How much of ESO lore keeps with canon and how much "dragon breaks" canon?

HeroOfNone · December 2015

So, how much in ESO is canon, and how much of it breaks canon from prior games and potentially future games? We already have a few concepts like "dragon breaks" points in time that are so turbulent that events get jumbled and lost. Then there is the warping of the west, which describes how the terrain changed between ESO and Daggerfall. But how deep does some of it go? What is set in stone and what is subject to change?

A small story
I was discussing the TES lore as a whole the other day and how bosmer (wood elves to some) were probably one of the most disturbing races. Minor Spoiler warning

Being originally beasts, you're looking at shapeshifters that agreed to look like elves, but are just beasts that agreed not to transform as per the green pact; an agreement with Y'ffre not to eat plants and never transform again, less they be stuck in a purgatory. Even some customs they have making contracts is creepy. In certsin cases they have a contractor put loved ones up as colateral and if they fail to deliver, the loved one may be killed and fed to them. Pretty brutal

After my description a few seemed impressed with my partial recollection of ESO quests and asked me where I found that. Explaining I got it from ESO got the immediate response "oh, that's cannon". I paused, and then asked "um, ok, what part isn't?" And the response, of course "any of it, they'll probably rewrite it all in TES 6.

We got in an argument on this, but to a lot of fanboys ESO is like the starwars prequels, it never happened, despite the lore sitting right there. Admittedly there is lore that doesn't Fite with prior games (the same way prior TES games always break canon with their prior game) but we always have common core canon threads that are still consistent.

So, for you lore geeks out there, how much is canon, and how much breaks canon?

JD2013 · December 2015

The thing is, lore is fluid. Especially as this game takes place hundreds and hundreds of years before the main numbered series. There's nothing in this game that stomps on the lore of the future games.

The reason they set this game in this period is there was little to nothing about lore in this era.

As long as things like the Dwemer stay gone stay true, there'll be no real big problems.

And if someone says "but the planemeld wasn't known about in the main games" no it wasn't. Because they had not fleshed out the lore of the second era.

Though there's something much bigger coming that may make a few lore buffs twitchy

btw I am a huge lover of all ES lore. It's the best lore I've ever known of a game series.

Gilliamtherogue · December 2015

JD2013 wrote: »

The thing is, lore is fluid. Especially as this game takes place hundreds and hundreds of years before the main numbered series. There's nothing in this game that stomps on the lore of the future games.

The reason they set this game in this period is there was little to nothing about lore in this era.

As long as things like the Dwemer stay gone stay true, there'll be no real big problems.

And if someone says "but the planemeld wasn't known about in the main games" no it wasn't. Because they had not fleshed out the lore of the second era.

Though there's something much bigger coming that may make a few lore buffs twitchy btw I am a huge lover of all ES lore. It's the best lore I've ever known of a game series.

Actually that something coming is seemingly one of the largest recorded events of the 2nd era. If you've been paying attention to the hints they've been dropping you should have a rough idea. Although I could be wrong, this is going to be likely the most accurate stab at lore to come with the next major story arc. Listen to the final speech of the main story as well as the little surprise after Orsinium's story, both of those hint towards something that's actually been recorded in the other games

Also recall there are still living Dwemer around, if you played Morrowind you know of a bit of info, and that took place in the 3rd era. There are a few magically sealed ruins around that hint towards a larger group still being alive in game too.

Zorrashi · December 2015

Ah. So the question of "is it canon?" raises its ugly head again....
Well as far as ZOS in concerned, ESO is canon (as per a tweet). But the players? Many players simply do not consider ESO up to par with preferred lore-standards, and thus claim that no, it is not canon.

In the end, the decision to adopt any ESO 'lore' will be up to Bethesda.

But me? I personally do not think it is canon. Some of the changes are due to cost or impracticality. As an example, Cyrodil is usually referred to as a Jungle in this era, but as it is PvP land, I imagine they overlooked that fact in favor of not making a landscape that takes a lot of power to process. Another one is how they implemented the Mane in ESO, which is supposed to be a unique sort of khajiit whereas the one(s) seen in ESO are clearly of the same sub-species as the player. One would imagine they disregarded this in favor of not creating a new character model.

But other changes? Some changes are there simply to garner a quick extra buck or not bother with details (ex. some of the Crown Store mounts. But then again some people don't really consider the crown store as part of the canon game). Some examples include the lack of architectural differences in Altmer architecture described in earlier tomes, the lack of non-human skeletons, the seeming...lack in truly fleshing out the stories associated of certain phenonena (the dragon priests were very underwhelming...). I suppose I should blame their story telling more, but perhaps that is innate to the MMO genre.

But overall I think ESO merely glazes their game with TES lore, hence why I consider their TES-elements only skin-deep.

Gidorick · December 2015

Ask 10 people, get 10 responses.

I personally see it as such: Events that we see occurred. If they conflict with what we have read in some book or were told by some mage or adventurer, the event we witnessed takes precedence. As for the ancient lore... that is literally a matter of belief. Some believe that Khajiit are descended from cats. Some believe Bosmer and Khajiit have the same origin:

"Y'ffer did not have Azurah's subtle wisdom, so Y'ffer made the forest people Elves always and never beasts. And Y'ffer named them Bosmer. And from that moment they were no longer in the same litter as the Khajiit."

Some believe Khajiit were straight up Mer who were changed, like the Dunmer.

And the Bosmer believe they were a shape shifting ooze-type stuff prior to becoming Bosmer.

I personally believe this "ooze" was the form of the et'Ada, who were formless until they became Ehlnofey. I think the "ooze" is more of a poetic visualization than it is a physical form... and this is why TES Lore is so amazing!

Anyway... if you're interested, I made this last summer:

It's full of my own perspective on established lore.

Dracane · December 2015

Zenimax put some effort into making sure, some ESO events can't be known in the future

Most famous example is the Dragonfire Cathedral underneaht the Imperial City.

'I make sure, known of these events will be written down and you must keep this as a secret' So this explains, why we've never heared anything about this cathedral in future games. So is this but a foolish excuse or a valid explaination ? That's the question.
I think it's mainly up to us, what we believe and we don't believe.

Lore crimes and mistakes really hurt the immersion and there should at least be some kind of excuse for such things. As you said, ESO took place several hundrets of years prior to the more popular games. So of course, many things can be told or can be present in ESO and nobody knows about it in the future. Same is true in reality. Not everything is written down and not everything persists.

BabeestorGor · December 2015

HeroOfNone wrote: »

And the response, of course "any of it, they'll probably rewrite it all in TES 6.

This applies to pretty much all the lore from the previous singleplayer games too. Bethesda have always been prepared to retcon lore if they felt it benefitted their newest game.

Shunravi · December 2015

Almost all TES lore is told by the Unreliable Narrator, is filled with cultural bias and predjudice, and varies wildly depending in who you ask. Absolutists are idiots.

Dracane · December 2015

Gidorick wrote: »

Ask 10 people, get 10 responses.

I personally see it as such: Events that we see occurred. If they conflict with what we have read in some book or were told by some mage or adventurer, the event we witnessed takes precedence. As for the ancient lore... that is literally a matter of belief. Some believe that Khajiit are descended from cats. Some believe Bosmer and Khajiit have the same origin:

"Y'ffer did not have Azurah's subtle wisdom, so Y'ffer made the forest people Elves always and never beasts. And Y'ffer named them Bosmer. And from that moment they were no longer in the same litter as the Khajiit."

Some believe Khajiit were straight up Mer who were changed, like the Dunmer.

And the Bosmer believe they were a shape shifting ooze-type stuff prior to becoming Bosmer.

I personally believe this "ooze" was the form of the et'Ada, who were formless until they became Ehlnofey. I think the "ooze" is more of a poetic visualization than it is a physical form... and this is why TES Lore is so amazing!

Anyway... if you're interested, I made this last summer:

It's full of my own perspective on established lore.

Something odd in this picture. Julianos is refered to as Xarxes (the Altmer god) but I've seen a book, that is refering Arkay to Xarxes. Though I've never seen any relation from Julianos to Xarxes.

Spacemonkey · December 2015

Gidorick wrote: »

Ask 10 people, get 10 responses.

I personally see it as such: Events that we see occurred. If they conflict with what we have read in some book or were told by some mage or adventurer, the event we witnessed takes precedence. As for the ancient lore... that is literally a matter of belief. Some believe that Khajiit are descended from cats. Some believe Bosmer and Khajiit have the same origin:

"Y'ffer did not have Azurah's subtle wisdom, so Y'ffer made the forest people Elves always and never beasts. And Y'ffer named them Bosmer. And from that moment they were no longer in the same litter as the Khajiit."

Some believe Khajiit were straight up Mer who were changed, like the Dunmer.

And the Bosmer believe they were a shape shifting ooze-type stuff prior to becoming Bosmer.

I personally believe this "ooze" was the form of the et'Ada, who were formless until they became Ehlnofey. I think the "ooze" is more of a poetic visualization than it is a physical form... and this is why TES Lore is so amazing!

Anyway... if you're interested, I made this last summer:

It's full of my own perspective on established lore.

@Gidorick no Lorkhan?

Also, Mai'Q is clearly a Daedric prince or .... something, if not how old is he at this point? ESO just made him by far the longest living 'assumed' mortal being of all their games. And yes I know it's just supposed to be an easter egg. ...or is it?

HeroOfNone · December 2015

Zorrashi wrote: »

Ah. So the question of "is it canon?" raises its ugly head again....
Well as far as ZOS in concerned, ESO is canon (as per a tweet). But the players? Many players simply do not consider ESO up to par with preferred lore-standards, and thus claim that no, it is not canon.

In the end, the decision to adopt any ESO 'lore' will be up to Bethesda.

But me? I personally do not think it is canon. Some of the changes are due to cost or impracticality. As an example, Cyrodil is usually referred to as a Jungle in this era, but as it is PvP land, I imagine they overlooked that fact in favor of not making a landscape that takes a lot of power to process. Another one is how they implemented the Mane in ESO, which is supposed to be a unique sort of khajiit whereas the one(s) seen in ESO are clearly of the same sub-species as the player. One would imagine they disregarded this in favor of not creating a new character model.

But other changes? Some changes are there simply to garner a quick extra buck or not bother with details (ex. some of the Crown Store mounts. But then again some people don't really consider the crown store as part of the canon game). Some examples include the lack of architectural differences in Altmer architecture described in earlier tomes, the lack of non-human skeletons, the seeming...lack in truly fleshing out the stories associated of certain phenonena (the dragon priests were very underwhelming...). I suppose I should blame their story telling more, but perhaps that is innate to the MMO genre.

But overall I think ESO merely glazes their game with TES lore, hence why I consider their TES-elements only skin-deep.

Ok, you seem to be the most on the edge of not canon so far, so do you accept some of the cannon, or do you throw out the baby with the bathwater in one go? ESO, while glazing lore, gives a lot of details into various races that prior TES games never go into.

Bosmer, Orcs, Argonians, Khajiit, etc. Had limited detail till now, and while some of it changes, there still seems to be more depth. Do we toss it out as being to shallow though? Or are there certain cultural truths we accept? If you take ESO lore in it really changes your outlook at prior games.

Gidorick · December 2015

@Spacemonkey check out Masser & Secunda

M'iaq is... something but I didn't want to make a proclamation here. As far as we know M'iaq is more a mantle or an order than it is one individual.

and @Dracan, if you ever come across that book again, please let me know! The association is a loose one and was questioned on the thread below. If there is lore connecting Arkay to Xarxes I would love to see it!

For further discussion of these please go over to the original thread here: http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/194676/visualization-of-the-pantheon-of-the-elder-scrolls-final-version-uploaded-d/p1

JD2013 · December 2015

Gilliamtherogue wrote: »

JD2013 wrote: »

The thing is, lore is fluid. Especially as this game takes place hundreds and hundreds of years before the main numbered series. There's nothing in this game that stomps on the lore of the future games.

The reason they set this game in this period is there was little to nothing about lore in this era.

As long as things like the Dwemer stay gone stay true, there'll be no real big problems.

And if someone says "but the planemeld wasn't known about in the main games" no it wasn't. Because they had not fleshed out the lore of the second era.

Though there's something much bigger coming that may make a few lore buffs twitchy btw I am a huge lover of all ES lore. It's the best lore I've ever known of a game series.

Actually that something coming is seemingly one of the largest recorded events of the 2nd era. If you've been paying attention to the hints they've been dropping you should have a rough idea. Although I could be wrong, this is going to be likely the most accurate stab at lore to come with the next major story arc. Listen to the final speech of the main story as well as the little surprise after Orsinium's story, both of those hint towards something that's actually been recorded in the other games

Also recall there are still living Dwemer around, if you played Morrowind you know of a bit of info, and that took place in the 3rd era. There are a few magically sealed ruins around that hint towards a larger group still being alive in game too.

One living Dwemer, who has corpus when we meet him, yes

Where is the lore for the .... big event? I have not seen that anywhere. I would be very interested in reading up on that!

Elebeth · December 2015

As was mentioned here, every TES game usually "changes" something from previous title, so best thing is to just wait for TES VI. But the thing is, TES VI can simply just ignore and not mention anything from ESO and thus leaving all lore in some kind of canon limbo.

People tend to "abuse" two extremist views on TES lore by sticking in either camp "Canon" or camp "Head Canon" and as @Shunravi said, if you are trying to be absolutist in TES lore, you are doing it wrong.

Loremaster Lawrence Schik said that TES lore doesn't come from "above", it comes from "below". Meaning that there is no Godhead dictating lore ( <==== see what I did there

); instead lore is created from POV of certain NPC and even players themselves.
Just look at how many NPCs in Skyrim mention the Oblivion Crisis... They are too busy stocking supply's for winter and worrying about civil war to care about some past event that happened 200 years ago let alone with something that happened in 2nd era.

I hope you get my point. I could elaborate on this a bit more but it's getting too late; maybe tomorrow if it'll be needed.

P.S. @Spacemonkey @Gidorick M'aiq is just the name that always gets passed on from father to son. But I also heard that M'aiq means "troll" in Ta'agra...

Gidorick · December 2015

Elebeth wrote: »

P.S. @Spacemonkey @Gidorick M'aiq is just the name that always gets passed on from father to son. But I also heard that M'aiq means "troll" in Ta'agra...

Who told you that @Elebeth ? It was M'aiq, wasn't it?

Zorrashi · December 2015

HeroOfNone wrote: »

Zorrashi wrote: »

Ah. So the question of "is it canon?" raises its ugly head again....
Well as far as ZOS in concerned, ESO is canon (as per a tweet). But the players? Many players simply do not consider ESO up to par with preferred lore-standards, and thus claim that no, it is not canon.

In the end, the decision to adopt any ESO 'lore' will be up to Bethesda.

But me? I personally do not think it is canon. Some of the changes are due to cost or impracticality. As an example, Cyrodil is usually referred to as a Jungle in this era, but as it is PvP land, I imagine they overlooked that fact in favor of not making a landscape that takes a lot of power to process. Another one is how they implemented the Mane in ESO, which is supposed to be a unique sort of khajiit whereas the one(s) seen in ESO are clearly of the same sub-species as the player. One would imagine they disregarded this in favor of not creating a new character model.

But other changes? Some changes are there simply to garner a quick extra buck or not bother with details (ex. some of the Crown Store mounts. But then again some people don't really consider the crown store as part of the canon game). Some examples include the lack of architectural differences in Altmer architecture described in earlier tomes, the lack of non-human skeletons, the seeming...lack in truly fleshing out the stories associated of certain phenonena (the dragon priests were very underwhelming...). I suppose I should blame their story telling more, but perhaps that is innate to the MMO genre.

But overall I think ESO merely glazes their game with TES lore, hence why I consider their TES-elements only skin-deep.

Ok, you seem to be the most on the edge of not canon so far, so do you accept some of the cannon, or do you throw out the baby with the bathwater in one go? ESO, while glazing lore, gives a lot of details into various races that prior TES games never go into.

Bosmer, Orcs, Argonians, Khajiit, etc. Had limited detail till now, and while some of it changes, there still seems to be more depth. Do we toss it out as being to shallow though? Or are there certain cultural truths we accept? If you take ESO lore in it really changes your outlook at prior games.

Well I consider it 'canon for ESO' but not 'canon for TES' if that makes any sense. I just try to take the story with a grain of salt and try not to worry too much over the details if I can help it (assuming that the lore setup isn't too atrocious).

Some of the stuff in ESO is really interesting--like the ooze, the existence of the Wilderking/queen, the glimpse of khajiiti culture. In trying to give this MMO-scape adequate amount of zones to explore in order to entice players better, they have widely expanded on aspects that other TES games couldn't because they often had to restrain themselves to one province at a time (can't really blame them). But in comparison to TES games, the depth falls a bit flat. But that is why I try to distance ESO from TES--so I can better take the story in at ESO value and not TES value (i'm not sure if this makes sense to you ^-^;;).
Like the physical appearance of the Mane(s) that I talked about in my last part? I 'overlook' that part, and just try to focus on the story where two female manes were born and they had to contend for who would remain who guide the khajiiti people and who would seal the dark Mane.

Basically when I come upon an interesting quest in ESO, I pay attention to the main theme of the story and not so much certain details (like appearance or sometimes even the time certain events take place) that seem a bit 'off' when looked at from a typical TES-scope.

Elebeth · December 2015

Gidorick wrote: »

Elebeth wrote: »

P.S. @Spacemonkey @Gidorick M'aiq is just the name that always gets passed on from father to son. But I also heard that M'aiq means "troll" in Ta'agra...

Who told you that @Elebeth ? It was M'aiq, wasn't it?

Zepiroth · December 2015

Gilliamtherogue wrote: »

JD2013 wrote: »

Actually that something coming is seemingly one of the largest recorded events of the 2nd era. If you've been paying attention to the hints they've been dropping you should have a rough idea. Although I could be wrong, this is going to be likely the most accurate stab at lore to come with the next major story arc. Listen to the final speech of the main story as well as the little surprise after Orsinium's story, both of those hint towards something that's actually been recorded in the other games

Also recall there are still living Dwemer around, if you played Morrowind you know of a bit of info, and that took place in the 3rd era. There are a few magically sealed ruins around that hint towards a larger group still being alive in game too.

I'm reading my eyes of the lore atm...please help a lore-loving but incapable of reading-fan...(and i cant remember the last words in main) what event do u reffer to? the rise of talos, thje akavir?

WarrioroftheWind_ESO · December 2015

ESO has alot of wiggle room to really go to town in expanding their lore-not rehashing it, mind you. Bosmer really do eat other men/mer btw. Read Dance in the Fire chapter 6. I don't think the story itself has taken place yet in ESO but you'll prob find a copy in Skyrim or Oblivion. It mentions the Unthrappa practice featured in that one quest in ESO where a Bosmer tribe threatened to eat the wife of this one guy as payment for a mistake he made. Keep in mind too that there was alot in the games that hadn't been elaborated on yet, but only bits and pieces in those little books you find in the world.

Forestd16b14_ESO · December 2015

JD2013 wrote: »

The thing is, lore is fluid. Especially as this game takes place hundreds and hundreds of years before the main numbered series. There's nothing in this game that stomps on the lore of the future games.

The reason they set this game in this period is there was little to nothing about lore in this era.

As long as things like the Dwemer stay gone stay true, there'll be no real big problems.

And if someone says "but the planemeld wasn't known about in the main games" no it wasn't. Because they had not fleshed out the lore of the second era.

Though there's something much bigger coming that may make a few lore buffs twitchy btw I am a huge lover of all ES lore. It's the best lore I've ever known of a game series.

What this guy said.

But my opinion is why dis the dragon break huh? Look at TES2 it used the dragon break (was the game that invented it) and the events of TES2 are all lore. Plus would make for wonderful stories of how the 3 alliances won the war and all that. Sure eventually all will fade to shadows and people will remember only fragments of what happened as such any dragon break moment but never a less be wonderful stories.

" The tale of the 3 great Alliances of the 2nd era is a long and blood soaked one. Armies of the Ebonheart Pact, Daggerfall Covenant, and Aldemri Dominion marched onto the plains of Cyrodiil for the seat ruby throne....." And here's were it can get really good were pact wins or covenant wins or the 3 armies put there difference aside to defeat the army of Molag Bal. Cause despite Princes being all powerful god even they are pawns to the will of the Elder Scrolls and the Dragon Break.

Story time !

" The tale of the 3 great Alliances of the 2nd era is a long and blood soaked one. Armies of the Ebonheart Pact, Daggerfall Covenant, and Aldemri Dominion marched onto the plains of Cyrodiil for the seat ruby throne but was not long when the armies arrived to the Imperial City when they were bombarded with the full might of the Daedric Prince of Domination armies. Was then that they put there differences aside and the combined force of man, mer, and beast fought back to push the hellish beings know as daedra back to the darkest pit of Coldharbor from once they came. Peace for a short time came across the land but as all stories peace was only short live when the trust 3 Alliances fell apart and each race when back to there province alone fighting with neighbors and there selves for years to come. That is till one man was born and through him long lasting peace finally came with the dawn of the new ear and the dawn of a new god."

Robo_Hobo · December 2015

There are a lot of very interesting concepts and details shown in ESO about cultures and races and lands that hadn't had the chance to be explored properly in the single-player games, it would be a shame and a waste if they weren't used by Bethesda in the future games. If they decide any particular elements that can't work with something ESO presented, they'll probably retcon that bit specifically, but naturally, a lot of what ESO talks about will be used, due to the fact that they'd have to almost, out-of-spite, rewrite tons to not use some of the details ESO created. Bethesda was also helping ESO when creating a lot of the lore so some Bethesda ideas are a part of what came to be anyway.

Will the Soul Burst itself and the three banners war be referenced in future games? It's hard to tell, there could be something that happened between ESO's time and the later games to make history completely forget that moment in time. Not necessarily a Dragon Break, but something. They could just as very well reference it like it was never lost, with some new "recently unearthed books telling us of times about the Second Era that must have been lost to the ages"

Stuff like the Mane looking like a Cathay or Suthay-raht depending on your interpretation is just stuff I overlook as well, it's a shame of course - and I dearly hope when more of Elsweyr is released they go back and make some models for the other forms of Khajiit throughout the game, Mane included, but development costs. Bethesda's done it too, though, one case I can remember in particular is the Akaviri ghost you find in Pale Pass (In Oblivion) whom looks like a standard imperial human wearing blades armour, when that Akaviri would have been a Tsaesci

WarrioroftheWind_ESO · December 2015

Robo_Hobo wrote: »

There are a lot of very interesting concepts and details shown in ESO about cultures and races and lands that hadn't had the chance to be explored properly in the single-player games, it would be a shame and a waste if they weren't used by Bethesda in the future games. If they decide any particular elements that can't work with something ESO presented, they'll probably retcon that bit specifically, but naturally, a lot of what ESO talks about will be used, due to the fact that they'd have to almost, out-of-spite, rewrite tons to not use some of the details ESO created. Bethesda was also helping ESO when creating a lot of the lore so some Bethesda ideas are a part of what came to be anyway.

Will the Soul Burst itself and the three banners war be referenced in future games? It's hard to tell, there could be something that happened between ESO's time and the later games to make history completely forget that moment in time. Not necessarily a Dragon Break, but something. They could just as very well reference it like it was never lost, with some new "recently unearthed books telling us of times about the Second Era that must have been lost to the ages"

Stuff like the Mane looking like a Cathay or Suthay-raht depending on your interpretation is just stuff I overlook as well, it's a shame of course - and I dearly hope when more of Elsweyr is released they go back and make some models for the other forms of Khajiit throughout the game, Mane included, but development costs. Bethesda's done it too, though, one case I can remember in particular is the Akaviri ghost you find in Pale Pass (In Oblivion) whom looks like a standard imperial human wearing blades armour, when that Akaviri would have been a Tsaesci

That's another important point to bring up. I think in the lore the Mane is described as having locks of fur from all of his subjects clipped to his head, and that the weight of it makes it to where he can't move without assistance. The Mane in ESO just wears a dome cap with braids of fur along the rim. Also in Oblivion while it is possible Bethesda was just really lazy and didn't model an Akaviri, there is a debate whether when its written that "Akaviri ate all the men" if that means literally or just 'enslaved' them. Same thing when you do the time travel quests in Stonefalls for the Brothers of Strife, when you peer into the past the Chimer who are supposed to have golden skin like High Elves, look like regular old Dunmer, and the Nedes, aboriginal Men from Atmora, are just Nords.

Spacemonkey · December 2015

@WarrioroftheWind_ESO

I'd have a tendancy to believe chimer really did have golden-ish skin though and they were just lazy with the past segments.

Because both Amalexia and Vivec have the golden skin in both ESO and Morrowind. <-thats proof enough for me. And also because the transition from Chimers to Dunmers is much more badass when you accept they got 'cursed' with ashen skin because their conflict with the dwemer and the heart of Lorkhan was the source of the dwemer disappearance, the death of Azura's champion and the Ascension of the Tribunal.