Regarding the characters, I only made use of a few in the Epic - Armadyl, Ikov, Tumeken, and Zaros a little. It was written in November 2015, when we knew much less about each of them - it's unclear to me whether there must be any contradiction in their characters. Elsewhere in the thread, I develop Thormac a lot and discuss Saradomin, Guthix, Bandos, V, Jack, Urval, Camorra, Aesa, Gunnar, the pests, and the spirit beast - I don't necessarily see contradictions here either, just more opportunity for character development. The School of Lesarkus could easily be renamed or removed entirely - all of this is meant only to provide more texture to Gielinor anyway.
The biggest problems with lore I see come from my critique of the language with which we currently speak of planes, realms, worlds, planets, the universe, time, magic, soul, life, life-force, anima, god anima, energy, etc. I'm just not a fan of talking of worlds like cheese and life like oil - where's the profundity in that? RuneScape's lore has so much more potential if these topics are taken seriously, and properly married to the religious outlooks of each of the factions, which themselves could use some further sophistication.
The Memorial to Guthix has also made things more difficult - it provides a different backstory for the Standing Stones and it relates rather than identifies life-force and anima, which multiplies our esoteric concepts. It also has a slightly different description of portal construction. It's probably obvious, but my strategy is to relate spiritual concepts back to the lived experiences in which they are constituted - I think this serves the profundity of the story.
Anyway, I'm glad you read and enjoyed this, and I hope some of it will be helpful. Thinking through these questions has been tremendously helpful for me. I wish you and the Lore Council the best with your work.
Your lorehound friend,
Attila Square
17-Jan-2017 21:59:03