Dragon invasion breaks the lore, we should all be dead or dying soon

Korah_Eaglecry

lordrichter wrote: »

Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »

Thats not how Dragon Breaks are used. The entire point of Dragon Breaks is to make every option, regardless of how much it conflicts with others, the option that happened.

Yes, but keep in mind that there are no hard and fast rules as to what a "dragon break" is. It is pretty much whatever the writers want it to be, whenever they want it to be. Lore vs reality.

Except currently it is exactly as I described it so whether they change it in the future or not. When people generally speak of Dragon Breaks this is exactly what they are referencing. If ZOS has decided to go a different direction on how Dragon Breaks work, or to add something to it. They havent shared that with us. And that would be a conversation in of itself if they did.

Honestly, it would not be ZOS that goes in that direction, but BGS. The only reason they would have to do a dragon break would be due to the needs of TES 6. I can't see where ZOS has any interest in dragon breaks.

Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »

All we know is how it was used the one and only time it has been used for a practical application. If ESO is in one, then it would be the second practical application. ESO is not in the same situation as Daggerfall, with the exception of some relatively minor plot points that can be attributed to transcription errors from an unreliable narrator. A dragon break like "Warp in the West" is not necessary for ESO.

ESO doesnt need to be in the same situation as Daggerfall for there to be a Dragon Break. While there hasnt been more than 1 confirmed Dragon Break during a game, there has been a number of them over the course of the history of Tamriel. So we do have an idea of how they work in general.

My point is that it does not matter whether we have an idea of how they work. They can change it. Would we even know of a dragon break that removed something from history? Only if it didn't work. (Note: this is a theoretical question, not something I am suggesting that ZOS or BGS do)

Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »

In order to meet the needs of the people who do not think that ESO is canon, or that ESO breaks the lore, a negation of those ESO events needs to happen. This is the opposite of what was done in Warp in the West, but it is in the same conceptual space as it. That is why it gets floated as a solution. It isn't in today's definition of dragon break, but it could easily be in tomorrow's.

No, no it doesnt. If it is canon, it is canon. No one, not the writers at ZOS or those at Bethesda have to jump through any hoops to appease a subset of lorebeards that cant get passed ESO being apart of the franchise. Those fans can either get over it or draw up whatever headcanon they want, but at the end of the day Bethesda has the final say in what is included.

I think we are safely on the same page here.

Im in general in agreeance that ZOS does not need to use a Dragon Break to explain anything. This period of time was a blank space in the timeline prior to the game and Bethesda is notorious for moving the games farther along the time line and into new regions so they dont have to address older games and their outcomes.

I just dont think Matt is really speaking about what it is people are asserting hes speaking of. His answer does not jive with the overall flow of that interview and that specific question.

luizhd

Princessrhaenyra wrote: »

Claudman wrote: »

Princessrhaenyra wrote: »

.

ManwithBeard9 wrote: »

Princessrhaenyra wrote: »

Bruccius wrote: »

Princessrhaenyra wrote: »

Pretty sure the lore will just write it off as a dragon break. Actually this whole game could then be considered a dragon break.

That doesn't even make a lick of sense. Nothing in ESO implies even a bit that a Dragon Break is taking place.

Really 3 factions fighting for control of Tamriel isn't going to be considered a dragon break? Who's going to win? Is no one going to win? Are all 3 going to w hin, with a dragon break all that is possible.

Is doesn't matter who wins or loses because none of them can light the dragonfires. And that's why there is little recorded history from this time. There's so much war and strife that history doesn't have time to be recorded.

There is always time for things to be recorded, if what your saying was true, then nothing would be recorded ever. Maybe the reason there's so much unknown about the 2nd era is because there was a dragon break.

Or the history was just not recorded...

There are a lot of things which get lost to history, even in real life.

I don't get why everything has to be so big and metaphysical. Metaphysics and magic are apart of the TES universe, but not all the time...Sometimes the answer is simple and not convoluted metaphysics.

With how big this game is, with all the dlc and chapters writing it off as it was just lost, is pretty lazy imo. We might as well just write everything off, all the Skyrim civil war too. It shouldn't have been recorded either. We'll just have empty games.

So far I haven't seen anything lore breaking in any of the expansions or dlcs. I've seen some lore addition to some empty gaps, but nothing that actually disturbs it.

VinxTerranova

Dragons always existed. Maybe not as many as before. But Mirmulnir, the first dragon you kill in Skyrim was very much alive. Along with Paarthurnax. There are probably tons of dragons in hiding just not wanting to be killed.

As for the Wraithstone, they were obviously locked away. So it's not like dragons can't exist. We just let them out of the prison. Perhaps the quests will explain how they were trapped. Or how their souls returned etc. It doesn't seem impossible that someone sealed away the dragons instead of killing them, since they were not dragonborn. The quest leading up to the Wraithstone they said it was a weapon. Think of the people who could actually use this 'weapon.' Tiber Septim?

Smaxx

VinxTerranova wrote: »

As for the Wraithstone, they were obviously locked away. So it's not like dragons can't exist. We just let them out of the prison. Perhaps the quests will explain how they were trapped.

It's already in the game, written down and on the walls of the Halls of Colossus (minor spoiler follows):

Khunzar-ri and his Kra'Jun tricked them to get into the halls, then sealed them away. Did they magically trap all dragons that were in Elsweyr? Not exactly. But thanks to their greed the Khajiit managed to weaken the dragons significantly. The most powerful ones resisted, but got tricked a second time (well, yeah, they were really desperate it seems), and finally sealed away.

You can read about it in the book Khunzar-ri and the Demons, which is part of the Elsweyr prologue:

So the demons arrived at the moon temple and Anequina, acting as moon-priest instead of queen, opened a connection between Nirn and Jode in the form of a shaft of moonlight. The demons, greedy and hungry for lunar power, eagerly stepped into the moonlight, but immediately realized they had been tricked. They roared in pain as a portion of their life force was drawn away by Jode. It took Kaalgrontiid every bit of his remaining strength, but he resisted and rallied his brothers. They broke free of the shaft of treacherous moonlight and fled into the wilderness.

Anequina then deposited a sliver of the demon-infused moonlight in an urn and gave it to Flinthild. Flinthild and the Kra'Jun took the urn to the ancient place of power, while Khunzar-ri went to do what he did best: convince the demons to follow the lure and walk into the trap of their own free will. And that is what he did, before the Betrayer earned his name. As you shall hear.

This book is also an immediate example of the unreliable narrator unintentionally covering up the fact that those "demons" were actually dragons. If Second Era Elsweyr forgot about the dragons – and just calls them demons – then it's absolutely plausible that future generations forgot it once more.

As for the "no dragons in Cyrodiil" theory: That won't hold. The Empire featuress tons of depictions of dragons and they're all far too accurate (ignoring actual stylistic choices) to be mere speculation or be based on tales. Someone had to see a dragon and then describe it in detail. Just look how first interpretations of Dinosaurs looked like in real live, based on randomly cobbled together bone pieces.