all, the information is still there, and the page can be undeleted. ~ Lhynard (talk) 19:56, June 23, 2019 (UTC)

Sch'thrruppasstt
So I told Gem Hound this already but since your working on Yuan-ti I'll give this to you as well. There's apparently another god of the Yuanti called Sch'thrruppasstt.

He's a Lesser God of the Abyss and it says that he orchestrated their creation but it's not really specifc on how. He wanted to become more powerful so he merged with his dimension making him effectively unkillable but also driving him crazy since it was in the abyss. His home is called the 'Mind of Evil' because it's literally his mind and he has absolute control their along with magical nullification. Also apparently the Yuan-ti seek to bring him back to normal using a lot of magic from the material world. So yeah, not sure how to mend that aside from making him more of a co-conspirator.

Vegepygmy (talk) 03:46, July 3, 2019 (UTC))


 * Thanks for the tip. ~ Lhynard (talk) 01:40, July 9, 2019 (UTC)

Armies of the Abyss
Hello again.

I can't find out of the armies of the abyss book is canon for forgotten realms.

Vegepygmy (talk) 23:05, July 8, 2019 (UTC)


 * No, it is not an official publication from either TSR, Inc. or Wizards of the Coast, so it is not canon. It was published as part of the Open Game Content license. ~ Lhynard (talk) 01:40, July 9, 2019 (UTC)

Good Article
I was about to add some stuff about Yeenoghu's realm from an old monster manual and noticed that there's like 12 new 'Good Articles' now. What's happened after I left for the day?


 * Nothing special; I just went through the list of nominations and awarded a bunch, because I have not done so in a while.


 * We maintain two levels of article quality here, Good articles and Featured articles. Each has its own procedure for nomination and approval. The former is a simpler process. If you want to nominate an article for GA status, simply add the Category:Good article nominees category. One of the admins—95% of the time, me—every once in a while goes through and checks if they follow the guidelines listed here. If so, it gets award GA status.


 * Featured articles are nominated here. Then, people vote and give critical feedback. If a sum of at least three people give the article a +1 vote that the article follows these guidelines, then an admin makes it into an FA, and it is displayed on the home page in a weekly cycle.


 * ~ Lhynard (talk) 23:52, July 9, 2019 (UTC)

Canon
So I've asked this before but this is more specific. Is the stuff by paizo publishing related to dragon magazine considered canon? Not to ask too much but I want to make double extra sure I don't read something for no reason whatever.

Vegepygmy (talk) 17:18, July 30, 2019 (UTC)


 * Paizo Publishing published the magazines for a while, but they are still official D&D content and canon, if they do not conflict with other Realms material. ~ Lhynard (talk) 19:10, July 30, 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Vegepygmy (talk) 19:26, July 30, 2019 (UTC)

Template:RaceInline
Hi Lhynard, thanks for posting your reply to the discussion, I have compiled this table to start with: Template:RaceInline/races. The only categories I have changed are those with differing version of the plural on the page.
 * Subraces are races ... we want either a single race category or every possible race categorization up the chain.
 * I get this, I can do either, what do you think is better?
 * Capitilization is important... & ...categories should be plurilized...
 * I get this, this is why I complied that table, if its matches the second column, regardless of case, it will link to the third column and display the input and categorise the first column.
 * Everything needs to be unlinked properly.
 * Thats what I am using for.
 * References need to be handled properly.
 * As I mentioned in the discussion this can be handled in a couple of ways, either I could use AutoWikiBrowser to semi-auto move references to basicref field, or I can try fix delink to handle the refs. I prefer the first method as that is what the basicref is there for.
 * We do not yet have a firm policy on half-races—though we should...
 * How are they categorised currently? I can use this until a verdict is made.

I have a couple of questions/thoughts: Thanks Abedecain - Talk  and maybe you'll get cake! 12:27, August 13, 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) I have the creature type in the table, do you think displaying this would be useful?
 * 2) Would you want a category for unmatched races, to either fix the table or add a category, could be useful for maintenance
 * 3) I was thinking of doing Gender first as a less complex version of the above, using Category:Inhabitants_by_gender, would changing the category from sexless to genderless as a more accurate term be okay? My fist draft version is Template:GenderInline what do you think?

Person Talk
Hey, I have started a thread in Person Talk on my implementations about Person/sandbox, would love for your feedback/thoughts. They are fairly simple modifications, but I think good ones. - Abedecain - Talk  and maybe you'll get cake! 13:04, August 22, 2019 (UTC)


 * I responded there; thanks. ~ Lhynard (talk) 13:38, August 22, 2019 (UTC)

Fey Day
Hi Lhynard,

Got your feedback about Fey Day. I'll definitely rewrite it, didnt realize that was a prohibition considering we're literally citing the reference down to the page.

That said, when you come across someone who's clearly trying to learn your system here, is it not possible to save the work they've done, either by deprecating the article to a draft or by copy & pasting the source into a message to them so they dont have to go back and redo ALL of the work? It seems like you have the best interest of the community in mind but it sure does feel crummy to see "Hey you know those couple of hours you spent looking up the really convoluted conventions this site uses in order to design that site... yeah well its all in the trash now, try again."

TigonDJ (talk) 08:11, August 24, 2019 (UTC)


 * If I may jump in, there is a record of all non-plagiarism contribution in each page's edit history. This link for example, will show the work that you put in for the Ches 19 page. It could then be used to add to a Fey day article.Ruf (talk) 14:40, August 24, 2019 (UTC)


 * Yes, Ruf is correct. Any legal edits are maintained in a history so that no work is lost.


 * Plagiarism is different, however. This has nothing to do with our wiki; it's the case for any wiki or any journal article regarding published text. Copied text is illegal and must be removed from the history as well, since the history is still accessible by search engines. So, while I recognize that it seems harsh, we have to follow the copyright laws or risk a lawsuit from Wizards of the Coast.


 * Also, I should say that I appreciate your comment here. It was presented in a very cordial way, when others might have responded angrily. Thank you for that. I totally understand where you are coming from, and when copied text is not involved, we generally try to work with what a new user added and go from there. No one wants to see hard work vanish.


 * ~ Lhynard (talk) 00:47, August 25, 2019 (UTC)

Hi again Lhynard,

I got some really good feedback and pointers from Moviesign and have redone the Fey Day article. Any additional feedback would be much appreciated.

Looking forward to contributing moving forward. TigonDJ (talk) 17:33, August 26, 2019 (UTC)

Cacodemon
Hello! You have poked a mystery ;-). After your comment I have looked for cacodemon as a creature. I found many appearances of the spell, but not of a creature. That was what I expected, as the spell summons defined demons, but does not mention a specific cacodemon. On the other hand the Wikipedia article does mention a supposed creature called cacodaemon or cacoloth. Unfortunately that article does not give sources. Do you have any ideas where a cacodemon might have appeared? Daranios (talk) 11:50, September 6, 2019 (UTC)
 * Just going to jump in here!
 * "Cacodemon" literally means "evil spirit". It's a Greek derivative, as a "demon" in those times were spirits, both those that were good and those that were evil. The "caco" prefix just refers to it as being an evil spirit, to distinguish it from good spirits. The 1e "cacodemon" spell brought forth especially evil demons, such as nalfeshnees, mariliths and balors. That unsourced wikipedia article is wrong, I believe.


 * Cacodemons are actually specifically mentioned in 4e material (and there's one 3e appearance, but only refers to the Lord of Cacodaemons). The 4e Demonomicon had a lot of information and stated that cacodemons were essentially the spirits of particularly evil demons: "Cacodemons are not insubstantial as defined in the Monster Manual. Rather, they are incorporeal. Unlike insubstantial beings such as wraiths and ghosts, cacodemons do not physically manifest." ~ Possessed Priest (talk) 12:23, September 6, 2019 (UTC)


 * Interesting, so 4th edition has one. Now I found that the cacodemon description in the Players Handbook 1st edition (which I think is the origin of the spell) uses "cacodemon" not only for the spell but also for the summond demon, both in the "evil demon" sense from the Greek word origin and in the sense of "the types of demons able to be summoned by the spell". Do you happen to have a source for the "Lord of Cacodaemons"? If I have access to it I might revise the Wikipedia article. Thanks! Daranios (talk) 14:31, September 6, 2019 (UTC)


 * Yes, the 3e mention is in Fiendish Codex I, page 155, on the page that describes demon lords. The demon lord's name is Ahrimanes, Chief of the Cacodaemons, and occupies layer 452 of the Abyss. ~ Possessed Priest (talk) 14:37, September 6, 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks again, I think this does not support the supposed 3rd edition cacodaemon from the Wikipedia article. I have removed the corresponding statement. Lhynard, sorry for talking over your head :-). Daranios (talk) 17:29, September 6, 2019 (UTC)


 * No need to apologize; this has been a fascinating read.


 * One confusing thing is that a daemon is a yugoloth, and a demon is not, so the subtle spelling might matter in these sorts of situations.


 * ~ Lhynard (talk) 20:04, September 6, 2019 (UTC)

Dhergoloth
Hello. I was wondering why there was no dhergoloth page? Was their just not enough for it or has no one bothered yet? Cause they do have some forgotten realms purpose in the Blood War and are somewhat important to the yugoloths it would seem. Just curious, and thanks.

Vegepygmy (talk) 02:42, September 13, 2019 (UTC)


 * It probably just means that no one got around to it. Feel free to add the page, if you do it carefully and be sure to mention the link to the Realms. Have fun! ~ Lhynard (talk) 02:48, September 13, 2019 (UTC)

Fleetswake
Hey again Lhynard,

At one point I had posted on the discussions about the redirect on Fleetswake to Waterdeep and asked getting it removed. You said you would do so after I corrected the Fey Day article. That's been done for nearly a month now. Can we revisit removing the Fleetswake redirect?

TigonDJ (talk) 17:31, September 19, 2019 (UTC)


 * I'm confused. There is already an article at Fleetswake. ~ Lhynard (talk) 18:49, September 19, 2019 (UTC)


 * Fleetswake has be updated from a redirect to an article only very recently. Daranios (talk) 13:45, September 20, 2019 (UTC)

No need to glare at the glory
Hello Lhynard! I have put up an edited version of your Outlands image, where I have to the best of my ability exchanged the "a" in the misspelled Glorium for an "o". What do you think? I would prefer using this instead of explaining the error in the article. However, I don't know if there are any limits within fair use to do something like that, and if the edited image should supersede the original image or be kept additionally. Thanks for your input! Daranios (talk) 13:45, September 20, 2019 (UTC)


 * Ha ha, I enjoyed the pun in the title.


 * Yes, I think that such an image is completely allowed by the fair-use policy. thanks


 * ~ Lhynard (talk) 01:21, September 23, 2019 (UTC)

Malatra and Jamnu Dweepam
I placed a canon map of Malatra at the top of that page so we can get rid of the markustay one. Also the fan-made location of Jambu Dweepam should be deleted Apotheot (talk) 23:26, October 5, 2019 (UTC)


 * thanks! ~ Lhynard (talk) 13:33, October 8, 2019 (UTC)

Yugoloths
Hey lhynard. How ya doing. If you haven't noticed I've been sprucing up the yugoloth pages. And I noticed something, especially with the chain devil page getting messed up, is that the Lower Planes have a lot of either incorrect or shallow info. Like for example, Baernoloth. The description was just taken from a 3e conversion without any checking. I was curious if there's any particular reason for this. If no one got around to them, or they got confusing or something. Just wondering, and thanks. Vegepygmy (talk) 02:41, October 8, 2019 (UTC)


 * No, there is certainly no reason for this. Fiends have always been popular, so many have edited or created such pages, and when more folk edit a topic, the odds are higher that more sloppy people will edit a topic. Before we had a good team of admins and well-established policies, there was less patrolling of pages, and now we have 30,000 pages to handle, so these have just not been fixed yet.


 * Thanks for your work on improving things.


 * ~ Lhynard (talk) 13:33, October 8, 2019 (UTC)

Maur/True Giant Classification
Hi! BadCatMan directed me to you to ask about this since you might know a bit more about giants. I just added the maur creature page from the 3E Underdark sourcebook. I'd like to update the relevant pages with links (namely the main giant page and the storm giant page), but before doing so I'd like to ask your opinion on classifying maurs as true giants. By definition a true giant must be able to trace its lineage to Annam All-Father and Othea, which maurs can do since they are a devolved form of storm giant. I would put them at a similar level as mountain and fog giants, being descended from one of the original groups but now distinct. Does that sound like acceptable reasoning to you? Thanks! - Bloghdaw (talk) 15:00, October 14, 2019 (UTC)


 * Yes, it sounds most acceptable. I actually had a note to self to make the very changes you describe later in the day, after having seen your new article. I just added Maur to the Giants template. (I actually had a spot waiting for it for a long while now.) Feel free to make the other changes on your own.


 * I am happy to see such an excellent first 4 edition to the wiki. Thanks!


 * ~ Lhynard (talk) 17:51, October 14, 2019 (UTC)


 * Haha, yeah, I meant to do more and then most of my books got lost in a move. Only just got a bunch of them back and started looking through stuff again. Thanks for the compliment! - Bloghdaw (talk) 17:58, October 14, 2019 (UTC)


 * Ah, rediscovering hidden gems is always nice. ~ Lhynard (talk) 18:16, October 14, 2019 (UTC)

How to Mark Plagiarism
I was reading through the page about Elminster and noticed some paragraphs in  the "Time of Troubles" section that needed citation. When I did some digging I found these sections to be plariarized from The Heroes Lorebook, page 49. Being relatively new I wasn't sure what to do except report it to an admin such as yourself.

ISUBurd (talk) 03:42, October 15, 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know!


 * In the future, you can simply add the following code (not from the Visual Editor) to the top of a page:


 * ~ Lhynard (talk) 15:50, October 15, 2019 (UTC)

Giant Questions
I'm working through the other giant pages, mostly the ones that don't exist but looking through all of them, and since I was thinking about making some extensive changes/haven't done this in awhile. I figured I'd ask some questions first.
 * 1) Arcane giants from 3E Monster Manual III do not have a specific section referencing their existece in Faerûn, however the Faerûnian sand giant entry mentions that the eldritch giants often harass them. Does that qualify as proof enough that they exist in the world to make a page for them?
 * 2) The 3E Monster Manual III says that Faerûnian death giants used to be called ash giants before the fall of Netheril. On the stone giant page, there is a subrace called ash giants referencing a 4E novel called "The Captive Flame." They are completely separate entities, both due to geography and the differening time periods. My plan was to make separate pages and just note that the ash giants that death giants were not the same as the other ash giants. Is that the best way to hande that?
 * 3) On a related note, death giants are in the 4e MM, but they have a very different origin and aren't specifically Faerûnian, so as far as I know that means that the information there doesn't qualify for this wiki, correct?
 * 4) Phaerlin and craa'ghoran giants are currently listed as giant offshoots on the main page, which isn't necessarily wrong, but the distinction between why mountain/fog giants count as true giants but phaerlin/craa'ghoran don't seems a little fuzzy to me. The former DID evolve naturally while the latter were changed by magic and elemental energy respectively, but still, their relation to Annam and Othea is known even if they aren't included specifically included in the Ordning list since they were one-offs that were added late to 3rd edition. Either way, I'd like to make their organization a bit more clear both on the page and in the Giants template. There are a few options but i think the best one is: mountain and fog giants are left as True Giants since they are specifically part of the ordning in multiple sources. Maurs, phaerlin, craa'ghoran, ash giants, and any other "mutants" are labeled as True Giant Offshoots in a separate section, since they have no stated place in the ordning but are still related. Zakharan giants, sand giants, death giants, arcane giants, and trolls are labeled Other Giants. Does this seem workable?


 * Yes, there is a ton of work to be done with fixing up the giant pages. It's been on my endless to-do for a while now.


 * A little history: All those red links on the Giant page are there because they used to be in the navbox and were simply dumped into the Giant page. This was because we wanted to remove links to non-canon/non-FR giant types from every single giant page. So, some of those red links certainly have no relevance to the FR and could be removed from the article at this point.


 * As far as the particulars:


 * " [T] he Faerûnian sand giant entry mentions that the eldritch giants often harass them. Does that qualify as proof enough that they exist in the world to make a page for them?"
 * Sure.
 * "My plan was to make separate pages and just note that the ash giants that death giants were not the same as the other ash giants. Is that the best way to hande that?"
 * Sounds good to me.
 * "On a related note, death giants are in the 4e MM, but they have a very different origin and aren't specifically Faerûnian, so as far as I know that means that the information there doesn't qualify for this wiki, correct?"
 * Correct.
 * " There are a few options but i think the best one is: mountain and fog giants are left as True Giants since they are specifically part of the ordning in multiple sources. Maurs, phaerlin, craa'ghoran, ash giants, and any other "mutants" are labeled as True Giant Offshoots in a separate section, since they have no stated place in the ordning but are still related. Zakharan giants, sand giants, death giants, arcane giants, and trolls are labeled Other Giants. Does this seem workable?"
 * Yes, I like your plan.


 * So, great work and thinking. I would encourage you, however, to not work too quickly. Give us a chance to check over your changes as you go, so that you can learn some of the finer details.


 * It's good to have you on-board with this. I have many projects and planned projects, more than I can possibly work on continuously, so it's exciting to have another person interested in some of the same topics here. :)


 * ~ Lhynard (talk) 16:04, October 15, 2019 (UTC)

Realms Legitimacy of Diancastra
Hi again! It's been a little bit since I've been busy with real world projects, but I am still working on the giant pages. I'm currently looking at the deities and had a question. Diancastra is mentioned in the Volo's Guide to Monsters (5e) pg 19. A large amount of that section discusses the giants of Ostoria/the Realms and the giant section of that book is heavily based on the information from Giantcraft, but the mention of her could theoretically be interpreted as a setting neutral statement and I'd like your opinion on whether it qualifies as Realms information if possible :P

Thanks! Bloghdaw (talk) 16:19, November 13, 2019 (UTC)


 * Diancastra is definitely a Realms-related deity. Mask disguised himself as her, as described in the Realm's novel Crucible: The Trial of Cyric the Mad, and she was worshiped by the character Avner, who appeared in four separate novels. ~ Lhynard (talk) 16:25, November 13, 2019 (UTC)


 * Oh cool! Well that's helpful lol, thank you


 * Bloghdaw (talk) 16:27, November 13, 2019 (UTC)

Out of universe clause
I'm a bit unclear about what this phrase means. It's what malebranche means from what I can tell. Did I just put it in the wrong place? Just a tad confused is all.Vegepygmy (talk) 17:52, November 13, 2019 (UTC)


 * Malebranche is an Italian translation, and Italian is not a language found in the Realms, so it is an "out-of-universe" inclusion. Such information can only go in the appendix, not the body of the article, because we are an in-universe wiki. Everything is written as if we were actual scholars living in the Realms. The translation is also already included in the appendix within the contents of the Malebranche name note. ~ Lhynard (talk) 19:02, November 13, 2019 (UTC)

Oooooooh. Ok my mistake I thought they were also called that in-universe. Thanks.Vegepygmy (talk) 20:08, November 13, 2019 (UTC)

Planescape Sources
I know that Sigil has connections to Toril and so canonically exists, but how does conflicting/overlapping/multiverse Planescape information interact with Forgotten Realms sources? I'm looking at updating Jotunheim, but the back and forth of mixing the Realms gods with pantheons that don't exist in the realms in Planes of Chaos is a bit confusing.

Bloghdaw (talk) 20:40, November 13, 2019 (UTC)


 * It's not that the gods of other pantheons don't exist; it's just that they do not have a presence in the Realms, so we don't care to write articles about them, because they are irrelevant.


 * Also, if a core source says that Diancastra likes apples but a Realms source says that she hates apples, we write that she, in fact, hates apples, although scholars from other crystal spheres believed that she likes apples. This is because we value Realms sources as being more trustworthy.


 * If you are writing about Jotunheim, it would be wrong to talk about lore that involves other worlds. For example, maybe the gods of Jotunheim led a war on the world of Midgard or Greyhawk. If so, we don't care. But if you are talking about what the realm of Jotunheim is like, because some Realms gods live there, that's great. If Jotunheim has some gods living there with no Realms connection, you can still mention those gods, but we do not bother linking to those gods or creating articles for them.


 * As an example, I write a lot of articles from the Spelljammer novels where the main character visits Toril and Garden and the Rock of Bral, which are all in Realmspace, but though I mention the name of planets in Krynnspace that he visits, I don't make links to those planets, and I don't write articles for them either.


 * So, if it's an actual conflict, the Realms sources trump the other sources.


 * If it's simply overlapping information, it's fine to use unless it conflicts or is irrelevant to the Realms.


 * I hope that this helps clarify things!


 * ~ Lhynard (talk) 21:04, November 13, 2019 (UTC)


 * My issue here is more not being able to distinguish what counts as Realms or not. The only named giant gods are Surtr and Thrym, gods with a presence both in the Realms and elsewhere in the multiverse. No Realms-specific book gives much information about them directly as far as i can tell, instead referencing non-specific books where those two are included in the Norse pantheon. Planes of Chaos seems to be referring specifically to the Norse incarnations of them, giving them distinctly different strongholds than any later realms sources and the Jotunheim geography as a whole being different and primarily focused on the Norse inhabitants. So if I understand correctly, that makes the information about Surtr and Thrym's homes a conflict that's trumped by the Realms sources, but does the information about Jotunheim still count if the gods don't?


 * Bloghdaw (talk) 21:45, November 13, 2019 (UTC)


 * Can you point me to where Realms sources provide a different "stronghold" for Surtur and Thrym than the Planescape sources? Then I could better answer your specific concerns. ~ Lhynard (talk) 23:40, November 13, 2019 (UTC)


 * Jotunheim is part of Asgard, Surtr rules from the city of Meerauk while Thrym wanders Jotunheim with occasional stops in the city of Utgard, Jotunheim is almost exclusively ruled by them and is a frozen mountain range/burning plain, heavily references the Norse mythology with no specific Realms references in that section - Planes of Chaos p115 (Planescape/2e)
 * Jotunheim is part of Asgard, Surtr rules from the city of Meerauk while Thrym wanders Jotunheim with occasional stops in the city of Utgard, Jotunheim is almost exclusively ruled by them and is a frozen mountain range/burning plain, heavily references the Norse mythology with no specific Realms references in that section - Planes of Chaos p115 (Planescape/2e)


 * Surtur has a divine realm called Muspelheim, Thrym has one called Jotunheim, both are part of the plane of Midgard. A Norse interpretation rather than a Realms one - Deities & Demigods p165,190-191, 194 (3e)


 * Jotunheim is part of Ysgard and is  home to all the giant gods, each has a divine realm that is unique to them and the landscape is varied, Surtr has his divine realm of Muspelheim with a stronghold called the Needle Spire of Surtr, Thrym lives at the opposite end of Jotunheim in his divine realm also called Jotunheim/Fimbulwinter - Player's Guide to Faerun p160 (3.5e)


 * Surtr has a divine realm in the Elemental Chaos called Muspelheim and lives in his citadel called the Iron Mountain, Thrym has a divine realm in the Elemental Chaos called Fimbulwinter and a stronghold called Nyfholl, other giant deities have realms as well but there is no cohesive Jotunheim. - Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide p67 (4e)
 * Bloghdaw (talk) 07:25, November 14, 2019 (UTC)


 * Those Realms sources you mentioned are from 3e and 4e, which employ different cosmologies than the other editions. 3e uses the World Tree cosmology, 4e uses the World Axis cosmology, and all the others use the Great Wheel cosmology, which is the one used in Planescape. So it is expected to see different names for the divine realms of some deities in different cosmologies. Here in the Wiki we stay edition-agnostic, so we do not note a preference for any one particular cosmology (even though the Great Wheel is clearly the best 😉). Therefore, a good practice would be to note the information from all three, noting where they differ.


 * What this basically means is that there would be an inconsistency between Planescape sources and Realms sources only if you compare Planescape information with with 1e, 2e, or 5e Realms material. ― Sirwhiteout (talk) 10:56, November 14, 2019 (UTC)


 * Alright, sorry for dragging this out more, but  i just saw that Jotunheim is described as the place where all the giant gods live in Giantcraft. Since that is also a 2e source, that does count as a conflicting source where Giantcraft trumps Planes of Chaos, correct?


 * Bloghdaw (talk) 11:27, November 14, 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for all the research that you are doing; I'm sorry for the delay. I haven't had the time to sit down and look through things to confirm the above until now.


 * Firstly, Deities and Demigods 3 edition can be thrown out above, because the whole chapter 6 on the Asgardian Pantheon explicitly presents its material as for an Asgardian campaign, complete with its own cosmology (pp. 164–167) separate from any of the three cosmologies that exist in the Realms. So, in this case, we don't use this sourcebook as a source at all, except, perhaps, as very bottom of the canon hierarchy for providing details about the gods' personalities or stats or such. But the cosmological info is definitely not canon. (So, I'm crossing it out from your list above to make it easier to move forward.)


 * The 3e sources for planes that are valid for the Realms unless conflicted are Manual of the Planes 3 edition, Dungeon Master's Guide v.3.5, and Planar Handbook, because these present the Great Wheel cosmology, which matches with the 1e, Planescape, core 2e, and 5e cosmologies.


 * Second, it's important to keep the planes, layers, realms, domains, and cities/strongholds straight, and confusingly, they often have the same names. Here's how it works out:


 * Plane: Ysgard (a.k.a. Gladsheim{MotP1e, PCS})
 * Layer: Ysgard (a.k.a. Asgard{MotP1e})
 * Realm: Asgard{MotP1e, PCS}
 * Domain: Gladsheim{MotP1e, PCS}
 * Domain: Valhalla{MotP1e, PCS}
 * Realm: Vanaheim{MotP1e, PCS}
 * Realm: Alfheim{MotP1e, PCS}
 * Realm: Jotunheim{MotP1e, PCS} (separated from Asgard and Vanaheim by the river Iving){MotP1e}
 * City: Utgard{MotP1e, PCS}
 * Stronghold: Meerrauk{PCS}
 * Stronghold: Gudheim {Giantcraft}}
 * Realm: Merratet{PCS}
 * Realm: Gates of the Moon{PCS}
 * Layer: Muspelheim{MotP1e, PCS}
 * Realm: Muspelheim{PoC}
 * Portals: primarily to Jotunheim,{MotP1e, PCS} Asgard (realm),{MotP1e} and Vanaheim{MotP1e}
 * Layer: Nidavellir{MotP1e, PCS}


 * This is the organization presented in the 1e and Planescape settings, and it does not conflict at all with the three 3e sources I mentioned. The only difference between 1e and 2e that I could spot was that Gladsheim and Valhalla are halls in 2e, not full domains, but even these can be argued as simple cosmological points of view of a non-material reality.


 * Manual of the Planes 1 edition notes that the fire giants of Muspelheim are led by Surtur and also calls that layer his home, but it also notes that he maintains outposts in Jotunheim as well. Thrym is said to make his home in Jotunheim.


 * OK, now to look at the information that you gave from Planes of Chaos. This boxed set does not change anything from the main Planescape campaign setting; it simply expands it. Yes, it places the homes of both Surtur and Thrym in Jotunheim, with Surtur particularly in Meerrauk. So, our first conflict is that 1e places Surtur in Muspelheim, while 2e places him in Jotunheim. However, 1e allows that Surtur has outposts, such as Meerauk, in Jotunheim. And technically, 2e only says that Surtur rules from Meerrauk, not that he makes his home there. So, there is not really a conflict.


 * Finally, the source claims that the other gods of the giants play Jotunheim frequent visits.


 * On Hallowed Ground is the best 2e source for finding out where a deity lives. It does not mention Surtur or Thrym, but it places the other deities in other places.


 * Now, the 2e Realms source, Giantcraft: The book confirms what On Hallowed Ground said and places Annam All-Father in the Outlands. His old palace, however, is Gudheim, and it is located in the center of Jotunheim, which it places in the plane of Ysgard (p. 44) So, thus far, no conflict with earlier sources. Giantcraft continues and claims that the souls of giants who die in battle go to Jotunheim. OK, still no conflict.


 * Giantcraft clarifies the previous 2e placement of Stronmaus' home in the Beastlands by claiming that he visits there very, very often but that he really supposedly lives in a cloud palace attached to Gudheim (p. 47). So, this is also more of a clarification than a direct conflict.


 * In the section on Hiatea, Giantcraft doesn't give her realm. Nor does it seem to give the realms for the other giant gods. So, I guess that I am confused why you say that Giantcraft places all of them in Jotunheim. Which page number is that? It seems to me that Giantcraft implies that they all used to be there, but it seems that when their father left, they too, with the exception of Stronmaus, which makes sense, abandoned it for the most part.


 * Moving on to 3e. As noted, the gods aren't mentioned in core sources that matter, but the Great Wheel cosmology matches up perfectly. Faiths and Pantheons provides some stats for the giant gods, but it does not state their homes.


 * The thing to keep in mind with 3e Realms sources is that they use the World Tree cosmology. This is simply another point of view from mortals on the Prime Material plane. It presents Jotunheim as a plane in its own right, not as a realm. Well, even in earlier editions, realms could be thought of as sub-sub-planes. On this wiki, we treat such cases as simply a matter of connections. Jotunheim exists, but how it connects to the other planes depends on one's point of view. And each of the giant gods' realms exist, but where they are located is simply a matter of point of view, because so many of the planes and layers and realms and domains "overlap" and are connected by seamless portals and other cosmological connections.


 * As you noted, each of the gods are given homes here, but since it is clear from earlier editions that the giants frequently visit Jotunheim, this is not necessarily a conflict.


 * Looking through them one on one, we are told that Annam keeps his Hidden Realm here. This is a connections issue. The realm may well be a demiplane, and to say that it has connections here actually matches what we know of it from Giantcraft and what it says about Gudheim.


 * Stronmaus is said in this sourcebook to live in a cloud palace in Jotunheim. This is in full agreement with Giantcraft. It even gives the palace the same name of Stormhold given in 2e sources.


 * Surtur is placed in a realm called Muspelheim. The description matches the layer of Muspelheim in the Great Wheel cosmology. The Spire of Surtr is new information, but it doesn't at all conflict, as it is simply a stronghold. We simply have a case of a layer in the Great Wheel viewpoint being considered a realm in the World Tree viewpoint.


 * Thrym is similarly placed in a realm called Fibulwinter. 2e would have called this a domain instead of a realm. No issue here really.


 * As for the other gods, the names of their realms match in 2e and 3e here—Steading for Grolantor, Woodhaven for Hiatea, Florallium for Ialannis, and Thraotor for Memnor. It continues to agree with 2e sources in saying that Skoraeus Stonebones prefers to wander, rather than keep a realm. Even the realm of Vaprak, Shatterstone, is the same in 2e and 3e.


 * So, it seems to me that the only issues here are a matter of placement in the cosmology, which is the same major conflict existing between the Great Wheel and the World Tree.


 * Even in 4e, Surtur and Thrym still have the same realms. The first and only conflict that I see here is that Surtur's stronghold is named Iron Mountain, instead of the Spire of Surtr. Perhaps the place has two names? Thrym is now given a stronghold called Nyfholl.


 * ~ Lhynard (talk) 21:40, November 17, 2019 (UTC)


 * Actually, in Planes of Chaos, Muspelheim is actually also the name of Surtur's realm in the layer Muspelheim, and he has a stronghold named the Spire of Surtr, so that matches Player's Guide to Faerûn exactly, except for the location of the realm. ~ Lhynard (talk) 05:31, November 18, 2019 (UTC)


 * Wow, that's some compilation. Can't help adding that On Hallowed Ground does feature Surtr and Thrym, but among the Norse deities on p. 178. It confirms Muspelheim and Jotunheim as their realms, respectively. Daranios (talk) 20:12, November 18, 2019 (UTC)


 * Great, thanks! ~ Lhynard (talk) 16:53, November 25, 2019 (UTC)


 * Alright, thanks for the slightly confusing clarification lol. I may need to read through a few times to get it but I'll get it. As for your question about Giantcraft/all giant gods being in Jotunheim, page 44 says that all the celestial children of Annam remained in Gudheim/Jotunheim even after Annam left. They may not have had specific described homes (besides Stonmaus), but they all still lived there. They invited priests who were about to die to dine with them and the spirits of dead giants were specifically in Jotunheim to defend the Ordning. - Bloghdaw (talk) 14:58, November 25, 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the info. To be clear, the text says that the giant gods stay in Gudheim, which is the specific palace/stronghold within the larger realm of Jotunheim.


 * The giants seem to be very different than many other peoples in that they worship the pantheon as a whole; they are what are called polygots, (not polyglots.) As such, they do not go to a single god or goddess's realm when they die; they go to Jotunheim. The gods remain in their own realms. Giantcraft mentions that some giant petitioners might get to visit the the gods in Gudheim, but they do not go their to live; they remain in Jotunheim.


 * ~ Lhynard (talk) 16:53, November 25, 2019 (UTC)