Lore/Fluff Wiki - Gathering knowledge and imagery

[Daeron]

Greetings,

I've been trying to puzzle together some bits and pieces of Fluff and lore. Lately my focus is in trying to pinpoint various locations of interest in Naggaroth, what the places look like, the land, the people and the type of armies. Eventually.. the idea starting splitting in two parts. On one hand, I think it would be interesting to collect the bits of known fluff/lore on the Druchii and Naggarond in particular. On the other hand I'd like to work on a project on "what would an army look like" if it were themed after a particular city.

For example, if I were to make an army of Ghrond, what kind of units would fit such a list best? The goal is not to divert from the official book's ruleset, but how to build a legal list and style it to fit the fluff.
If I were to make buildings to fit my army of Ghrond, what would they look like? What would the land look like, if I'd make a themed board?
What can be used as a source of inspiration?

Some themes are well represented in one particular edition of the DE book. Some are scattered over small facts or details throughout different stories.

I'd like a place to gather all these facts and collect the references to the sources. I've become quite taken by the idea to style an army and drive it to more story driven battles... trying to keep the hobby spirit high

Because the purpose is more a collection of facts that have some persistency over time, I think a Wiki format would be an excellent tool for this kind of work. Keep in mind, the initial purpose is the gathering of Lore facts mostly. Discussions should be kept or encouraged on the forum instead.

How do other people feel about this? Is anyone else encouraged to partake in this?

Daeron

[Lesebyst]

If it will be image driven, have you considered combining it with a Pinterest blog? I have a Rogue one, with multiple boards which could instead be cities/aspects of Druchii warfare. http://www.pinterest.com/Lastroguepvp/

[Daeron]

It's not image driven, but I thought it would be interesting to collect imagery that could relate to one topic or another... Should someone seek inspiration for a themed board or a story.

[Amboadine]

Excellent idea, I would be very happy to contribute. The wiki format seems appropriate, perhaps if enough people show interest, then you could allocate out some areas to focus on.
Then discussions could commence area by area, rather than one thread trying to discuss everything simultaneously.

[Daeron]

Hmmmm... It seems, as could be expected, that this isn't the first idea like this to pop up:
- http://whfb.lexicanum.com

This presents an interesting question:
- Shall we seek cooperation, and launch this project within their site.. and their boundaries or structure?
- Or will we get started on our own anyway, probably benefiting the liberty to work on some things in more detail?

Additionally, it may be interesting to note that Wiki's have built-in support to exchange information. The export and import features aren't so effortless that they require only a single click, but integration is possible never the less. This would also permit a strategy where we work on our own system and periodically exchange our updates.

[Daeron]

I posted the idea of cooperation on their forum:
http://forum.lexicanum.com/showthread.p ... n=lastpost

I'm curious... They already have a lot in place, but a lot of their work seems "thin" or outdated. I do think it would be great if we could benefit from one another's work.
It seems the latest changes on their wiki in general are made by a user named Fr0. Hey Fr0!

[Amboadine]

Will take a read of those links once I get home. Work and Captain America comes first today.

Interested to know their response first before deciding one way or the other, although I feel we should look at the structure and boundaries that we feel are appropriate and then compare to determine how closely they align.

[Daeron]

Right. They replied and so did I. So that should give us and them some food for thought. I tried to separate the topics we'd stuff on the wiki to see which ones are compatible.

[Amboadine]

I get from their response, that only really half your original intention would be met using their existing site.
Collection of existing lore is all well and good, and I agree, would be nice to keep in one place.
However the part of the proposal that excites me more is the extrapolating from what is already in the books and building upon it, for the purposes of modelling and army list design. This does not really meet their need for citation in all cases, rather references an idea.

[Daeron]

I tried to highlight that in one of the proposals. I like the Boiling Sea as example. It's a name that wouldn't ring a bell at first, but if you read through the books it pops up every once in a while as a location where the Dark Elves find some of their war monsters. Sometimes the "west coast" is referenced instead. And if you look up its location on the 4th and 8th edition maps, you see that it's on the west coast, surrounded by islands like "Ghorgon's island" and a salamander-thing.
Should all references to such location be collected, they could form a basis for some hobby fun:
- A description of the region perhaps?
- Monster loaded wild-life
- Beastmaster focused expeditions and hunting parties
...

I'll have to check with Lizardmen lore and Beastmen lore to see if there's any related notions of that location on the map.

A lot of this research could be placed in the Lexicanum. Of course, how to build an army theme around it is something they might not be interested in, but that part we could keep on the forum.
An important question for this kind of work is: is it really fact, common knowledge or shared information... Or is it our individual interpretation of the facts? One can be worked on as a collaborative effort, the other can not. A Wiki system isn't designed for personal interpretations, but more suited for collected information (though that could include some interpretations if they are considered "relevant"). But it would be a great starting point for a hobby project.

[Archamedius]

I tried to highlight that in one of the proposals. I like the Boiling Sea as example. It's a name that wouldn't ring a bell at first, but if you read through the books it pops up every once in a while as a location where the Dark Elves find some of their war monsters. Sometimes the "west coast" is referenced instead. And if you look up its location on the 4th and 8th edition maps, you see that it's on the west coast, surrounded by islands like "Ghorgon's island" and a salamander-thing.
Should all references to such location be collected, they could form a basis for some hobby fun:
- A description of the region perhaps?
- Monster loaded wild-life
- Beastmaster focused expeditions and hunting parties
...

I'll have to check with Lizardmen lore and Beastmen lore to see if there's any related notions of that location on the map.

A lot of this research could be placed in the Lexicanum. Of course, how to build an army theme around it is something they might not be interested in, but that part we could keep on the forum.
An important question for this kind of work is: is it really fact, common knowledge or shared information... Or is it our individual interpretation of the facts? One can be worked on as a collaborative effort, the other can not. A Wiki system isn't designed for personal interpretations, but more suited for collected information (though that could include some interpretations if they are considered "relevant"). But it would be a great starting point for a hobby project.

I don't see why if you put a disclaimer up top about your wiki being based on published material and then expanded upon by members, you couldn't run an embellished version of lore for the purposes of expanding the Druchii lore and helping to create opportunities for different themed armies. Yes the wiki suite is designed to be a repository of information. Who's to say that information can only be information seen elsewhere first? You could probably even come up with a rule for contributors to section off content as "Published/Cited" and "Expanded Universe". Thereby allowing the casual reader to understand where the line is drawn between data taken from a GW published source and data that is extrapolated/expanded upon by the contributors.

[Daeron]

It really depends on what kind of Wiki you're creating. I once used a Wiki as easy content management system for a roleplaying website. It also permitted us to expand the website as a collaborative effort where people could bring in their own characters and locations of interest to the collection. It offered us a library of people who liked to archive information, as well as keep "living pages" for those who liked to have an up to date story on their characters and storylines. But like so many things in roleplay on a large enough scale, such a method works well because it offers a freedom for the individual and you only need to resolve conflicts "as they occur" which is generally low compared to the amount of information gathered.

Wiki's are a superb tool to collaborate on articles, or gather pieces of information, where each author or editor works on their time and moment, adding or expanding an existing page/site.
But when it comes to defining army styles, hobby themes etc we reach a more difficult topic. Who is going to write what part? Will there be yes/no discussions such as which units should be included?
It's more difficult because there is no "truth", no real measure to judge one as more accurate than another. Say, we imply that Corsair-typed armies could use Shades modeled to be advancing Corsairs. This is anything but far fetched. But if we go this route, who is to say that any sea-monster with the "counts as cauldron of blood" isn't suited either?

How far will we go? This is a form of consensus that is difficult to acquire by gathering bits of information.

That said, it could serve as a system to report the conclusion of a discussion. Such an article can then be enriched with a collection of all links to people using the theme or style and how they experienced it.
The Lexicanum won't host that conclusion, I'm afraid. But that's so many steps further down the line, that I'd recommend to get started with the ground work first. We can still post the conclusions in a forum sticky. Should it really grow in size, then we can still start a new Wiki and import the groundwork we did with the Lexicanum. It needn't be "lost effort". That's the fun part of Wikis It's great at collecting information

[Daeron]

Their answer is in, the cards are on the table.. I think it's time to make a decision.

It appears that most, if not all textual knowledge can be gathered on the Lexicanum provided we keep it "free" from personal interpretations (but factual correlations can be mentioned if they are limited to the facts). There's, apparently, even room to note information such as Northern Tower Patrols, which is a rather vague concept based on some 6th edition pictures and a few paragraphs of fluff.
While I believe this puts high demands on how the information is presented (which is good practice anyhow!) it seems to permit most of what we have suggested here.

But... it won't permit creative interpretations or artful interpretations. We will not be able to collect imagery, for example, unless it's official stuff. While I never imagined opening up the collection of images to every scrap and doodle we could google, I do think some artistic images are worth collecting if only because they so accurately depict the fluff with a very high quality impression.

Let there be no mistake though: if we start this ourselves, we're in for a lot of moderation work. Work with a rewarding feeling, maybe, but a lot of work.

I made a poll. It's up for votes. But where a "yes" or "no" can be used to vote, I would love to hear your opinions in more detail.

[Amboadine]

Reading through the response, it seems we would be limiting ourselves somewhat in brief.

Whilst the data gathering in itself is rewarding, it can become some what dry without room to express some personal opinions.

Although more work I would rather look at developing our own repository of knowledge that can be managed in a way more suitable to the initial concept and I would be happy to offer my services to help with any moderation needs. If there is an initial framework in place and specific guidelines on what and how far personal interpretation can go, then this could be used as a basis to build information on each city, area, unit type etc. Start with a standard template of essential information and add a couple of subheadings at the bottom of the page for personal interpretations, such as the aforementioned army list unit suggestions and architectural differences.

That is not to say that the data couldn't be used and linked to Lexicanum, if it fits their criteria.

[Daeron]

I see the opinons are a bit divided on the subject, according to the poll. The response in general is quite low. Perhaps there is only a small group showing interest?

[Amboadine]

I see the opinons are a bit divided on the subject, according to the poll. The response in general is quite low. Perhaps there is only a small group showing interest?

I would imagine the finished article would be of interest to a larger group, especially if it is relevant to gaming and modelling; however the commitment to undertake the sheer amount of work required to write, collate and sort the data may be significantly smaller, hence the low response.

[MangoPunch]

I don't think a lot of people read this forum, maybe posting links in painting and modeling, army discussion and history would be appropriate, and get some more people involved.

I voted "yes with the other site" but am pretty indifferent between the two yeses. I am leaning towards a factual repository as I think 1) we will end up surprised by the amount of color and neat tid-bits there are, 2) it is the least limiting for people to create within the framework, 3) it will avoid contradictions and contention when people have different personal views.

I'll be happy to help, although will probably be much less useful than a lot of others on the site who know/have more Warhammer resources.

[Daeron]

Final 10 days to vote and respond.

@MangoPunch: Agreed. I really would like a factual repository that isn't too clouded by interpretations. Still, one important advantage is that you could link to other articles and posts on the forum. At the least, I hope to keep the fluff facts and fluff interpretations or adaptations separate.

[Daeron]

With the votes in, it seems like we have some work on our hands to get a wiki started. I'll keep you posted on the progress.