Talk:Timeline

Jump to: navigation, search

About this board

By clicking "Add topic", you agree to the terms of use for this wiki.
Azurillkirby (Talkcontribs)

I made a flowchart of the current timeline, if you guys think it might be worth posting on the main page to make the timeline look less confusing than having 20 separate timelines.

http://i.imgur.com/3PhnxPj.png

Toadslayer (Talkcontribs)

As much as I can see that you have put a lot of effort into this flowchart I have to say I don't think it's worth posting. I think that timelines like this are just too hard to read or garner information from, especially when they are as convoluted as the one we have on out hands.

Azurillkirby (Talkcontribs)

It's hard to read, but so is the timeline as it currently is written on the wiki lol. All it would be is an aid to better read the existing information, more than a definitive guide of how the timeline is.

Reply to "Flowchart"
Summary by Azurillkirby

(Rob confirmed that it is not canon)

Azurillkirby (Talkcontribs)

Is it actually canon that there is only one Lieutenant Surge? All I personally remember is Rob and DB saying that one of them had to lose it after Kinney randomly got it, but that seems to fall more under the "Word of Rob" in that it isn't necessarily canon.

I looked back at Porc Hunters and it is never mentioned (even by Rob to describe the mace) to signify that the mace is anything more than just a regular mace enchanted with electricity.

Azurillkirby (Talkcontribs)

(Just asked Rob about this in his patreon discord and he said that the mention in Jewel of the Dingo Isles of there being only one Lieutenant Surge is not canon, so I will separate the timelines accordingly.

Summary by Azurillkirby

(Got confirmation from Rob that they are not canon as of the current moment)

Azurillkirby (Talkcontribs)

Do we know if all of the Dreamweaver visions from Cobblers and Skeleton King are canon? If so, it might be helpful to add those to the timeline separately, as they do each contribute to the overall timeline assuming they are confirmed canon.

Pillowkeeper (Talkcontribs)

Hey, thanks for bringing the timeline page to our attention. I'd say hold off on trying to interpret what is on this page. A lot of the information if false or purely speculation so we need to discuss how to handle the page in the future.

Azurillkirby (Talkcontribs)

That's why I brought it up specifically in a discussion post. I could very easily be wrong so I'd rather just bring up the ideas and let the more knowledgeable people in the community make the actual decisions! :P

Toadslayer (Talkcontribs)

Hey Pillowkeeper. A lot of the stuff on this page I have put there myself. Could you please point out where the information is false and/or speculation as to the extent of my knowledge it is all true. I have tried to be meticulous in maintaining truth in the timeline here.

Pillowkeeper (Talkcontribs)

It's not so much that the information is incorrect, but that the timeline format of the page needs to be adjusted. That's the reason I'd say not to put too much effort into it right now. The page has good info, but needs to be presented in a better way. At this point, I'm not completely sure how we would be able to display it properly, so it's not at the top of my list to do.

Azurillkirby (Talkcontribs)

Asked Rob about this in the Patreon discord, and he said that "They are visions, they aren't going to be clear!"

So the Dreamweaver visions are not purely canon.

Tower of Ultimate Wizardry after Sunswords

1
Azurillkirby (Talkcontribs)

There is no reasoning given on the timeline why Sunswords comes before Tower of Ultimate Wizardry so I have separated the timelines. The best reasoning I can think of is that because ToWR takes place slightly before ZC, but the amount of time between the two is not specified so this can't be confirmed canon.

The only other reason I can think of is that maybe Rhedmun maybe mentioned Boyfriend Quest? But even then, that's just a character saying something.

Reply to "Tower of Ultimate Wizardry after Sunswords"
Azurillkirby (Talkcontribs)

Seems a bit silly to have a section needing to explain that Pot Puppies only live for a year, when not only does this fact affect nothing other than the amount of time between Dingo Isles and New Crew (which isn't even discussed), but also the fact that the only way this has been confirmed is by Rob saying that "I think" that's how it works in a campaign. Also the entire fact that we don't know how long a "year" is makes this fact even more meaningless

Mind you, I'm not trying to make it out as if this is a big deal or anything. I just found it mildly amusing how this section talks about Pot Puppies as if this fact is completely 100% true, when not even a full screen down there's a section talking about how Rob saying something doesn't make it canon.

Toadslayer (Talkcontribs)

It partially is a remnant of the past as a few people were trying to make assertions on the timeline based on the lifespan of pot puppies. It may not be the most relevant thing now, but it is good to have there, as it does contribute to the knowledge we have of time and therefore the timeline of the world.

As for the word of Rob, I think you misunderstand. That section is clarifying that not everything Rob says is canon, as in if he tweets something or says something in BTS it isn’t canon. It must happen in a campaign. The pot puppies only live for about a year thing was in a campaign and so is canon as much as Phineas and Xavius being cousins is, or any other thing that Rob has said about the world in a campagin. If the section isn’t clear then you might want to edit it to make it clearer.

Azurillkirby (Talkcontribs)

There have been many other times Rob has said something in a campaign that wasn't canon. Biggest example being the fate of Philipe after Band of Thieves. The way that I've personally interpreted that is that if Rob is describing an event that is currently going on in the middle of the campaign, then yes that is canon. If it is merely an off the cuff remark about the world that isn't a part of their current situation, then it isn't necessarily canon.

Reply to ""Pot Puppies" vs "Word of Rob""
Toadslayer (Talkcontribs)

I just came to edit the timeline for GPO and I noticed that @Shovelkills removed all the theories from the page under the reasoning that theories shouldn't be on the wiki. I say that on the contrary they should be as they are where we can store information useful to new potential timeline links and also explain to users why things aren't canon to the timeline. Before we had theories many people added things to the timeline that were only theories, because they didn't understand why they didn't fit. Before I revert it back to the way it was does anyone have any thoughts to add?

Shovelkills (Talkcontribs)

The wiki is used to record factual information about the show. The forums are now a good place to theories now.

Toadslayer (Talkcontribs)

You haven't really put forth any reasoning, I believe they are valuable to the wiki and the users of the wiki. All you've said is that the wiki is for factual information. The theories are facts, facts that have been put together as premises to form a conclusion. That conclusion might not be factual, but it is valuable for wiki users to know that and it is interesting to read and consider when thinking further about the timeline.

Shovelkills (Talkcontribs)

Theories aren't actual facts as it is a possibility that things could happen and isn't officially canon. If they were facts they wouldn't be theories. The wiki is to record official lore and as the theories can't be confirmed cannon they aren't canon. The wiki mods and I agreed on removing the theories.

Toadslayer (Talkcontribs)

Sorry for not replying earlier, but could you provide evidence to the mods agreeing with you? This is because I still think it's dumb to not include theories on the page. There is no need to be so hard line only facts on the wiki when I have outlined how these theories help both those looking at and those editing the wiki, especially when they are explicitly labelled as theories, so no one is going to think they are facts.

Rob (Talkcontribs)

I don't know why Shovel didn't outright say this, but I told all the wiki editors not to post theories as they are better suited for our URealms Forums, not the wiki. When they are on the wiki, they can lead to misinformation very quickly.

Toadslayer (Talkcontribs)

Alright, thanks, I'll make a thread for it on the forums then

Reply to "Timeline Theories"

What evidence do he have that Silvermine Mountains happened after The New Crew?

7
Toadslayer (Talkcontribs)

I was just looking through the evidence for the canon timeline, and I couldn't find anything about Silvermine Mountains being after The New Crew. So I was wondering, do we even have evidence that this is the case, or did it somehow jut slip through?

B333 (Talkcontribs)

I don't think that there is any 100% clear evidence, but I'll see if I can make some sense of it. I'll be using some acronyms to make this easier to read (Porc Hunters=PH, Jewel of the Dingo Isles=DI, Sunswords=SS, New Crew=NC, Silvermine Mountains=SM).

Because of Phineas, we know that it goes SS–>PH–>NC. We know that it goes DI–>NC, and that it goes PH–>DI based on Phineas' age. We know that it goes SS–>PH–>SM, based on characters that die and events that occur (like Unter and Rufio being in the prison).

So from this, we have SS–>PH–>DI–>NC, and SS–>PH–>SM.

There aren't really any specific events that suggest that NC is before SM. The only things I can think of are that Maelstrom references that his brother is heading to the Silvermine Mountains, and after the crew is captured, it is said that they are going to be sent to the mountains. Obviously, since the prison is destroyed in SM, it makes sense that NC takes place before it, but it's possible that the news just hadn't reached any of these characters yet.

GentlemanTwain (Talkcontribs)

Another thing to keep in mind is that in the Campaign “The New Crew,” Phineas shares an interesting piece of lore that significantly cleans up our timeline. Pot Puppies at maximum, live only a year. Meaning that since McCoy’s dog is on his last leg (Pun intended) it has almost been a year since the events in Dingo Isles. And while we never see Anihlus The Living Death that Walks in The Silvermine Mountains, he is presumed to be healthy by things Kallark meant ions in passing about him. Meaning that between Sunswords and Silvermine, no more than a year has passed. Meaning we either have continuity error, or the skeletons raised the pot puppies for a while before McCoy stole them. Seeing how defensive the skeletons seemed to be of them in the final encounter of The Dingo Isles, the ladder seems more likely. So recap, SS->SM=less than a year. while DI->NC=a year at most. Upholding your continuity theory, albeit vastly shortening the span of time between campaigns.

B333 (Talkcontribs)

Right now this isn't strong enough evidence to say for sure, though. All we know is that Phineas thinks that Pot Puppies live for a year. It's possible that Phineas was lying, or misinformed, about the lifespan of Pot Puppies.

Rob (Talkcontribs)

I agree with B333. I don't think using the insane ramblings of Phineas should be used to prove time between campaigns. Phineas saying "Don't they live like a year a most?" isn't solid enough to establish if it's been 1 year, 3 years, 5 years, etc etc.

Toadslayer (Talkcontribs)

As much as I would like to agree that this can be dismissed as insane ramblings of Phineas, it wasn't Phineas who said this. It was Rob as the GM (proof: https://youtu.be/8uPUrRRqVoI?t=2m10s) and as far as I know that means it is canon for sure. As such I think Gentleman Twain must be right.

(Would have replied earlier, but for some reason I was getting errors whenever I tried)

Rob (Talkcontribs)

That makes it canon that Pot Puppies live around a year old, but means nothing for the timeline as we have no idea how long THESE pot puppies lived for. We have already introduced the fact that characters can extend their lifespans by consuming Dragon Scales.

I also want to point out that we have no idea how long a Day let alone a year. This world doesn't function on having a set in stone timeline for a purpose and it's to not have theories like this that force a timeline.

Pot Puppies living for a year is not solid enough to establish how long it's been since the previous campaign.

Reply to "What evidence do he have that Silvermine Mountains happened after The New Crew?"
212.159.12.80 (Talkcontribs)

With the new website most of the characters has a "They were last seen". The character sheet for Squinks says he was last seen "escaping from an Elven Town after a heist went sour", which suggests that his appearance in Unseen Rogues took place before Roamin's Band of Thieves. So really this question is, how much are we treating the facts on the website as canon?

Tdis8629 (Talkcontribs)

The main issue with viewing one text over another is that either side could be correct. With a fluid timeline such as between Unseen Rouges and Roamin's Band of Thieves, either event could have happened first (in other words, to the writers perception of events). Either character would have to state that "They were gathering supplies for some crazy wizard" in the city, or "After the failure in the village, we had to lay low in a dwarven city" in order to solidify the events.


In other words, there is no way to know unless it is specified on the board in front of a live stream audience. However, since Band of Thieves is the campaign that there was spoken dialogue between any character, that may be why it was placed in the "Last seen" section.

Reply to "The new website and Squinks"

Who changed the timeline layout at the top and can we change it back?

4
Toadslayer (Talkcontribs)

I'm sorry to whoever did it, but it's just really hard to make sense of. Before we had the information clearly laid out, it wasn't fancy, but it was easy to make sense of for anyone coming in to have a look. Now you've got all this flashy extra unnecessary information there and the real information you can't actually read. Honestly I can't even tell what the timeline is anymore, which is not good for a page with the express purpose of telling people what the timeline is. I really think we need to just change it back to the way it was without all this flashy table stuff.

B333 (Talkcontribs)

Looking at the history of the page, it seems that MrHealix did it. I'm sure he had good intentions, by trying to make it look nicer, but I do agree that it was a lot easier to read before. I don't really know enough about wiki/formatting stuff to know what to do with it, but I can revert it back, if there are no objections to this, of course.

Emperor Emorious1 (Talkcontribs)

I would also like to change it back to the original format, because personally, it was confusing to decipher.

Toadslayer (Talkcontribs)

I've managed to make sense of it and it actually doesn't even include the actual timeline anymore, I had to go into the history to get it. I'm going to edit it (not revert as other stuff might have changed since) to remove this table nonsense that confuses things and literally doesn't have the timeline in it.

Reply to "Who changed the timeline layout at the top and can we change it back?"

Does the appearance of Albert (Apparition) make a canon timeline?

4
Emperor Emorious1 (Talkcontribs)

This will have spoilers to the latest episode of Battle of the Bards. So Gear Man makes an apparition of Albert the Monkey Fish, after he gets a 10 on his dice roll. Would this establish a timeline because as we know Albert died in RBoT?

MrHealix (Talkcontribs)

not realy did you get what the Optical Illusion does Summon an optical illusion of any character from any campaign. meaning it just an illusion and a meta level thing.

Emperor Emorious1 (Talkcontribs)

I understand, thanks for clearing that up!

MrHealix (Talkcontribs)

No Problem just helping out another wiki editor.

Reply to "Does the appearance of Albert (Apparition) make a canon timeline?"