This Sanguine design is not good

Syldras · July 16

BretonMage wrote: »

Well, in the case of French, for example, every object has a grammatical gender, and my language teacher assures me it's not a matter of personal choice

Not in the grammatical sense of one specific language, of course. But if we take the sun as an example, is it "really" male like in Italian and French (or other Latin/Romance languages), or is it "really" female like in German (and other Germanic languages)? The differences in this perception stem from different cultural and historical ideas: Germanic mythology had a female sun goddess, ancient Greece and Rome had a male sun god. But it's not possible to say that one of these perceptions is right and the other one wrong.

BretonMage wrote: »

It seems we often attribute gender to shapes (or perhaps sounds), or we wouldn't call Azura or Meridia "she" and Malacath "he".

Ideas of gender roles or even gender clichés certainly play a role, as well as personal views.

Maybe also the sound of names, although there are many languages where male names end with "a", so this also varies from culture to culture.

For me, Sanguine is male, because that fits the idea I have of him, the thing that fits to the concept I have of him most. Other people might imagine a mysterious beautiful and seductive lady carrying a rose, for them, Sanguine's imagine might be female.

In the end, it's just a variation of the main question of the thread: How Sanguine "should" look like, and whether a fat ugly goblin or a muscular handsome dremora would be the "correct" depiction. In reality there is no right or wrong.

BretonMage wrote: »

Technically if they are all called daedric "princes", then they should all be called "he", to accord with the gendered term itself.

It's used as a "generic" aristocratic title.

BretonMage · July 16

Syldras wrote: »

Ideas of gender roles or even gender clichés certainly play a role, as well as personal views.

Maybe also the sound of names, although there are many languages where male names end with "a", so this also varies from culture to culture.

For me, Sanguine is male, because that fits the idea I have of him, the thing that fits to the concept I have of him most. Other people might imagine a mysterious beautiful and seductive lady carrying a rose, for them, Sanguine's imagine might be female.

In the end, it's just a variation of the main question of the thread: How Sanguine "should" look like, and whether a fat ugly goblin or a muscular handsome dremora would be the "correct" depiction. In reality there is no right or wrong.

True, it's all very circumstantial, or subjective. I had a quick look through the UESP articles and they do change the pronoun for Boethiah in accordance with how he/she manifests through the eras. That's probably the simplest way to do it.

For me , Sanguine in Skyrim made for a memorable quest, hence I'm rather partial to Sam Guevenne, but I wouldn't mind seeing other forms if it fits the story and is convincingly presented. It also occurs to me now that I wouldn't mind if Molag Bal had a redesign, despite (or perhaps because of) his ubiquity in ESO this year. I do consider Sheogorath and Azura to be iconic, though.

OgrimTitan · July 16

Syldras wrote: »

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

Just look at Vivec's "muatra"... It was just not 2017-friendly to admit he slapped Azura with... A very specific part of his body.

There are earlier depictions of muatra as a "normal" spear, for example in TES3 concept art, or the famous "foul murder" drawing where Muatra is used to kill Nerevar.

Also, the Lessons Of Vivec are highly symbolic. I always cringe a bit when people take the text literally, to be honest, especially the part about Vivec's conception and birth. Have they never read any myths before, especially creation myths?

And at last, if at all, it's not part of Vivec's body, but a sewered part of Molag Bal's body, from how it is narrated in the Lessons of Vivec.

And when it comes to Sanguine or generally depictions of Daedric Princes in statues or other artworks: These depend entirely on the creator. Daedric Princes have no "true form", their looks depend entirely on how they choose to be seen. Depictions made by mortals vary and are influenced by their own culture, for example, a statue of Azuza looks different whether it's made by Bretons or by Dunmer. If there was one "mainstream" teaching, one could say different cultures of Tamriel have their different own folklore or folk religion/beliefs, when it comes to the Daedric Princes, let alone different cultural art styles.

Sanguine also isn't just the "eating, drinking, merriness" cliché that he's often reduced to. His revelries also include arena fights (so there is a fighting aspect that may explain armor as part of his depiction) and unrestricted violence. For the Khajiit, he's a deity of blood, death and murder (and while that isn't shown that much in Imperial traditions, it's not impossible that this is also part of them, just not the main focus). Also: Ayleid "flesh-sculpting", "gut-gardening" and "art-torture". For the Ayleids, one of his many names what "Blood-Made-Pleasure". Considering that Ayleids lived in the West Weald, Colovian depictions of Sanguine could also be slightly influenced by their traditions.

So, yes, I see that the newest depiction is a nod to Skyrim, probably because Skyrim is the game most players here have played before (the younger ones may have never played Oblivion, let alone Daggerfall) and having a recognition value absolutely makes sense. But no, it's not wrong. It's not even wrong if the location in TES4 is identical, because within many centuries, the old shrine (as seen in ESO) might have been destroyed, even more than once, and then replaced by a new statue, which can look different, not only because art styles have changed, but maybe also because the way people perceived Sanguine did. Maybe there was a cultural/folkloristic shift between ESO and TES4, with the violent aspects decreasing and the view shifting more towards aspects like gluttony and drunkenness (although the statue still includes a skull in the TES4 depiction). I think this is very much possible as it's also known from the real world.

Sanguine also isn't just the "eating, drinking, merriness" cliché that he's often reduced to.

- [Snip]

Also, the Lessons Of Vivec are highly symbolic. I always cringe a bit when people take the text literally, to be honest, especially the part about Vivec's conception and birth. Have they never read any myths before, especially creation myths?

- Off-topic, but Vivec's myths are MORE than JUST myths. They are artificial half-truths and altered-reality fabrications, BOTH literal and metaphorical. Incorrectly patronising people on the complicated topic isn't good.

Actually they're all proven by lore, be it lorebooks or dialogues.

- And? It doesn't make those attributes defining of the character. Lord Dagon is a god of earthquakes, but no one is trying to make his defining look that of an.. I don't know.. earth golem? Aspects like that are welcome, but we're not talking about the aspects, and this Sanguine is not a violent aspect of Sanguine. It was also proven that Summerset COULD'VE looked like it ended up looking in ESO, but it doesn't make it any better. Or true.

Sanguine has extremely violent, brutal, even perverted aspects. The spiky daedric armor symbolizes that very well, in my opinion.

- [Snip]

In the end, it's just a variation of the main question of the thread: How Sanguine "should" look like, and whether a fat ugly goblin or a muscular handsome dremora would be the "correct" depiction. In reality there is no right or wrong.

- It's not about "right" or "wrong". It's about good or bad. The quality is an objective value. The art design of Dark Souls or Elden Ring is praised for a reason. You may not like the aesthetics of it's darker themes, but the creativity is undeniable. Creativity is an indication of quality, because it shows time spent and efforts put.

[Snip]

[Edited for baiting/bashing]

Syldras · July 16

BretonMage wrote: »

I do consider Sheogorath and Azura to be iconic, though.

Yes, they're two of the Princes that have a more constant way of presenting, but even Sheogorath manifests as an Alfiq sometimes (although he seems to like his peculiar style of clothing):

And when it comes to Azura, there's a nice stone relief in Elsweyr that shows her as a three-faced goddess...

...which is clearly based off the depictions the Greek goddess Hekate (who is linked to witchcraft, the night, the moon, and some aspects which would be considered necromancy nowadays), by the way...

...which also shows a Khajiit form of her (along with a human and an elven form).

Oh, and it's also speculated that the mermaid statue in Anvil might be a depiction of her.

agelonestar · July 16

This whole thread has made me chuckle and roll my eyes in equal measure, so thanks for that.

If I were some sort of demi-god who enjoyed a few extra burgers, who binged on more beers than he should, and who delighted in a couple of large slices of chocolate fudge cake on the regular, and I couldn't magic my appearance to be whatever I wanted, then I think I'd resign my godhood and call it a day.

Just sayin'

Syldras · July 16

OgrimTitan wrote: »

In general, I don't understand the emphasis on demagogy

It's a wide stretch to call a lore discussion based on sources from TES as well as rl parallels "demagogy" - the act of instigating the dumb or uneducated masses with propaganda, lies and scapegoating to reach a political goal or persecute a minority out of personal interest, instead of striving for morality or truth.

We had a civil and interesting discussion so far that worked without overdramatic accusations and insults and I'd prefer to keep it that way.

xylena_lazarow · July 16

We know little of how daedric cultures approach sex and gender. They also don't reproduce the way we do. It's fun to speculate on the mystery, so I wouldn't worry much about daedric pronouns.

Syldras · July 16

.

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

They also don't reproduce the way we do.

Just to add a bit more of TES' wonderful lore: From what I've read so far, they don't reproduce at all. It's a constant mass of energy (let's call it daedric "souls" for a more illustrative term) that always remains stable. If a daedric being "dies", its "soul" has lost its physical form for a while, but it will form again through the use of what lore calls "chaotic creatia" (or, more symbolically, "the waters of Oblivion"). The place where that happens varies from realm to realm (for example, in TES4 there's the Wellspring in Sheogorath's realm), but the outcome is always the same: The being will just emerge again. So, because no one ever dies, there's also no need for reproduction.

Araneae6537 · July 16

Syldras wrote: »

.

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

They also don't reproduce the way we do.

Just to add a bit more of TES' wonderful lore: From what I've read so far, they don't reproduce at all. It's a constant mass of energy (let's call it daedric "souls" for a more illustrative term) that always remains stable. If a daedric being "dies", its "soul" has lost its physical form for a while, but it will form again through the use of what lore calls "chaotic creatia" (or, more symbolically, "the waters of Oblivion"). The place where that happens varies from realm to realm (for example, in TES4 there's the Wellspring in Sheogorath's realm), but the outcome is always the same: The being will just emerge again. So, because no one ever dies, there's also no need for reproduction.

But isn’t Fa-Nuit-Hen a scion of Boethiah?

Syldras · July 16

Araneae6537 wrote: »

But isn’t Fa-Nuit-Hen a scion of Boethiah?

Not physically. There was a dialogue that mentioned that Daedric Princes may "adopt" other daedra, give them their own pocket realm, and treat them like offspring, if that makes any sense in the Daedric context. I think it was Madam Whim who mentioned it. I have to look that up.

Other than that, he may also be a split aspect of Boethiah, like Barbas is a part of Clavicus Vile? We could discuss now whether that counts as procreation.

Syldras · July 16

Okay, I checked it now, it was in the Loremaster's archive - Malacath and Maelstrom:

In fact, if you look back through recorded history, you'll find several instances of Daedric Princes adopting beings as scions, even if the creatia of their own realm was not involved. By the same token, of course, we Daedra do occasionally change loyalties

laniakea_0 · July 16

BretonMage wrote: »

Syldras wrote: »

I've come across another nice detail, the description for Sanguine's Rose in Daggerfall

The Sanguine Rose is not an artifact most folk would care to have. It summons a lesser daedra to the user. The daedra will attack any other creature in the area except the bearer of the rose. The rose is like any other in that it will wilt. The more of its power that is used, the more wilted it becomes. Eventually all its petals fall off and it loses its powers. Somewhere in Oblivion a new rose blooms and is plucked by Sanguine herself to be given to a new champion.

Yes, it's no new info that Daedric Princes can show in any form they like. But it counters the statement that Sanguine had been established as an ugly fat male ogre (and nothing else) until Skyrim.

Interesting! So is Sanguine actually a they?

no. I think he's whatever he chooses to be in the moment. not an amalgamation of all possibilities at the same time.

Syldras · July 19

laniakea_0 wrote: »

no. I think he's whatever he chooses to be in the moment. not an amalgamation of all possibilities at the same time.

Actually that would be a good description for his state when he's non-manifested but in his energy/spirit form.

boi_anachronism_ · July 19

Interesting. Keep in mind that looking worn or as if over indulgence has taken a toll is a mortal thing. He's a daedra. Its his sphere of power. Additionally if he wants to entice mortal followers I would think he would not to appear in a fashion that would make him look weakened by that or or insinuate potental negative consequences for indulging.

PrayingSeraph · July 20

OgrimTitan wrote: »

Syldras wrote: »

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

Just look at Vivec's "muatra"... It was just not 2017-friendly to admit he slapped Azura with... A very specific part of his body.

There are earlier depictions of muatra as a "normal" spear, for example in TES3 concept art, or the famous "foul murder" drawing where Muatra is used to kill Nerevar.

Also, the Lessons Of Vivec are highly symbolic. I always cringe a bit when people take the text literally, to be honest, especially the part about Vivec's conception and birth. Have they never read any myths before, especially creation myths?

And at last, if at all, it's not part of Vivec's body, but a sewered part of Molag Bal's body, from how it is narrated in the Lessons of Vivec.

And when it comes to Sanguine or generally depictions of Daedric Princes in statues or other artworks: These depend entirely on the creator. Daedric Princes have no "true form", their looks depend entirely on how they choose to be seen. Depictions made by mortals vary and are influenced by their own culture, for example, a statue of Azuza looks different whether it's made by Bretons or by Dunmer. If there was one "mainstream" teaching, one could say different cultures of Tamriel have their different own folklore or folk religion/beliefs, when it comes to the Daedric Princes, let alone different cultural art styles.

Sanguine also isn't just the "eating, drinking, merriness" cliché that he's often reduced to. His revelries also include arena fights (so there is a fighting aspect that may explain armor as part of his depiction) and unrestricted violence. For the Khajiit, he's a deity of blood, death and murder (and while that isn't shown that much in Imperial traditions, it's not impossible that this is also part of them, just not the main focus). Also: Ayleid "flesh-sculpting", "gut-gardening" and "art-torture". For the Ayleids, one of his many names what "Blood-Made-Pleasure". Considering that Ayleids lived in the West Weald, Colovian depictions of Sanguine could also be slightly influenced by their traditions.

So, yes, I see that the newest depiction is a nod to Skyrim, probably because Skyrim is the game most players here have played before (the younger ones may have never played Oblivion, let alone Daggerfall) and having a recognition value absolutely makes sense. But no, it's not wrong. It's not even wrong if the location in TES4 is identical, because within many centuries, the old shrine (as seen in ESO) might have been destroyed, even more than once, and then replaced by a new statue, which can look different, not only because art styles have changed, but maybe also because the way people perceived Sanguine did. Maybe there was a cultural/folkloristic shift between ESO and TES4, with the violent aspects decreasing and the view shifting more towards aspects like gluttony and drunkenness (although the statue still includes a skull in the TES4 depiction). I think this is very much possible as it's also known from the real world.

Sanguine also isn't just the "eating, drinking, merriness" cliché that he's often reduced to.

- [Snip]

Also, the Lessons Of Vivec are highly symbolic. I always cringe a bit when people take the text literally, to be honest, especially the part about Vivec's conception and birth. Have they never read any myths before, especially creation myths?

- Off-topic, but Vivec's myths are MORE than JUST myths. They are artificial half-truths and altered-reality fabrications, BOTH literal and metaphorical. Incorrectly patronising people on the complicated topic isn't good.

Actually they're all proven by lore, be it lorebooks or dialogues.

- And? It doesn't make those attributes defining of the character. Lord Dagon is a god of earthquakes, but no one is trying to make his defining look that of an.. I

OgrimTitan wrote: »

Syldras wrote: »

JiubLeRepenti wrote: »

Just look at Vivec's "muatra"... It was just not 2017-friendly to admit he slapped Azura with... A very specific part of his body.

There are earlier depictions of muatra as a "normal" spear, for example in TES3 concept art, or the famous "foul murder" drawing where Muatra is used to kill Nerevar.

Also, the Lessons Of Vivec are highly symbolic. I always cringe a bit when people take the text literally, to be honest, especially the part about Vivec's conception and birth. Have they never read any myths before, especially creation myths?

And at last, if at all, it's not part of Vivec's body, but a sewered part of Molag Bal's body, from how it is narrated in the Lessons of Vivec.

And when it comes to Sanguine or generally depictions of Daedric Princes in statues or other artworks: These depend entirely on the creator. Daedric Princes have no "true form", their looks depend entirely on how they choose to be seen. Depictions made by mortals vary and are influenced by their own culture, for example, a statue of Azuza looks different whether it's made by Bretons or by Dunmer. If there was one "mainstream" teaching, one could say different cultures of Tamriel have their different own folklore or folk religion/beliefs, when it comes to the Daedric Princes, let alone different cultural art styles.

Sanguine also isn't just the "eating, drinking, merriness" cliché that he's often reduced to. His revelries also include arena fights (so there is a fighting aspect that may explain armor as part of his depiction) and unrestricted violence. For the Khajiit, he's a deity of blood, death and murder (and while that isn't shown that much in Imperial traditions, it's not impossible that this is also part of them, just not the main focus). Also: Ayleid "flesh-sculpting", "gut-gardening" and "art-torture". For the Ayleids, one of his many names what "Blood-Made-Pleasure". Considering that Ayleids lived in the West Weald, Colovian depictions of Sanguine could also be slightly influenced by their traditions.

So, yes, I see that the newest depiction is a nod to Skyrim, probably because Skyrim is the game most players here have played before (the younger ones may have never played Oblivion, let alone Daggerfall) and having a recognition value absolutely makes sense. But no, it's not wrong. It's not even wrong if the location in TES4 is identical, because within many centuries, the old shrine (as seen in ESO) might have been destroyed, even more than once, and then replaced by a new statue, which can look different, not only because art styles have changed, but maybe also because the way people perceived Sanguine did. Maybe there was a cultural/folkloristic shift between ESO and TES4, with the violent aspects decreasing and the view shifting more towards aspects like gluttony and drunkenness (although the statue still includes a skull in the TES4 depiction). I think this is very much possible as it's also known from the real world.

Sanguine also isn't just the "eating, drinking, merriness" cliché that he's often reduced to.

- [Snip]

Also, the Lessons Of Vivec are highly symbolic. I always cringe a bit when people take the text literally, to be honest, especially the part about Vivec's conception and birth. Have they never read any myths before, especially creation myths?

- Off-topic, but Vivec's myths are MORE than JUST myths. They are artificial half-truths and altered-reality fabrications, BOTH literal and metaphorical. Incorrectly patronising people on the complicated topic isn't good.

Actually they're all proven by lore, be it lorebooks or dialogues.

- And? It doesn't make those attributes defining of the character. Lord Dagon is a god of earthquakes, but no one is trying to make his defining look that of an.. I don't know.. earth golem? Aspects like that are welcome, but we're not talking about the aspects, and this Sanguine is not a violent aspect of Sanguine. It was also proven that Summerset COULD'VE looked like it ended up looking in ESO, but it doesn't make it any better. Or true.

Sanguine has extremely violent, brutal, even perverted aspects. The spiky daedric armor symbolizes that very well, in my opinion.

- [Snip]

In the end, it's just a variation of the main question of the thread: How Sanguine "should" look like, and whether a fat ugly goblin or a muscular handsome dremora would be the "correct" depiction. In reality there is no right or wrong.

- It's not about "right" or "wrong". It's about good or bad. The quality is an objective value. The art design of Dark Souls or Elden Ring is praised for a reason. You may not like the aesthetics of it's darker themes, but the creativity is undeniable. Creativity is an indication of quality, because it shows time spent and efforts put.

[Snip]

[Edited for baiting/bashing]

How much stock you put in the Lessons of Vivec is an individual choice. There is nothing in the lore to suggest its all true for example, literally or metaphorically. One can reasonably doubt most of it. Vivec is a known liar afterall. Or you can believe it all, literally and/or metaphorically. But thats one's choice. There is no "objective truth" when it comes to Lessons of Vivec.

TaSheen · July 20

There's no "objective truth" for any of the lore books - or the major or minor NPCs throughout the entire game. In reality, the lore is as much a background "curtain" as is lore/mythology in our own world: a framework for varied systems of belief, none of which may be true at all.

All of us live with "selective" disbelief - it's a fact of life in the real world, and even more so in a world like Nirn. In Nirn, we are handed various propositions which we can accept as fact, or alternatively, discard. It's actually a really logical construct in a way - it enables all of us to move in this world in a way which satisfies each of us individually without voiding any of the background "lore" or logic....

kaushad · July 20

To help illustrate how lame using Sanguine's appearance from Skyrim is, here's a new concept for Azura:

xylena_lazarow · July 20

boi_anachronism_ wrote: »

Additionally if he wants to entice mortal followers I would think he would not to appear in a fashion that would make him look weakened by that or or insinuate potental negative consequences for indulging.

I too would love to follow Generic Armored Dremora Churl #6587901.

TheNuminous1 · July 20

You are all also forgetting an important social context that daedra especially a pleasure(ish/esque) daedra would mess with and utilize.

Some people want to be fat.or ugly. Or both.

A daedric prince will manifest in whatever way the individual needs them fo manifest for their desired outcome.

I'm sure Bal does not always appear as a demon when he is whispering in men's ears to commit horror to others in a "domination" kinda way.

The whispers of the dark and demented often appear colorful and good in the moment.

That's how the mortals get so easily twisted.

So sure he might appear handsome lf buff to an imperial. But there is absolutely people in the world who idolize and aspire to be what society considers ugly.

xylena_lazarow · July 20

TheNuminous1 wrote: »

A daedric prince will manifest in whatever way the individual needs them fo manifest for their desired outcome.

So his goal is to be visually indistinguishable from the daedric trash mobs I kill every day at Bruma?

TheNuminous1 · July 20

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

TheNuminous1 wrote: »

A daedric prince will manifest in whatever way the individual needs them fo manifest for their desired outcome.

So his goal is to be visually indistinguishable from the daedric trash mobs I kill every day at Bruma?

If that's the best way for him to manipulate you then sure I guess.

For me he will manifest as some rotten grapes and green flowers.

And a Netflix series or two

NotaDaedraWorshipper · July 20

A four pages long thread about my favourite prince (yes I'm using this avatar for a reason) and I've not noticed it until now? Appalling!

I first saw this statue as its furniture version in datamine which looks identical and was for a brief moment happy we were finally getting a Sanguine statue. But that flew out the window as soon as I saw it. I frankly find this statue bad, for various reasons.
The pose is weird and awkward. The face and expression is bad, to put it mildly. Is the statue made out of stone or metal? It's hard to tell sometimes. It frankly doesn't look like a realistic statue either just a dremora model from the game they gave this filter all over and put in this pose and added a tankard from somewhere else. Not an actually designed item that is supposed to be a statue, it looks off.
And of course, the boring and uncreative model of Sanguine himself looking like a rather typical dremora in daedric armour.

Not like the other princes who get statues, sometimes more than one, which gives them an unique look designed to be them.

So, now when my thoughts on the low quality statue has been done lets move on to Sanguine himself, since OP brought up some certain topics, such as choice in physique that is worth being discussed.
Sanguine is a daedric prince, and as one he has no physical form. What we see when seeing a prince is a manifestation, an avatar, they have chosen to take so mortal eyes and minds can actually comprehend them. This manifestation can be whatever they want, although many of them do have some preferences in themes they stick to, some varies more than others. Hermaeus Mora being an obvious example of one who has one theme he sticks to quite strictly. Blobs, eyeballs and tentacles galore while being referred to as he. Meanwhile Boethia usually just have "warrior" as their theme and vary between pronouns and if they look masculine, feminine, androgynous etc quite regularly. Sanguine sadly doesn't have many appearances or references. He has his statues in in TES II and IV, and a manifestation in V, which is as uncreative as ESO's statue. He's almost identical to the standard dremora there.
This doesn't mean him looking physically fit or wearing armour is wrong, neither are the older portly versions. Both can be right and both can fit what he represent, along with so many other forms. One just needs to be better better designed.

Saying he must look less beefy and in a certain way because of some reason that is related to biology not only doesn't work because he's a daedric prince who can look however he want, but also shows a limited view of his sphere, one that relates to one that has been a pet peeve of mine for a long time. Which is to equal him to nothing but drinking and eating with a touch of partying and pranks. They are a part yes, but there's so much more to his sphere than that. Which is in simple terms for those unaware: hedonistic revelry, debauchery, wild org-I probably can't say that on the forum, passionate indulgences and the dark natures of people. And the minds of people can be very dark and depraved. To the khajiit he's Sangiin the Blood Cat and connected to both death and secret murder as well as things matching the generic view of him such as tempting khajiit to give into flesh and pleasure without purpose. Also making their flesh immortal, aka vampirism, which has been a topic of interest to me and have waited for more information on this.

I could talk about my thoughts of Sanguine and his unimaginate portrayals in the games (along with many of the other princes tbh) for ages, but to go back to the main topic. Sanguine is the urges of blood, one's selfish desires and enjoyment, he can be as much with the people feasting and partying as the ones in the brothels, along with people commiting atrocities for their own pleasure and the warrior who bathes in blood for their bloodthirst.

A lot of looks could fit such a sphere. But I would prefer the more attractive forms, which to my obviously biased opinion is more suiting for him in general, especially when "introducing" himself and/or trying to tempt people. Because which form would you think work better to tempt and persuade people to indulge in various things? Attractive people are in general more liked, trusted and judged less harshly. "Sure he is a daedra, but he looks nice and seems friendly, it can't be that bad can it".

If my drawing skills were better I'd give actual examples of statues I'd think be better. Which would be somewhat of a mix of the two portayals. Having him being physically fit not portly (yes people have varied taste in bodies, but a large majority like physically fit) with a good face that is handsome in a less human way fitting for a daedra, and wearing something like the older portayals such as a chiton or himation but having some aesthetic armour pieces worked into the look. Also no dumb tankard that sticks out, but just an inviting hand and a smile.
Also better horns. The ones the statue have are very lacklustre and needs more oomph to be worthy of a prince depiction. Something like the horns the Ram of Dark Delights have but of course more fitted for a humanoid head. The double set of horns with the roses are nice.

The Ram of Dark Delights for reference.

Sorry for long post, I better stop before I ramble more, have a rose 🌹

Syldras · July 21

PrayingSeraph wrote: »

How much stock you put in the Lessons of Vivec is an individual choice. There is nothing in the lore to suggest its all true for example, literally or metaphorically. One can reasonably doubt most of it. Vivec is a known liar afterall. Or you can believe it all, literally and/or metaphorically. But thats one's choice. There is no "objective truth" when it comes to Lessons of Vivec.

To say it right away: I agree that there's not "the truth" we can extract from the writings of Vivec. There are some clear contradictions to existing lore where we could estimate what's more probable - and in some cases, from what we know about the Mundus, it's clearly not Vivec's account (take the part about Vivec's birth, for example, where Lord Seht is not only described as an adult man and creator of "homunculi"=factotums, but even already called the Clockwork God - while we know from other accounts that the apotheosis - if we want to call it that - of the Tribunal happened much later, during Vivec's adulthood). And there are clearly many parts that we cannot prove at all, where it is up to the reader what to make of it.

And there again, we have different ideas. I personally, focus on the poetry aspect. To me, Vivec isn't just an ordinary liar, he is indeed a poet, a writer of his own history. The whole introduction of the Lessons of Vivec reeks of a traditional origin myth. There's also a divine justification in it. Vivecs mentions all different kind of "creatures" as being involved in his creation: There's the netchiman's wife, a symbol for the Chimer people; there are dreugh, that are a symbol for nature; there are the factotums, a symbol for artificial beings; there are daedra involved; and in Sermon Three, even the Dwemer have a part in Vivec's development - and until that, he's not even born yet!

There a part in the ending dialogue of CWC that also fits very well to the impression I had, where Lord Seht shares the knowledge he has of Vivec:
"He also suffers a kind of enslavement. Not unlike my own, in fact. Beauty holds the keys to his shackles. Beauty, and a love of great works. Great heights. His appetites are insatiable, thus his despair. Yes. A poet's despair. Vivec craves radical freedom - the death of all limits and restrictions. He wishes to be all things at all times. Every race, every gender, every hero, both divine and finite... but in the end, he can only be Vivec."

There are also other parts in the Lessons of Vivec that remind me of real world myths (even the Muatra thing to some extend), but let's leave it at this for now.

TaSheen wrote: »

There's no "objective truth" for any of the lore books - or the major or minor NPCs throughout the entire game.

This is a good point. I find it unfortunate that some people like to see every lorebook as a fact about the world, while in the end, these are subjective accounts from characters within the narration. If at all, we can take official statements by Bethesda or ZOS as "real" for TES' world, because they define this world. A fictive account within a narration does not.

TaSheen · July 21

Y'know.... I would LOVE to be able to go back in time to the origins of TES - in the paper and pencil game the original group invented/imagined.

A birth of that nature - that has grown and thrived for all these years.... I'm actually thrilled and delighted with the length of time this entire creation has lived.

And that's what it is: a living creation, first of the original role-play group, and furthered by so many many others over all these years.... decades! It would be a crime to let it die....

Syldras · July 21

NotaDaedraWorshipper wrote: »

The pose is weird and awkward.

I've been thinking about what ZOS might have had in mind. It's clearly a victorious pose, stepping on something/someone defeated. Is it a victorious arena fighter that has defeated a beast (celebrated by his fans who throw roses)? A dark knight who has defeated his enemies? A hunter stepping on the head(s) of its prey? If you want to take the vampiric aspect into consideration, maybe it symbolized the victory over death?

No, I don't think it's that complicated.

NotaDaedraWorshipper wrote: »

Is the statue made out of stone or metal? It's hard to tell sometimes.

Maybe it's pyrite, then it's both

I would have suspected unpolished obsidian, which is volcanic glass, which has a bit of a sheen (although one could argue where it's imported from then) - then of course, considering some colors at the outfit station make you look like you were wearing a plastic bag, ZOS aren't the best when it comes to textures... The mug seems to be colored differently, which caught my attention. Maybe that part of the statue was replaced sometime? In a wine region, it should be a bottle or a wine chalice anyway

NotaDaedraWorshipper wrote: »

To the khajiit he's Sangiin the Blood Cat and connected to both death and secret murder as well as things matching the generic view of him such as tempting khajiit to give into flesh pleasure without purpose. Also making their flesh immortal, aka vampirism, which has been a topic of interest to me and have waited for more information on this.

This is an interesting aspect, considering that the origins of the vampire myths are quite... carnal, and the vampire is basically a sinner figure. I mean, the biting and turning of the victim has a deeper symbolic, after all.

Syldras · July 24

I just realized that the npc giving you the position of Sanguine's shrine in TES4 is Falanu Hlaalu:
"What makes you think I'd know anything about that... But it just so happens I've run into some Sanguine worshippers up in the Imperial Reserve, a long way north-north-west of Skingrad. Can't give you any better directions, unfortunately. Traveled mostly at night with a guide, and didn't see much on the way."

That's the charming lady who asks you this question the first thing when you enter her store:
"I'm the only alchemist in Skingrad. Not much business here, but I can't go back to Morrowind. It's just like anywhere else in the Empire. By the way... do you happen to know what the fine is here in Cyrodiil for ***? Just asking."

Source: https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Oblivion:Falanu_Hlaalu

So much for the darker or outright creepy aspects...

But what I actually wanted to write... @NotaDaedraWorshipper

NotaDaedraWorshipper wrote: »

If my drawing skills were better I'd give actual examples of statues I'd think be better. Which would be somewhat of a mix of the two portayals. Having him being physically fit not portly (yes people have varied taste in bodies, but a large majority like physically fit) with a good face that is handsome in a less human way fitting for a daedra, and wearing something like the older portayals such as a chiton or himation but having some aesthetic armour pieces worked into the look. Also no dumb tankard that sticks out, but just an inviting hand and a smile.
Also better horns. The ones the statue have are very lacklustre and needs more oomph to be worthy of a prince depiction. Something like the horns the Ram of Dark Delights have but of course more fitted for a humanoid head. The double set of horns with the roses are nice.

If you send me a picture of the pose you imagine for reference (random photo from the internet is enough) or post it here, I might give it a try. I can't guarantee the outcome, but it's an interesting subject at least.