Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

Soarora wrote: »

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

Well, now that I think of it, I (and probably not only I) will have another reason to dislike Telvanni even more. So, every time there will be an endeavour that requires to kill NPCs with Blade of Woe, I know even more where to go.

Also, just a thought. I have not done this quest, but thankfully to this thread I know what I am signing up for. With that being said, if this quest is at least half as "emotional" and dark as people in this thread describe it - then Sharp-As-Night might become the companion with strongest & saddest backstory.

I mean even if some one dislikes Khajiits or Argonians I can not think that any one won't say (or at least think): Poor guy... I feel sorry for him and feel some kind of sympathy & empathy.

Also, even if some one is Telvanni fan lore-wise, I also can not see anyone not wanting to kill this quest's villain.

Anyone can be an abuser. I’d avoid hating Telvanni as a whole because one mer is an abuser. It does not translate well. (Ex. Someone is abused by a woman therefore I dislike women… that’s sexism.)

Well, I agree with you that disliking entire group of people because of one individual is a bad thing. Sure. There are always "Black Sheeps".

But, that is not necessary the case when it comes to Telvani. They are based on hierarchy. So one who is higher is more important than the other etc. But the thing is that Telvani have countless of examples in which some one in the position of power, abuses that power left & right without any serious repercussions. It is not just one or two "Black Sheeps". So this villain actually kinda "confirms" the "average Telvani" Stereotype. Some one even posted here in this thread that even in TES III Morrwind (which action takes place much, much later in the timeline) stuff like this happens and is actually, comonly & socially accepted. Yikes !

Telvani have power, but what matters is how they use that power. Slavery is bad. But Telvani put that statement to a shame. They go over the top to the point in which slaves are not just slaves but test subjects.

When I try to think about some one from House Telvani who is at least half decent the only one that comes to mind is Divayth Fyr - but even he has done some horrible stuff.

If it was not Elder Scrolls, but for example D&D - Telvani would be Neutral Evil or Lawful Evil.

Revus Demnevanni

Faulgor wrote: »

xgoku1 wrote: »

This isn't even lore appropriate for the Telvanni. Telvanni being pro-slavery is 'balanced' by them being famously disinterested in everything else, and being highly meritocratic (even for slaves, and non-Dunmer). Magisters being obsessed stalkers for an ex-slave is just nonsensical.

https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Morrowind:Ra'Zahr

Telvanni famously do whatever they like.

I also want to put out this lore book example as well.

https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Online:Telvanni_Requirements

The emphasis on physical appearance for the women (and two of the men, the rest noted to be used for physical labor), makes it pretty obvious that they're going to be....used....a certain way in these "events".

As a side note, I've always wanted to kill Llarel Telvanni (the author of this note). It would be very nice to have him/her dead. Just saying.

EDIT: Forums giving me difficulty in posting an actual link, so you might have to copy/paste it in the url bar.

Wolf_Eye wrote: »

Faulgor wrote: »

xgoku1 wrote: »

This isn't even lore appropriate for the Telvanni. Telvanni being pro-slavery is 'balanced' by them being famously disinterested in everything else, and being highly meritocratic (even for slaves, and non-Dunmer). Magisters being obsessed stalkers for an ex-slave is just nonsensical.

https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Morrowind:Ra'Zahr

Telvanni famously do whatever they like.

I also want to put out this lore book example as well.

https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Online:Telvanni_Requirements

The emphasis on physical appearance for the women (and two of the men, the rest noted to be used for physical labor), makes it pretty obvious that they're going to be....used....a certain way in these "events".

As a side note, I've always wanted to kill Llarel Telvanni (the author of this note). It would be very nice to have him/her dead. Just saying.

EDIT: Forums giving me difficulty in posting an actual link, so you might have to copy/paste it in the url bar.

I'd argue that they would learn little from death.

On the other hand they don't get many visitors in the Halls of Torment, but there's always room for a few more … permanent residents.

kaushad wrote: »

Soarora wrote: »

Anyone can be an abuser. I’d avoid hating Telvanni as a whole because one mer is an abuser. It does not translate well. (Ex. Someone is abused by a woman therefore I dislike women… that’s sexism.)

Other people are usually constrained by laws that prohibit certain types of abuse. House Telvanni is an institution that uses hierarchies of social climbers to prevent anybody from enforcing laws like that. So a lot of Telvanni are complicit in the abuse of power committed by their worst. A better analogy would be a state or possibly a large business.

I disagree. You are not obligated to put your life on the line to prevent a crime from happening. That's what police is for. But Telvanni society has no real central authority, no monopoly on violence, that real life countries or even companies do. Telvanni society is essentially anarchy where the most powerful enforce their rules on those who cannot enforce their own, but nobody is powerful enough to enforce rule over everyone. There is no social contract between the people, only a very loose one between only the magisters and masters that mainly guarantees the continuation of the system but nothing else. For a Telvanni to meddle in the business of another Telvanni means putting their life at risk, as retaliation could be fatal. Murder is famously legal in the Telvanni lands if you can get away with it, because "getting away with it" means having the power to fend off everyone who would come after you for murdering that person.

When it comes to "being complicit", if that were true, that would actually extend to the entirety of the Dunmer people. Before the Pact, House Dres provided the backbone of agricultural produce through slavery, which makes every Redoran, Hlaalu and Indoril complicit in their slavery. They encourage the Dres' way of slavery by buying their produce. Only the Ashlanders are free of that baggage. So, I think, you cannot make every Telvanni responsible for the actions of those with the most power. Is that Alchemist in Balmora complicit in the slavery? She only owns that shop but is a member of House Telvanni. I wouldn't think so.
Even if there would be a majority against slavery within Telvanni lands, it would not matter, because there is no central authority that could stop the slavering magisters. If you are physically unable to stop someone from committing a crime, then you are not complicit in them committing that crime, and even if you could, you wouldn't be guilty of being complicit, but guilty of "failure to lend assistance" (not sure if that translated properly into English). Being complicit requires you to protect, encourage or shelter the criminals or lie to the authorities (which, again, don't exist). The only ones complicit are the Archmagister, the Magisters and Masters who could decide to abolish slavery in their councils, as well as the actual practitioners of slavery themselves.

So yeah, while I think it's fair to hate all the Telvanni for their system of values, I don't think it's fair to hate all Telvanni for the acts committed by those in/with power. Bringing it back to the topic of the thread, Reynila is a Telvanni who wants to end slavery, but also did not renounce her status within the House (from the looks of it, as far as we can tell). Would you blame her for what Sondivel did on account of being an active member of House Telvanni, even though she tried to stop him?

Kesstryl wrote: »

I watched Nefas play through the quest, and I can't pretend to know what it's like for a survivor of SA, so I can't speak for them. As a player of an M rated game, I honestly didn't see the content to be as explicit as others have stated. The only thing that made me cringe was that book the villain wrote. On first glance I wasn't sure if the tongue part was not referring to Sharp's sassy back talking as it could be taken that way too, and the villain might have been obsessed simply because Sharp was the most defiant of his slaves and he wanted to control someone with that kind of willpower. I know that is not the intent, but if that book was rewritten, ZOS could easily alter the narrative to fit this less offensive version and leave it up to the interpretation of the player.

I don't know how that would change the impact of the story. All I know is I did not find the quest to be as bad as I feared from all this feedback, but again I'm stating that I'm not a survivor and I don't know what the triggers could be for something like that, nor should survivors be gaslighted for the way they feel. I do feel like dark themes should not be avoided because this is a rated M game, and also those explorations can bring awareness (and if handled correctly, maybe catharsis) for the full condition of humanity. Pretending the forest is not on fire when it is will not make the fire go away, and neither will the darkness in humanity go away by pretending it's not there and making everything Disney.

I do agree there needs to be more added to show Sharp is healing, not just in a letter you can put in your house, but in quest form also. Make it possible to skip the memory sequence for those who are triggered by it (I didn't see anything offensive in it except for one line the villain said which could be removed). The ending did seem rushed and not satisfying. I would prefer more being added to Sharp himself and his own healing than altering the narrative in the way I suggested above. That would mean bringing the actor back for some extra lines. Probably won't happen, but that would be my wish as a player going through this quest.

Can we stop pretending like this is an M rated game everywhere in the world? It's not. It's rated 16 in Germany. Just because it's considered M in your country doesn't mean that anything automatically goes now.

Edit: I am not talking to you in particular btw, I just saw several comments under Nefas' video pointing towards the "M rating". Dark topics can definitely be handled in ESO even with that 16 rating and I think this didn't cross that line, but it's kind of gross when the worst part of this quest exists inside a plot hole and doesn't actually serve a greater narrative purpose. Then it just feels unnecessary.

Ratzkifal wrote: »

I disagree. You are not obligated to put your life on the line to prevent a crime from happening. That's what police is for. But Telvanni society has no real central authority, no monopoly on violence, that real life countries or even companies do. Telvanni society is essentially anarchy where the most powerful enforce their rules on those who cannot enforce their own, but nobody is powerful enough to enforce rule over everyone. There is no social contract between the people, only a very loose one between only the magisters and masters that mainly guarantees the continuation of the system but nothing else. For a Telvanni to meddle in the business of another Telvanni means putting their life at risk, as retaliation could be fatal. Murder is famously legal in the Telvanni lands if you can get away with it, because "getting away with it" means having the power to fend off everyone who would come after you for murdering that person.

When it comes to "being complicit", if that were true, that would actually extend to the entirety of the Dunmer people. Before the Pact, House Dres provided the backbone of agricultural produce through slavery, which makes every Redoran, Hlaalu and Indoril complicit in their slavery. They encourage the Dres' way of slavery by buying their produce. Only the Ashlanders are free of that baggage. So, I think, you cannot make every Telvanni responsible for the actions of those with the most power. Is that Alchemist in Balmora complicit in the slavery? She only owns that shop but is a member of House Telvanni. I wouldn't think so.
Even if there would be a majority against slavery within Telvanni lands, it would not matter, because there is no central authority that could stop the slavering magisters. If you are physically unable to stop someone from committing a crime, then you are not complicit in them committing that crime, and even if you could, you wouldn't be guilty of being complicit, but guilty of "failure to lend assistance" (not sure if that translated properly into English). Being complicit requires you to protect, encourage or shelter the criminals or lie to the authorities (which, again, don't exist). The only ones complicit are the Archmagister, the Magisters and Masters who could decide to abolish slavery in their councils, as well as the actual practitioners of slavery themselves.

So yeah, while I think it's fair to hate all the Telvanni for their system of values, I don't think it's fair to hate all Telvanni for the acts committed by those in/with power. Bringing it back to the topic of the thread, Reynila is a Telvanni who wants to end slavery, but also did not renounce her status within the House (from the looks of it, as far as we can tell). Would you blame her for what Sondivel did on account of being an active member of House Telvanni, even though she tried to stop him?

You say that the masters and magisters have a very loose social contract that guarantees the continuation of the system. Do you think that they would be able to do that without their errand boys and mercenaries dreaming of joining their ranks? I don't particularly blame the free working class, whose work just so happens to serve the Telvanni, even if they enthusiastically believe in Telvanni values. Someone who buys saltrice picked slaves is complicit in slavery, but the alternative is inconvenience to starvation (so that goes beyond Morrowind) depending on economic circumstances. But in the middle, there are ambitious people supporting the lords, who have the drive and talent work elsewhere but choose not to.

Ideally, the lords would get abandoned and replaced with people who do keep a social contract and then there'd fewer people with the freedom to commit SA with impunity*, but the individual can't accomplish that. We have examples of people working on the inside, which might prove a more productive choice until they get caught out. Reynila is one. A more modest example is an officer who works for the Kwama Consortium, pushing for better duty of care for its workers, which could get her fired.

*It's worth bearing in mind that one wouldn't have to be nearly as powerful as a magister to be in that position. So longer as the owner doesn't care, even a hireling or another slave could abuse a slave. For that matter, one free Telvanni can assault another.

It just dawned on me that since I plan on using Sharp as my primary companion for my characters, I'm going to need to do this companion quest 7 times. Ouch.

kaushad wrote: »

Ratzkifal wrote: »

I disagree. You are not obligated to put your life on the line to prevent a crime from happening. That's what police is for. But Telvanni society has no real central authority, no monopoly on violence, that real life countries or even companies do. Telvanni society is essentially anarchy where the most powerful enforce their rules on those who cannot enforce their own, but nobody is powerful enough to enforce rule over everyone. There is no social contract between the people, only a very loose one between only the magisters and masters that mainly guarantees the continuation of the system but nothing else. For a Telvanni to meddle in the business of another Telvanni means putting their life at risk, as retaliation could be fatal. Murder is famously legal in the Telvanni lands if you can get away with it, because "getting away with it" means having the power to fend off everyone who would come after you for murdering that person.

When it comes to "being complicit", if that were true, that would actually extend to the entirety of the Dunmer people. Before the Pact, House Dres provided the backbone of agricultural produce through slavery, which makes every Redoran, Hlaalu and Indoril complicit in their slavery. They encourage the Dres' way of slavery by buying their produce. Only the Ashlanders are free of that baggage. So, I think, you cannot make every Telvanni responsible for the actions of those with the most power. Is that Alchemist in Balmora complicit in the slavery? She only owns that shop but is a member of House Telvanni. I wouldn't think so.
Even if there would be a majority against slavery within Telvanni lands, it would not matter, because there is no central authority that could stop the slavering magisters. If you are physically unable to stop someone from committing a crime, then you are not complicit in them committing that crime, and even if you could, you wouldn't be guilty of being complicit, but guilty of "failure to lend assistance" (not sure if that translated properly into English). Being complicit requires you to protect, encourage or shelter the criminals or lie to the authorities (which, again, don't exist). The only ones complicit are the Archmagister, the Magisters and Masters who could decide to abolish slavery in their councils, as well as the actual practitioners of slavery themselves.

So yeah, while I think it's fair to hate all the Telvanni for their system of values, I don't think it's fair to hate all Telvanni for the acts committed by those in/with power. Bringing it back to the topic of the thread, Reynila is a Telvanni who wants to end slavery, but also did not renounce her status within the House (from the looks of it, as far as we can tell). Would you blame her for what Sondivel did on account of being an active member of House Telvanni, even though she tried to stop him?

You say that the masters and magisters have a very loose social contract that guarantees the continuation of the system. Do you think that they would be able to do that without their errand boys and mercenaries dreaming of joining their ranks? I don't particularly blame the free working class, whose work just so happens to serve the Telvanni, even if they enthusiastically believe in Telvanni values. Someone who buys saltrice picked slaves is complicit in slavery, but the alternative is inconvenience to starvation (so that goes beyond Morrowind) depending on economic circumstances. But in the middle, there are ambitious people supporting the lords, who have the drive and talent work elsewhere but choose not to.

Ideally, the lords would get abandoned and replaced with people who do keep a social contract and then there'd fewer people with the freedom to commit SA with impunity*, but the individual can't accomplish that. We have examples of people working on the inside, which might prove a more productive choice until they get caught out. Reynila is one. A more modest example is an officer who works for the Kwama Consortium, pushing for better duty of care for its workers, which could get her fired.

*It's worth bearing in mind that one wouldn't have to be nearly as powerful as a magister to be in that position. So longer as the owner doesn't care, even a hireling or another slave could abuse a slave. For that matter, one free Telvanni can assault another.

That's the thing about wizards. They don't need to maintain the same support structures that tyrants in the real world do. For a dictator the military is essential, because it is the threat of violence that gets people to fall in line. In the real world, one person cannot rule alone. But a single wizard, especially one of the caliber of the Telvanni magisters, can threaten an entire town all on their own and that is why they have to obey, because even if they started an uprising against their single master, there is no guarantee that the wizard wouldn't completely wipe the floor with them.
The people in the middle are irrelevant to the Telvanni ability to do slavery. Obviously the slave raiders are essential to the system too and they would qualify as people in the middle, but it is as Neloth says, it's not that he cannot brew his own tea but that it would be a waste of his time. The Telvanni lords are very much capable of capturing slaves on their own. It is a matter of convenience to them to outsource this to whoever is willing. And if everyone turns their back on them? Then they simply start summoning Daedra to enslave people for them.
So yes, I think they would be able to uphold the system all on their own, so long as the other magisters and masters also agree to do so. Aside from outside intervention, nothing can really stop them from keeping slaves.

Here is a mostly complete list of people complicit or culprits in Telvanni slavery:
All Telvanni magisters and masters including Divayth Fyr and the archmagister (some more than others), all suppliers and merchants of slaves, all mercenaries tasked with the protection of slave caravans, all overseers of slaves, all blacksmiths who create chains used in slavery, the Tribunal gods, the other Great Houses in their entirety, House Dres in particular, every Telvanni rank climber who is indifferent or supportive of slavery, and lastly - my extra spicy take for the day - the Hist, because they really could do something about it if they wanted to but they aren't.

BaalMelqartu wrote: »

It just dawned on me that since I plan on using Sharp as my primary companion for my characters, I'm going to need to do this companion quest 7 times. Ouch.

I have done Mirri, Bastian, Isobel and Ember's quests 27 times now.

Once Necrom hits that will be:

- Mirri, Bastian, Isobel and Ember's quest x 3
- Azandar and Sharp x 30

Yay?

I have seen this post or discussions about it on several platforms so far (Twitter, Youtube, Reddit, here...), and given the subject matter, I wanted to check the community's stance on it.

All I have to say is... I am kind of disappointed. A lot of people are responding to these suggestions negatively, seemingly without actually reading the points despite being well laid out.

"Just don't play it if you don't like it", "grow thicker skin", "dark subject matter is good"...

Really, guys? This is not about stopping ZoS from telling a story, especially one that brings attention to something that lacks representation. It is about making this representation better. Many people have seemingly chosen to build a strawman and be outraged at it instead of hearing the very valid plight that a questline about a SA victim would be much better if it also focused on the healing that comes after it.
No one that I'm aware of is asking for the quest to be entirely rewritten, just for the writers to explore dark subject matter in a way that can be meaningful for many. This is not a throwaway comment in a random NPC's dialogue, it's the focus of a whole questline.

Also a heads up about the subject matter discussed in the quest hurts no one, and I'd very much rather have my immersion briefly broken by this than by someone riding around a hooved disco ball.




It's also good to see that I'm not the only one who finds it a bit yikes for the quests of our first Khajiit and Argonians to involve slavery to varying degrees...

FayJolyn wrote: »

As for a content warning, I would personally dislike it if I where to get one just as I about to start a quest. However a clear content warning when you install the game would be a nice compromise in my opinion.

I think this would be best as well, make a better warning at the start of the game. I can see how adding it before the quest potentially sets a precedent of signalling certain topics, which creates a huge discussion on what deserves one or not in the first place. That in turn will probably be messy, as both the setting and many quests in TES:O are related in some way or another to dark subjects, and some may take the lack of a warning in some scenarios as ZoS undermining the subject matter being discussed.

On the other hand, it is true that Sharp's quest is a lot more upfront with its handling of these matters, to the point of putting the player in his place during a flashback. That's why if ZoS chooses to not act on the feedback given on this due to it being too late to change parts of the story (which I believe is the case, as writing and voice acting a quest must take a lot of time), namely the already mentioned "healing" process, a CW at the start of the quest is the least they can do.

Still haven't played it (console), but lore says Telvanni bad, this is completely in line with what they'd do.

Real people say poorly handled and makes them uncomfortable because of a horrible experience in their past/present. I think real people > lore.

Ratzkifal wrote: »

Kesstryl wrote: »

Ratzkifal wrote: »

Kesstryl wrote: »

I watched Nefas play through the quest, and I can't pretend to know what it's like for a survivor of SA, so I can't speak for them. As a player of an M rated game, I honestly didn't see the content to be as explicit as others have stated. The only thing that made me cringe was that book the villain wrote. On first glance I wasn't sure if the tongue part was not referring to Sharp's sassy back talking as it could be taken that way too, and the villain might have been obsessed simply because Sharp was the most defiant of his slaves and he wanted to control someone with that kind of willpower. I know that is not the intent, but if that book was rewritten, ZOS could easily alter the narrative to fit this less offensive version and leave it up to the interpretation of the player.

I don't know how that would change the impact of the story. All I know is I did not find the quest to be as bad as I feared from all this feedback, but again I'm stating that I'm not a survivor and I don't know what the triggers could be for something like that, nor should survivors be gaslighted for the way they feel. I do feel like dark themes should not be avoided because this is a rated M game, and also those explorations can bring awareness (and if handled correctly, maybe catharsis) for the full condition of humanity. Pretending the forest is not on fire when it is will not make the fire go away, and neither will the darkness in humanity go away by pretending it's not there and making everything Disney.

I do agree there needs to be more added to show Sharp is healing, not just in a letter you can put in your house, but in quest form also. Make it possible to skip the memory sequence for those who are triggered by it (I didn't see anything offensive in it except for one line the villain said which could be removed). The ending did seem rushed and not satisfying. I would prefer more being added to Sharp himself and his own healing than altering the narrative in the way I suggested above. That would mean bringing the actor back for some extra lines. Probably won't happen, but that would be my wish as a player going through this quest.

Can we stop pretending like this is an M rated game everywhere in the world? It's not. It's rated 16 in Germany. Just because it's considered M in your country doesn't mean that anything automatically goes now.

Edit: I am not talking to you in particular btw, I just saw several comments under Nefas' video pointing towards the "M rating". Dark topics can definitely be handled in ESO even with that 16 rating and I think this didn't cross that line, but it's kind of gross when the worst part of this quest exists inside a plot hole and doesn't actually serve a greater narrative purpose. Then it just feels unnecessary.

I hear what you said in that you are not talking to me in particular, but I do feel the need to say (since you quoted me and that does make me feel involved) that I do not think anything should "just go" because it is M rated in my country (and no I didn't know it had different ratings in other countries). I would never think anything should just go and we should just get as gory and raunchy as we wish. I'd probably leave any game that went in that direction.

Yeah, but every now and then I hear people criticizing ZOS for not calling a spade a spade when it's supposed to be an M rated game. Seeing you making a mention of its rating like that, simply caused me to share my opinion on it as a "by the way". I realized that it might look like I am putting words in your mouth, hence the edit I made.
Especially when it comes to depictions of abuse I can see the German rating going from 16 to 18. Sexual content is fine here so long as it's not pornographic but excessive violence usually is what ups that rating. ESO's cartoon violence doesn't qualify, but if they explicitly say or show what someone like Sharp has experienced, even if it doesn't involve gore, and how that messes with him mentally, then yeah, I too would worry about the rating going towards 18. So yeah, lots of reasons for ZOS to not call a spade a spade. That they made the attempt at all is good! It's just sad how in the ending was rushed and how that undermined the seriousness of it all.
Edit: fixed typo

I think if you got past my comment about the rating, you would see that we pretty much agree about everything else.

I'm sorry, but as an SA victim that memory sequence in which you play as Sharp when Sondivel experiments on him was a horrible part of the story that requires an option to skip it entirely. I could not get through it without physical repulsion IRL.

It doesn't display the SA Sharp went through but is enough to insinuate how Sondivel achieved it, and frankly adding an SA component to portray how warped Sondivel is in his quest to climb the ranks of House Telvanni was a gratuitous and unnecessary implementation. Giving him "depraved homosexual" tropes and making him effeminate is (from my perspective as a gay man) such a slap in the face and reductive when we have better characters from past Chapters like Alchemy. What happened to ZoS treating LGBTQ+ characters as normal people in Tamriel? Why are we using homosexual stereotypes to convey personalities? Federo's another victim to this, his entire personality is coded on the "camp gay" stereotype.

Showcasing how Sharp would later experience SA was terrible. It suggests how Sondivel would do it, which is just as bad as showing it (thank god ZoS didn't show it). ZoS decided to call it a day by implementing shock value in a situation that didn't need it. We know what House Telvanni is, we know how ambitious they are. Did you need to turn Sondivel into a homosexual *** stereotype from the late 20th century to do that?

Good representation is the depiction of ethnic, cultural and sexual minorities being accepted by society and facing no limitations or impairments because of who they are. It should focus on betterment, not drag us back down into egregious stereotypes and reliving trauma. We KNOW what we have gone through in the last few decades. We do NOT need to be reminded of it every waking second.

I am glad that I read these comments as I intend to avoid this entire chapter.