Will we ever see Dwemers? Possible 11th race for ESO?

OrdoHermetica

No! Just give me new a class!

Ertosi wrote: »

OrdoHermetica wrote: »

It would be very difficult to justify why no one would be able to detect a Dragon Break happening in the Interregnum period after the fact, especially since schools of magic that specifically deal with time (like the Psijics) are still around by the 4th Era. That would be a pretty big thing to paper over.

The Interregnum period (2E 430-854) was much larger compared to when ESO takes place (2E 583), which is the specific time we're looking at. During the events of ESO, a little thing called the Planemeld took place. Something like the Planemeld could easily hide or confuse the events of a dragon break for scholars coming afterwards. Most researchers looking back would probably have a very hard time separating the two events. So I would disagree and state it would be very easy to justify why such an event wasn't recorded (at least not as common knowledge) in the times to come.

Yes, I'm aware the Interregnum is a larger period than ESO's timeline. My point was that the Interregnum has notoriously poor record-keeping (turns out endless civil wars will do that), so there's some credibility to the idea of written accounts of the event going missing, but probably not magical investigation failing to find it.

Speaking of, to your main point... I don't know about that. We're talking about very different types of magic. A Dragon Break is a disruption of Aedric power, while Planemeld - though using an Aedric artifact as a catalyst - is decidedly Daedric in nature. Certainly no accounts in-game suggest that the Warp in the West, the Red Moment, etc. were Daedric interventions - in-game scholars seem very certain they they were Dragon Breaks, even if documentation surrounding the events were destroyed.

And regarding Planemeld specifically, it had nothing to do with the flow of time, outside of the usual "time doesn't work the same way in Oblivion" weirdness. It strikes me as very unlikely that they would be mistaken for one another.

RebornV3x

No, too many choices already

NO never as far as anyone's concerned there pretty much extinct it would be dumb and a slap in the face to everyone if suddenly there are hundreds of Dwemer players just roaming around

The only race I see them adding anytime in the near future is probably Maomer or "Sea Elfs" but that's for another discussion.

kaiage

No! Just give me new a class!

No, but not because of the reason listed in the vote options.

No because the dwemer are long gone... as quoted by

---

some really smart mage's guild character, and possibly even some really hot chick in the psijic order.

Instead give us a class that only I can play that let's me roleplay as god.

Ertosi

Yes, Dwemers would do nice or...

UrQuan wrote: »

What unreliable narrators don't affect, AT ALL, is what you, as the player, experience.

The bold part is an important point that I really should have brought up. Anything that we explicitly see in any TES game simply cannot be explained away by the unreliable narrator.

This is an extremely good point and I fully agree with it. Unreliable narrators cannot account for things our own characters had perceived.

UrQuan wrote: »

The only thing that can really be used to explain a discrepancy between what we witnessed in one TES game and what we witnessed in another is some sort of hand-wave.

This is where I must disagree. A good imagination can come up with a great many scenarios which could explain the differences in ways that would be both lore-friendly as well as provide great storytelling. I've previously stated the most likely possibility...

Ertosi wrote: »

Throw all-powerful daedric princes into the mix and these two concepts mean that literally anything could happen in the world of Nirn no matter how contradictory it might seem us. Did the story change? No, we just didn't know the correct or full story originally.

The Dwemer were a people that preferred reason and logic over faith and religion, so they had turned their backs on the Aedra and Daedra, but that doesn't discount the possibility that a Daedric prince had been involved with their disappearance, either directly or indirectly. Had some of the Dwemer betrayed their beliefs and literally made a deal with one of these "devils", or perhaps the prince(s) involved merely pulled strings from the shadows.

How could this have effected what we've seen first hand in previous games? If a Daedric Prince was somehow involved in their disappearance, they most certainly had the power to cover their tracks quite well. What better way then to provide false visions to any heroic bystanders present. It would be a pretty epic easter egg in one story to find out characters of ours in a previous game were mere dupes of a larger plan.

It does bring up a good question of which Daedric power could have been involved in the very long-term scheme of secretly whisking an entire race away to an unknown demi-plane only to bring them back in a later age, to be used as pawns against the people of Nirn and the other princes. If it was originally a matter of some of the Dwemer deciding to "make a deal with the devil" then Clavicus Vile would be an obvious choice. If it was a matter of strings being pulled from the shadows, due to Dwemers' preference for reason, logic and knowledge Hermaeus Mora would make for an interesting choice for the mastermind behind the event. Really, any one of the princes could have been involved and ultimately it would come down to whomever tells the story should it ever be told.


Would the Dwemer ever return in an event such as this? As much as I would obviously love to see it happen, I honestly doubt a story such as this would ever be told by the powers that be. But my point has never been if it would happen, rather its been that it could happen and that it would most certainly not be against lore if it did.

Edit: Corrected some of the BB Code.

Elsonso

Ertosi wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

What unreliable narrators don't affect, AT ALL, is what you, as the player, experience.

The bold part is an important point that I really should have brought up. Anything that we explicitly see in any TES game simply cannot be explained away by the unreliable narrator.

This is an extremely good point and I fully agree with it. Unreliable narrators cannot account for things our own characters had perceived.

Actually, that is not quite true. We can be unreliable narrators just as much as anyone else. We just don't see ourselves that way.

Was Lerisa disguised as a fern, or did you see a fern because you weren't looking closely enough?

kaiage

No! Just give me new a class!

What if we say the Psijic order opened a portal and saved two dwemer from whatever fate that befell them?

We'd be recylying the same time hopping story that befell Warcraft (the world of)

Loves_guars

If we are breaking lore, I want Sotha Sil to have a better future of what happens in Tribunal.

kaiage

No! Just give me new a class!

And I want the Tribunal to give me ERP-God powers, but... Ladies.. come on.

Carl_Bar

UrQuan wrote: »

Ertosi wrote: »

There are two big things in ESO often forgotten by the peach-fuzz "lorebeards".

Unreliable Narrators: The concept of an unreliable Narrator runs deeply through all ESO lore. The story is always told through the eyes of a strong perspective and history is written by the winners. We, as players, never know the whole story.

The fact that virtually all Elder Scrolls lore comes from unreliable narrators is what makes it so great, and you're absolutely right that it's something that tons of TES fans just don't seem to understand.

I can't count the number of times I've seen people arguing "this book from this game said XYZ therefore it's fact, and anything that contradicts it is lorebreaking!" Well no, it's fact that the in-game book said that. It's not fact that the book was right. Just like in the real world, you have to consider the biases and agenda of the author, as well as whether they could have simply been wrong and/or misinterpreting things.

I love the fact that there are in-game sources that directly contradict other in-game sources - sometimes in very obvious ways (like a book that explicitly says that a different source is wrong or lying), and sometimes in much less obvious ways.

Interpreting TES lore and trying to sort out what is likely to be true from what is likely to be false (and, due to your second point below, what is likely to be both true and false simultaneously) is fun and in many ways is like doing real world historical research from primary and secondary sources.

Ertosi wrote: »

Dragon Breaks: Phenomenon where time is broken. They are the realignment of time and space in response to events which makes the normal continuity of reality impossible. The cause is often attributed to mortals manipulating divine matters and often involves the Heart of Lorkhan. Many of the events happening during a dragon break will be forgotten to history after the dragon break's resolution, as if they had never happened.

Throw all-powerful daedric princes into the mix and these two concepts mean that literally anything could happen in the world of Nirn no matter how contradictory it might seem us. Did the story change? No, we just didn't know the correct or full story originally.

This is true, but there's a huge caveat to dragon breaks. That caveat is that you can't explain everything away with dragon breaks.

As a narrative device, dragon breaks need to be used extremely sparingly, because if ZOS/Bethesda rely on them too much to explain away inconsistencies, people interested in the lore lose a lot of that interest. It becomes a lazy narrative device that devalues existing lore in a way that the unreliable narrator device does not. Possibly more importantly, if too much of the Elder Scrolls universe is explained by dragon breaks, the setting would become virtually incomprehensible for players new to the series.

Additionally, we know that dragon breaks are heavily commented on by in-universe sources as they are huge world-changing events. In-universe sources may not be entirely clear on the specifics of any dragon break (largely because the very nature of a dragon break makes it impossible to be entirely clear on the specifics), but they certainly notice when they happen, and that gets passed down through the ages.

It is unlikely (but not impossible) that by the time of Skyrim there had been any more dragon breaks than the ones that we already know of. Specific things that may have both happened and not happened during a dragon break will have been forgotten, but the fact that a dragon break happened is unlikely to have been forgotten.

Having said that, the pre-existing lore (as in: the lore that existed before the launch of ESO) about the time period in which ESO is set is fragmentary at best, and speaks of a time of turmoil and chaos. It's not impossible that a dragon break occurred during the interregnum, and that secondary sources writing about the time period at a later date misinterpreted accounts that would indicate a dragon break as just being confused due to the political chaos and wars of the time.

To be fair my assumption is the entire soulburst probably counts as some form of dragon break.

Thevampirenight

I posted this in the other dwemer thread that popped up Undead Dwemer.

✭✭✭✭✭

Well its possible there is a few undead not ghost dwemer. For example
http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Harmonic_Auditor
It is hinted that he might be a dwemer and the dwemer of that city or outpost used him in an effort to merge their souls all together. My guess an early experiment to try and reach their goal of achieving a higher state of being not liking the fact they are subgradients. They used this method to try and merge all their souls together into one bigger soul and tried the same methods that ended up destroying their race. He might not have been effected because he was in that state and the lifesupport system hes on he might not have counted as a living dwemer because he was a conduit used in an early form of dwemer uncreating themselves. But all the other dwemer around him were well taken or destroyed by what they did in those ruins or became part of the brass tower like most of all the other dwemers that were not in the outerplanes by the major event that happened later on in morrowind.

I believe all the theories of what happened are true in some way their disappearance was not all at once and all at once are both true. Some were teleported into the future to return in the later eras, the rest became merged with the giant robot god they created. While also being zero summed out of existence.Some of them uncreating themselves through rituals profaning earthbones over the decades slowly not all at once till the big event at the volcano with the heart which wiped out all the remaining dwemer except one and the one in the ruins that we find in eso on the lifesupport system. There might be dwemer locked and imprisoned in Oblivion, WIthin Azuras Realm, maybe in other daedric realms. So there is lots of possibilities and more then likely all of them are true in some form or another.

They could explore Dwemers who were trapped in oblivion maybe are trapped there forever, unable to escape and are now some form of daedra, in a very secret part of oblivion not even Vivec with Chim can see. Maybe in Azuras realm. They could do that in Eso, Maybe tie in the last living dwemer somehow. Now as them being a playable race, well maybe if this game was in the first era, they could have done that. But it isn't so that will never ever happen if it did I think players and people who follow the lore closely would be really upset. Besides I doubt Bethesda would ever allow them to do this for those very reasons.

They could feasibly add in Sea Elves and the akaviri races- those who survived the war with the ebenheart pact. They can do this easily because I'm sure there is plenty of Maormer maybe rogues from their land, that could be in Summerset isles and other areas. Then those Akaviri that survived the war. Maormer and Akaviri Completely feasible and logical choices for new player races maybe in a manner that makes them rare. But for a time buyable and unlockable like limited time houses.

There is only once race ever added by bethesda to be playable after the first two major games and that is the orc and ever since that time have kept to the default ten playable races without adding anymore playables. They had their reasons for adding the orcs as a playable race, arena and daggerfall were more d&d based and they distanced themselves and redid a lot of the lore to make it not d&d hence they desided there must be playable orcs and they are not all chaotic evil or goblinoids being reconed into a race of mer . A lot of arena and daggerfalls lore was tossed out. Even the cool aspects they shouldn't have removed like Ebenarm the warrior god the enemy of all daedric princes except Sheogorath that was tossed out . Bethseda might have stopped them from mentioning or adding him into the game for that reason even the book where he was mentioned his name was removed. If they do add more playable races in the next elderscrolls game just maybe, they will add those to eso but till then I think they will stick to the main ten. Altmers, Argonians, Bretons, Bosmers, Dunmers, Imperials, Khajjits, Nords, Orcs and Redguards.

TiZzA93

No! Just give me new a class!

Necromancer!!!

DanteYoda

No! Just give me new a class!

Neoealth wrote: »

DanteYoda wrote: »

No offense but this is a real Fantasy Dwarf

That is just a Nord with his knees in his boots.

Ok that made me laugh but you are wrong.

Bruccius

No, too many choices already

The Dwemer being gone has a lore reason, only one of them is known to have survived the ordeal; it's best ESO doesn't change that, as people are already very iffy about the lore-accuracy of ESO.

Having such a large lorebreak wouldn't end up well in the lore community.

jeedrzej wrote: »

Dwemers aren't bloody dwarves man... They are elfs actually and its rather educated and enlighted race.

Doesn't mean they aren't Dwarves.

starkerealm

Carl_Bar wrote: »

To be fair my assumption is the entire soulburst probably counts as some form of dragon break.

Given the Soulburst lead to a large number of player characters scampering all over Tamriel turning events inside out, that seems likely. Though I suspect the exact breaking point was during Lyris's escape attempt, rather than the Soulburst itself.

That said, I want to say there already was a documented Dragonbreak sometime in the mid-second era. So, the idea that ESO is mid-Break isn't that weird.

starkerealm

lordrichter wrote: »

Ertosi wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

What unreliable narrators don't affect, AT ALL, is what you, as the player, experience.

The bold part is an important point that I really should have brought up. Anything that we explicitly see in any TES game simply cannot be explained away by the unreliable narrator.

This is an extremely good point and I fully agree with it. Unreliable narrators cannot account for things our own characters had perceived.

Actually, that is not quite true. We can be unreliable narrators just as much as anyone else. We just don't see ourselves that way.

Was Lerisa disguised as a fern, or did you see a fern because you weren't looking closely enough?

I know where you're trying to go with this. The argument you're setting the stage for is that the Dwarves are all over the place, but they're simply masters of disguise, masquerading as cookware and cutlery. Which doesn't really pass a scratch and sniff test.

First, we know that Lerisa's a master of disguise because we've seen her use it. She's also a smartass, we've seen that too. That you've seen her in disguise does not make you an unreliable narrator. What would make you an unreliable narrator is if you believed that she was actually the shrub all along, and tried to make that statement.

The player's experiences are not subject to an unreliable narrator. When the player reports that, then they may become unreliable. If they report information inaccurately.

Literally, an unreliable narrator is one who deceives or misdirects their audience.

Second, bold claims require strong evidence:

It's very difficult to prove a negative. For example: Prove that I haven't read the Duetsch boards today. Proving positives is much easier. "Hey, here's evidence to support my argument."

Proving the absence of the Dwemer is tricky, because there could always be one or two exceptions. However, that is not the same thing as saying, "clearly, they're out there, we just don't see them because they're in disguise."

If you want to assert the idea that they're out there, you'd need evidence to support that. Strong evidence. Evidence that overturns almost 4000 years of lore, and their extensive ruins scattered across the continent. To do that, you'd probably need a few living examples. And no, Yagrum Bagarn doesn't count, because he says he has no idea where they are.

Put in contrast to the claim that The Last Dragonborn is an incarnation of Shor. It's based on the existence of the Shezzarine, the fact that you can countermand Shor's orders to the other Dragonborn in Sovngarde, that you can sit in Shor's throne (this is, actually, a big deal), and that you can "casually" brush Tsun aside in one on one combat (again, this is not normal). There's a lot of smaller arguments to support it as well, ranging from people mistaking you for other incarnations of Ysmir, and the name itself. So, there's a credible argument that you're playing a mortal incarnation of a god in TES5, supported by reasonable (though not, insurmountable) evidence.

This is the kind of evidence you need, if you want to make a point like this. Not, "we haven't seen any dwarves, therefore, you have no proof they're gone." Look at all this evidence that they're still here, sneaking around.

But, I haven't seen anything like that, have you?

IsharaMeradin

starkerealm wrote: »

There's no, "unreliable narrator," to the Dwarven absence. There are questions about exactly what they did, or where they went (if anywhere), but the part where they all either vaporized or beamed up isn't in dispute. They're not around. Full stop.

That's it! We got our answer!

They were beamed up and melded with automatons creating the forebears of the Borg (about 1E 700). The massive release of energies causing all this ripped a hole in the fabric of both Mundus and Oblivion and sent them into "our realm". Fearing a collapse of everything known the Aedra sealed the outer breach of Oblivion while individual Daedra tried to take advantage of the tear between Mundus and Oblivion. A few Daedra succeeded to cause small scale havok upon Nirn, however, most were turned back by the Celestials who took it upon themselves to seal the breach between Mundus and Oblivion.

Being in an unknown universe the former Dwemer sought out new technologies that could assist their return to Nirn. Over time all that remained was an ever constant search for new technologies, resources and information about their new home. Most of this was obtained at the expense of absorbing or assimilating the native species into their own. This facilitated a need to control the masses and prevent any uprisings. Thus the emergence of the Borg in 1476 CE (Common Era also known as AD - Anno Domini)

gurluasb16_ESO

I'd rather see Maormer or a surviving pocket of Falmer. (Snow elves not the goblinoids they became later)

Both makes more sense than the Dwemer who can possible be metaphysically zero-summed or at the very least incorporated into the Numidium.

Then again, all you need to repopulate a race is a female. From what I've read, the child is always the race of the mother with characteristics from the father.

So if you find a Dwemer/Ayleid/Falmer woman, all you gotta do is make her have looots of babies and in a few centuries you'll have the race restored.

Elsonso

starkerealm wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

Ertosi wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

What unreliable narrators don't affect, AT ALL, is what you, as the player, experience.

The bold part is an important point that I really should have brought up. Anything that we explicitly see in any TES game simply cannot be explained away by the unreliable narrator.

This is an extremely good point and I fully agree with it. Unreliable narrators cannot account for things our own characters had perceived.

Actually, that is not quite true. We can be unreliable narrators just as much as anyone else. We just don't see ourselves that way.

Was Lerisa disguised as a fern, or did you see a fern because you weren't looking closely enough?

I know where you're trying to go with this. The argument you're setting the stage for is that the Dwarves are all over the place, but they're simply masters of disguise, masquerading as cookware and cutlery. Which doesn't really pass a scratch and sniff test.

First, we know that Lerisa's a master of disguise because we've seen her use it. She's also a smartass, we've seen that too. That you've seen her in disguise does not make you an unreliable narrator. What would make you an unreliable narrator is if you believed that she was actually the shrub all along, and tried to make that statement.

The player's experiences are not subject to an unreliable narrator. When the player reports that, then they may become unreliable. If they report information inaccurately.

Literally, an unreliable narrator is one who deceives or misdirects their audience.

Second, bold claims require strong evidence:

It's very difficult to prove a negative. For example: Prove that I haven't read the Duetsch boards today. Proving positives is much easier. "Hey, here's evidence to support my argument."

Proving the absence of the Dwemer is tricky, because there could always be one or two exceptions. However, that is not the same thing as saying, "clearly, they're out there, we just don't see them because they're in disguise."

If you want to assert the idea that they're out there, you'd need evidence to support that. Strong evidence. Evidence that overturns almost 4000 years of lore, and their extensive ruins scattered across the continent. To do that, you'd probably need a few living examples. And no, Yagrum Bagarn doesn't count, because he says he has no idea where they are.

Put in contrast to the claim that The Last Dragonborn is an incarnation of Shor. It's based on the existence of the Shezzarine, the fact that you can countermand Shor's orders to the other Dragonborn in Sovngarde, that you can sit in Shor's throne (this is, actually, a big deal), and that you can "casually" brush Tsun aside in one on one combat (again, this is not normal). There's a lot of smaller arguments to support it as well, ranging from people mistaking you for other incarnations of Ysmir, and the name itself. So, there's a credible argument that you're playing a mortal incarnation of a god in TES5, supported by reasonable (though not, insurmountable) evidence.

This is the kind of evidence you need, if you want to make a point like this. Not, "we haven't seen any dwarves, therefore, you have no proof they're gone." Look at all this evidence that they're still here, sneaking around.

But, I haven't seen anything like that, have you?

Heh. I never considered the idea that the various items of dinnerware in Tamriel are really the Dwemer hiding from us. Interesting idea.

No, my statement was more general and towards the idea that we are not reliable narrators. I agree that the Dwemer are gone, have been gone, and are actually and truly gone gone gone. Except for the fat guy hiding out on Vvardenfell, but I might be wrong about him.

The point about Lerisa is just a way of saying that what perceive in the game is colored by our expectations and interpretations, as is the case with any narrator. Nothing about us makes that perception any more reliable than the books we read in the game. The players are very much unreliable narrators.

Imryll

Pretty sure that it won't be in ESO, but a BGS title, that we'll eventually learn what happened to the dwemer. That said, I think the mystery adds more to the lore than a reveal would offer.

Starlock

Yes, Dwemers would do nice or...

lordrichter wrote: »

Heh. I never considered the idea that the various items of dinnerware in Tamriel are really the Dwemer hiding from us. Interesting idea.

Not dinnerware... calipers. The Dwemer are calipers.

Mai’q the Liar hid them all away during the time or the Oblivion crisis to conceal the truth. It’s why you don’t find any calipers by the time the dragons return.

starkerealm

lordrichter wrote: »

No, my statement was more general and towards the idea that we are not reliable narrators. I agree that the Dwemer are gone, have been gone, and are actually and truly gone gone gone. Except for the fat guy hiding out on Vvardenfell, but I might be wrong about him.

The point about Lerisa is just a way of saying that what perceive in the game is colored by our expectations and interpretations, as is the case with any narrator. Nothing about us makes that perception any more reliable than the books we read in the game. The players are very much unreliable narrators.

An individual player might be unreliable.

Example: I've been remembering the Alduin Dichotomy as popping up in TES3: Morrowind. It doesn't; the book was added for Skryim, though the description of Alduin as an alternate name for Akatosh does date back to Morrowind, it's not that book.

Simple human error can introduce an element of unreliability to the lore, and mistakes will happen.

The observed events within however, aren't the result of unreliable narrators. This includes the behavior you engaged in during a playthrough that I did not. It doesn't make you unreliable. If your Dragonborn joined the Dawnguard, and mine joined Clan Volkihar, that doesn't make one of us incorrect. Both of us experienced distinct, canonical, events. That's the purpose behind a Dragonbreak. The character came to a fork in the road, and went both ways.

Again, this isn't an unreliable narrator. If I told you that Clan Volkihar enjoyed full sunlight immunity, the way the Lamae bloodline does, because I never noticed the stat debuffs, and my own regeneration was already buffed by enchantments so I didn't notice that health, stam, and magicka regen stopped in daylight, I would be an unreliable narrator.

An unreliable narrator is one who inaccurately reports their experiences, or who's experiences are fundamentally warped and do not reflect reality. If you accurately report what you did and saw, you are reliable. You can still put your own perspective and editorial commentary on it without becoming unreliable. You're still relating your experiences, and you can do that subjectively or objectively. So long as you accurately report your experiences.

Bruccius

No, too many choices already

starkerealm wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

Ertosi wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

What unreliable narrators don't affect, AT ALL, is what you, as the player, experience.

The bold part is an important point that I really should have brought up. Anything that we explicitly see in any TES game simply cannot be explained away by the unreliable narrator.

This is an extremely good point and I fully agree with it. Unreliable narrators cannot account for things our own characters had perceived.

Actually, that is not quite true. We can be unreliable narrators just as much as anyone else. We just don't see ourselves that way.

Was Lerisa disguised as a fern, or did you see a fern because you weren't looking closely enough?

I know where you're trying to go with this. The argument you're setting the stage for is that the Dwarves are all over the place, but they're simply masters of disguise, masquerading as cookware and cutlery. Which doesn't really pass a scratch and sniff test.

First, we know that Lerisa's a master of disguise because we've seen her use it. She's also a smartass, we've seen that too. That you've seen her in disguise does not make you an unreliable narrator. What would make you an unreliable narrator is if you believed that she was actually the shrub all along, and tried to make that statement.

The player's experiences are not subject to an unreliable narrator. When the player reports that, then they may become unreliable. If they report information inaccurately.

Literally, an unreliable narrator is one who deceives or misdirects their audience.

Second, bold claims require strong evidence:

It's very difficult to prove a negative. For example: Prove that I haven't read the Duetsch boards today. Proving positives is much easier. "Hey, here's evidence to support my argument."

Proving the absence of the Dwemer is tricky, because there could always be one or two exceptions. However, that is not the same thing as saying, "clearly, they're out there, we just don't see them because they're in disguise."

If you want to assert the idea that they're out there, you'd need evidence to support that. Strong evidence. Evidence that overturns almost 4000 years of lore, and their extensive ruins scattered across the continent. To do that, you'd probably need a few living examples. And no, Yagrum Bagarn doesn't count, because he says he has no idea where they are.

Put in contrast to the claim that The Last Dragonborn is an incarnation of Shor. It's based on the existence of the Shezzarine, the fact that you can countermand Shor's orders to the other Dragonborn in Sovngarde, that you can sit in Shor's throne (this is, actually, a big deal), and that you can "casually" brush Tsun aside in one on one combat (again, this is not normal). There's a lot of smaller arguments to support it as well, ranging from people mistaking you for other incarnations of Ysmir, and the name itself. So, there's a credible argument that you're playing a mortal incarnation of a god in TES5, supported by reasonable (though not, insurmountable) evidence.

This is the kind of evidence you need, if you want to make a point like this. Not, "we haven't seen any dwarves, therefore, you have no proof they're gone." Look at all this evidence that they're still here, sneaking around.

But, I haven't seen anything like that, have you?

Actually, the Dragonborn = Shezzarine theory is filled with holes.

You can't countermand Shor's orders, as Shor's orders weren't for the Three Tongues; but for the other Heroes of Sovngarde.
You can sit in the Emperor's throne, too, without being the Emperor.
All those who sit in the Hall of Valor have brushed Tsun aside in one on one combat.