Lore and how it relates to information a character knows.

[Zango_Unchained]

I am curious as to how lore corresponds to what a pc knows for example, how would one know about exacts about Netherese culture and practices?

I would also like to know does lore score represent direct knowledge of something and as it gets higher do you just magically learn more things?

I find it rather bothersome to get into long winded arguments with other pcs IC about information that in no way would be known by our pcs. This isn't a gripe because I am honestly curious if I should just start intently researching what I wish to know in a wiki or otherwise when I reach a higher lore value on a character.

[HalflingPower]

This might be better posed to the DM Q+A as any answer another player can give you may not be module policy and merely their opinion.

[Zango_Unchained]

I wouldn't mind to get player thoughts on this, if a DM would pop in on official server policy that would be spectacular.

[Deadlykate]

Well there is a library of information IG, such that can be learned if your character would seem the type to read it. Libraries and Tomes of Ymph forum is meant for knowledge that can be learned in game, they tomes within Mistlocke regarding information about many things.

So say you have a character with high lore, they must read a lot. Therefore the tomes within Mistlocke could provide what items you look over and other things you may find. This would be my idea of how one would be able to get knowledge of other cultures, items and other things.

[Pigadig]

I find it rather bothersome to get into long winded arguments with other pcs IC about information that in no way would be known by our pcs.

Wouldn't the logical response then for your PC be to say "Really? Okay." and then move on?

If you shouldn't know, and they shouldn't know, I don't know how you can get into an argument over it.

[Deception]

zango - consistent master of lore

[The Old Hack]

For me, it depends on four factors: character origin, character mental stats, character profession and level of lore skill. The last one being highly important, of course.

If the character only has default lore, I work from the assumption that it barely knows how to read and write and mostly relies on personal life experience. In case of modest but usable lore, I figure that the character has some basic math skills, has a decent idea of its homeland's history and a good grasp of the things needed to be competent at its class. In the case of high or maxed lore, I assume that this is a born bookworm who reads everything it comes across, may know complicated math and will have keen insights in its own home's history.

When it comes to more complicated and/or setting specific lore, my basic assumption is that my character only knows of it if it has come across it ICly. (Obviously every character who has been on the island for more than a day or two will know what the Withering is and that a Lich is making it, but will they know that the Lich was originally Netherese, called Shylae and taught by ancient druids?) If it is about anything Netherese, all any of my characters except high lore mages and clerics will only know that Netheril was an old magical empire which blew itself up fooling with powers beyond their ability to understand and control. They might know more than that, but what they know might easily be wrong.

I'd like to finish with this: there is nothing wrong with having your character know stuff that is distorted, misunderstood or outright untrue! If you cling to your wrong knowledge and get into trouble following it, that can be fun, too. I have found that the DMs rarely object to my character making a blatantly wrong assumption and then cheerfully marching off a cliff following it. :) (Crit fail lore checks are your friend here! If you make one of these, this is a godsent opportunity to make up your very own guaranteed-to-be-wrong lore and ride it to disaster. And if you are confident enough to convince everybody around you that it is true, all the better!)

~tOH.

[Dillusionist]

It could also be that a PC is dead wrong about what they're saying, lore-master or not. Remember not everything a PC knows is wholly derived from what they've experienced in-game. On what basis are you deciding PCs shouldn't know about Netherese culture, though? Ymph is covered in its remnants.

If you're trying to pay a lore master and are not wholly familiar with Forgotten Realms cannon it can put you in awkward situations sometimes. Like I'm playing a PC whose supposed to know a lot about monsters and magical creatures. But I, as a player, don't know really know much about all the weird D&D aberrants in the underdark. So that's sort of awkward if someone asks my PC, with his legendary lore, about something that I as a player cannot answer.

Forgotten Realms Wiki is a decent resource if you're playing a scholar and need general information about the realms. Obviously EFU lore takes precedence over it, but its good for general info.

[HungeringShadows]

Let a DM worry about whether or not a character is more knowledgeable than he should be. You should only concern yourself with roleplaying the stats on your character sheet. Whether somebody else is roleplaying their numbers properly is for a DM to decide and something you've no business speculating upon.

To answer your question. Lore allows you to expand upon things that are done with finer details. Or speak upon things that are outside of your normal field. Things that would require study as you've no experience with them in person. Whether or not you have lore doesn't dictate how much you know as almost every tavern/church across the realms has bards/priests spinning tales of every major happenings.

[Kotenku]

I take lore
1: to identify items and translate forgotten texts.
2: so that a low INT character can still justifiably have a decent vocabulary, because I hate being limited in what words I can use.

In general I feel like any obscure fact from the FR wiki should be pretty much verboten because half of it comes from 4th edition's setting changes, half of it isn't canon in EfU, and half of it is supposed to be known by absolutely nobody IC, regardless of how high your lore skill is.

[Ebok]

Quoting facts from the FR wiki can surprise you, since they can quite easily turn out to be completely false here. In general, I'd also caution this method unless you've applied for the background to have this knowledge. In that way, the DMs can also inform you on any specific alterations that might exist.

The Lore skill imho, represents how much extraneous knowledge you might have. Found something weird buried in the sand, how does it work? Found an ancient book on a shelf, can you puzzle out meaning from the runes? Run across a really strange critter form some god awful plane? Oh, that lore guy knows what it is. Really naming the planes, specific dogma from other faiths, the extra things you would not need to do what it is you do, that is what the lore skill represents.

[Dillusionist]

The Lore skill imho, represents how much extraneous knowledge you might have. Found something weird buried in the sand, how does it work? Found an ancient book on a shelf, can you puzzle out meaning from the runes? Run across a really strange critter form some god awful plane? Oh, that lore guy knows what it is. Really naming the planes, specific dogma from other faiths, the extra things you would not need to do what it is you do, that is what the lore skill represents.

I'm not saying FR wiki isn't shitty. I'm saying some of THAT information isn't necessarily known to all players, and sometimes you need to look it up online some-where if you're playing a scholar-PC would would be aware of it. That's one place to look up information. Some of its 4e, some of it is still relevant like: "What's the Capital of Thay? Maybe my well-traveled bard might know?"

[Ebok]

I wasn't contradicting you in any way Dillusionist.

[Ebok]

I wasn't contradicting you in any way Dillusionist.

I find it rather bothersome to get into long winded arguments with other pcs IC about information that in no way would be known by our pcs. This isn't a gripe because I am honestly curious if I should just start intently researching what I wish to know in a wiki or otherwise when I reach a higher lore value on a character.

I guess... to clarify my statement, People will always argue about what was or is true. They do it all the time, facts on a historical level are only as relevant as the particular authors understanding them them. Ina  time before the printing press, really vague lore such as the culture of the Netherese are going to both be strongly coloured by the author's particular point of view and why they wrote the book.

Then you have degrees of translation, where you try to take a dead language and pull meaning from a passage whose meaning is sensitive to the time of the culture and the individual. Lore passed down from these sources will often vary. In this way, the only way to learn what the netherese culture really was, is to walk out into the game world, find a lich, and ask it the questions. ( be sure to prompt the DM with your questions ahead of time if you can reasonably expect a answer >_> )

Essentially, anything you do not learn in game beyond the basic facts: Netheril had floating cities. Its capital was in 'X' and was called 'Y', it ended because of 'Z', etc... should be considered entirely up for debate.

In this manner, your lore skill increasing represents the character's off screen information gathering, and the Pcs ability to puzzle out the workings of some text, language, or other literary source. I would not take it further without a background application, personally. Although you can find good lore sources from 2e-3e books in the form of free pdf's if you are truly interested. Just, expect ( pertinent ) info not gathered in game to be contradict-able by things found in game.