Queen Ayrenn's Death (Lore)?

SilverIce58 · June 2018

starkerealm wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

I guess she might have existed as a character concept that was eventually put to use in ESO, but that would be weird, considering that her Dominion didn't become a fleshed out concept until pretty late in the series. I'd love to know what you're referring to, I can't think of any such examples. This reminds me how much it sucks that we can't easily search old Bethesda forums anymore...

The Dominion (and Thalmor), have actually been around longer than you might realize. They get discussed in the Pocket Guide as far back as Oblivion (2005.) The big thing to understand is that the Dominion in ESO is not the same Dominion as Skyrim's.

Specifically, ESO takes place during the first Aldmeri Dominion. This organization lasted through most of the second era, though I cant remember exactly when it finally fell apart.

In Skyrim you're dealing with the Second Aldmeri Dominion. They styled themselves after the first Dominion, but there's no real continuity between these two.

The Thalmor are still there. It's the same group. The difference is that after the Oblivion Crisis, they started aggressively seizing power in Alinor. So, by the time you see them in Skyrim, they're the de facto leadership of the Second Dominion. The Thalmor you encounter in ESO are, technically, the same group, but this is nearly 800 years before they'd come to power, so you see them in their original role as administrators.

Actually, @starkerealm in Skyrim, we deal with the third Dominion. The second was formed in 2E 830, roughly 300 years after the first was formed (the first dissolved after their goal of unification failed). After the Oblivion Crisis, with the weakening of the Empire, the third formed and took power, and is the current Dominion we all generally dislike.

Source: http://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Aldmeri_Dominion

starkerealm · June 2018

Rosveen wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

I guess she might have existed as a character concept that was eventually put to use in ESO, but that would be weird, considering that her Dominion didn't become a fleshed out concept until pretty late in the series. I'd love to know what you're referring to, I can't think of any such examples. This reminds me how much it sucks that we can't easily search old Bethesda forums anymore...

The Dominion (and Thalmor), have actually been around longer than you might realize. They get discussed in the Pocket Guide as far back as Oblivion (2005.) The big thing to understand is that the Dominion in ESO is not the same Dominion as Skyrim's.

Specifically, ESO takes place during the first Aldmeri Dominion. This organization lasted through most of the second era, though I cant remember exactly when it finally fell apart.

In Skyrim you're dealing with the Second Aldmeri Dominion. They styled themselves after the first Dominion, but there's no real continuity between these two.

The Thalmor are still there. It's the same group. The difference is that after the Oblivion Crisis, they started aggressively seizing power in Alinor. So, by the time you see them in Skyrim, they're the de facto leadership of the Second Dominion. The Thalmor you encounter in ESO are, technically, the same group, but this is nearly 800 years before they'd come to power, so you see them in their original role as administrators.

I appreciate the lore lesson, but you know, I've read the Pocket Guides too.

Specifically, check the 1st Pocket Guide, the one that came out with Redguard. It describes the same Dominion as the 3rd Guide (from Oblivion), but in more detail which indicates that it's not the same empire as Ayrenn's. It was originally meant to be the first Dominion, but ESO retconned it as the second to make room for Ayrenn's first - that makes Skyrim's Dominion the third one.

There's no real conflict there, the timeline didn't even change, Beth & ZOS just created an even earlier Dominion because they needed one for their three-way war. That's what I meant when I said it wasn't fleshed out - because it's not the same one we read about in the PGE. That one was formed by a king, not a queen.

Then you might want to check the in-universe publication date for the Redguard Pocket Guide. It's a Second Era text. It'd be pretty weird if that was referencing things like the Oblivion crisis, wouldn't it?

Nevermind, I misread what you wrote.

anitajoneb17_ESO · June 2018

Rosveen wrote: »

I know, but I don't care. With questions like this, out of game sources are just as interesting as the in game ones. Again, even if she wasn't in the games, she might have existed as a concept - and that's what I want to read about.

https://aurbis.c0da.es/ayrenn/ayrenn.pdf

That was published in october 2013. One could argue that it doesn't prove that the character comes from Kirkbride and was used by ZOS, because it could be Kirkbride, with some insider knowledge at what was being produced by ZOS, who built up a story around her. I admit to that.

However, at the end of the Grahtwood quest line, when Ayrenn kills Naemon and stands some sort of identity test in Elden Root, she suddenly asks (us) if "we have noticed there's something more to her", "if she's really what she seems to be", that sort of things. (I don't remember the exact phrasing).

That's why I personally adhere to the idea that Ayrenn is something very special in ES lore and we'll eventually know more. I also believe she's been created and imagined, along with her story, in the very early years of creation of the ES universe.
Also, don't you think the character is much, much deeper than her two counterparts ? Silly Jorunn and boring Eymeric ? That also shows that there's more to her and that her story wasn't created just for ESO. Just my opinion.

(Kirkbride-haters, C0DA-haters and "canon-rigid" lorefans, please ignore this message and refrain from derailing the discussion by rehashing the debates we all know by heart, thank you).

starkerealm · June 2018

SilverIce58 wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

I guess she might have existed as a character concept that was eventually put to use in ESO, but that would be weird, considering that her Dominion didn't become a fleshed out concept until pretty late in the series. I'd love to know what you're referring to, I can't think of any such examples. This reminds me how much it sucks that we can't easily search old Bethesda forums anymore...

The Dominion (and Thalmor), have actually been around longer than you might realize. They get discussed in the Pocket Guide as far back as Oblivion (2005.) The big thing to understand is that the Dominion in ESO is not the same Dominion as Skyrim's.

Specifically, ESO takes place during the first Aldmeri Dominion. This organization lasted through most of the second era, though I cant remember exactly when it finally fell apart.

In Skyrim you're dealing with the Second Aldmeri Dominion. They styled themselves after the first Dominion, but there's no real continuity between these two.

The Thalmor are still there. It's the same group. The difference is that after the Oblivion Crisis, they started aggressively seizing power in Alinor. So, by the time you see them in Skyrim, they're the de facto leadership of the Second Dominion. The Thalmor you encounter in ESO are, technically, the same group, but this is nearly 800 years before they'd come to power, so you see them in their original role as administrators.

Actually, @starkerealm in Skyrim, we deal with the third Dominion. The second was formed in 2E 830, roughly 300 years after the first was formed (the first dissolved after their goal of unification failed). After the Oblivion Crisis, with the weakening of the Empire, the third formed and took power, and is the current Dominion we all generally dislike.

Source: http://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Aldmeri_Dominion

Yeah, this is what I get for going off memory while sleep deprived.

Rosveen · June 2018

starkerealm wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

I guess she might have existed as a character concept that was eventually put to use in ESO, but that would be weird, considering that her Dominion didn't become a fleshed out concept until pretty late in the series. I'd love to know what you're referring to, I can't think of any such examples. This reminds me how much it sucks that we can't easily search old Bethesda forums anymore...

The Dominion (and Thalmor), have actually been around longer than you might realize. They get discussed in the Pocket Guide as far back as Oblivion (2005.) The big thing to understand is that the Dominion in ESO is not the same Dominion as Skyrim's.

Specifically, ESO takes place during the first Aldmeri Dominion. This organization lasted through most of the second era, though I cant remember exactly when it finally fell apart.

In Skyrim you're dealing with the Second Aldmeri Dominion. They styled themselves after the first Dominion, but there's no real continuity between these two.

The Thalmor are still there. It's the same group. The difference is that after the Oblivion Crisis, they started aggressively seizing power in Alinor. So, by the time you see them in Skyrim, they're the de facto leadership of the Second Dominion. The Thalmor you encounter in ESO are, technically, the same group, but this is nearly 800 years before they'd come to power, so you see them in their original role as administrators.

I appreciate the lore lesson, but you know, I've read the Pocket Guides too.

Specifically, check the 1st Pocket Guide, the one that came out with Redguard. It describes the same Dominion as the 3rd Guide (from Oblivion), but in more detail which indicates that it's not the same empire as Ayrenn's. It was originally meant to be the first Dominion, but ESO retconned it as the second to make room for Ayrenn's first - that makes Skyrim's Dominion the third one.

There's no real conflict there, the timeline didn't even change, Beth & ZOS just created an even earlier Dominion because they needed one for their three-way war. That's what I meant when I said it wasn't fleshed out - because it's not the same one we read about in the PGE. That one was formed by a king, not a queen.

Then you might want to check the in-universe publication date for the Redguard Pocket Guide. It's a Second Era text. It'd be pretty weird if that was referencing things like the Oblivion crisis, wouldn't it?

You lost me. What does the Oblivion Crisis have to do with anything?

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

I know, but I don't care. With questions like this, out of game sources are just as interesting as the in game ones. Again, even if she wasn't in the games, she might have existed as a concept - and that's what I want to read about.

https://aurbis.c0da.es/ayrenn/ayrenn.pdf

That was published in october 2013. One could argue that it doesn't prove that the character comes from Kirkbride and was used by ZOS, because it could be Kirkbride, with some insider knowledge at what was being produced by ZOS, who built up a story around her. I admit to that.

However, at the end of the Grahtwood quest line, when Ayrenn kills Naemon and stands some sort of identity test in Elden Root, she suddenly asks (us) if "we have noticed there's something more to her", "if she's really what she seems to be", that sort of things. (I don't remember the exact phrasing).

That's why I personally adhere to the idea that Ayrenn is something very special in ES lore and we'll eventually know more. I also believe she's been created and imagined, along with her story, in the very early years of creation of the ES universe.
Also, don't you think the character is much, much deeper than her two counterparts ? Silly Jorunn and boring Eymeric ? That also shows that there's more to her and that her story wasn't created just for ESO. Just my opinion.

(Kirkbride-haters, C0DA-haters and "canon-rigid" lorefans, please ignore this message and refrain from derailing the discussion by rehashing the debates we all know by heart, thank you).

Sadly, this doesn't prove anything. In October 2013 the alliance leaders had long been officially unveiled, so Ayrenn was an established ESO character before MK wrote about KINMUNE. Heck, the closed beta tests started in the beginning of 2013, so some people had already met her in the game (maybe; I don't remember what was available in these early versions).

This is just MK having insider knowledge and ESO writing tying in with his creations as a tribute and recognition, which happened in a few other places too (most notably Sermon 37). It's certainly interesting, but it doesn't show us that Ayrenn "has been in ES lore for like... forever", like you said.

Bruccius · June 2018

lygerseye wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

Radinyn wrote: »

I'm pretty sure queen wasn't in lore until ESO.

That is correct. There is no mention about the events of ESO in the previous games.

I believe one of the prevailing theories is that the events in ESO take place during a Dragon Break, so not only is history recorded inconsistently, it’s also incomplete.

In other words, nothing matters! LOL

That's not how a Dragon Break works, though. Everything taking place within the Dragon Break is canon.

Rosveen · June 2018

Bruccius wrote: »

lygerseye wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

Radinyn wrote: »

I'm pretty sure queen wasn't in lore until ESO.

That is correct. There is no mention about the events of ESO in the previous games.

I believe one of the prevailing theories is that the events in ESO take place during a Dragon Break, so not only is history recorded inconsistently, it’s also incomplete.

In other words, nothing matters! LOL

That's not how a Dragon Break works, though. Everything taking place within the Dragon Break is canon.

Oh yeah, I missed that one. It's exactly the opposite: everything matters.

starkerealm · June 2018

Rosveen wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

I guess she might have existed as a character concept that was eventually put to use in ESO, but that would be weird, considering that her Dominion didn't become a fleshed out concept until pretty late in the series. I'd love to know what you're referring to, I can't think of any such examples. This reminds me how much it sucks that we can't easily search old Bethesda forums anymore...

The Dominion (and Thalmor), have actually been around longer than you might realize. They get discussed in the Pocket Guide as far back as Oblivion (2005.) The big thing to understand is that the Dominion in ESO is not the same Dominion as Skyrim's.

Specifically, ESO takes place during the first Aldmeri Dominion. This organization lasted through most of the second era, though I cant remember exactly when it finally fell apart.

In Skyrim you're dealing with the Second Aldmeri Dominion. They styled themselves after the first Dominion, but there's no real continuity between these two.

The Thalmor are still there. It's the same group. The difference is that after the Oblivion Crisis, they started aggressively seizing power in Alinor. So, by the time you see them in Skyrim, they're the de facto leadership of the Second Dominion. The Thalmor you encounter in ESO are, technically, the same group, but this is nearly 800 years before they'd come to power, so you see them in their original role as administrators.

I appreciate the lore lesson, but you know, I've read the Pocket Guides too.

Specifically, check the 1st Pocket Guide, the one that came out with Redguard. It describes the same Dominion as the 3rd Guide (from Oblivion), but in more detail which indicates that it's not the same empire as Ayrenn's. It was originally meant to be the first Dominion, but ESO retconned it as the second to make room for Ayrenn's first - that makes Skyrim's Dominion the third one.

There's no real conflict there, the timeline didn't even change, Beth & ZOS just created an even earlier Dominion because they needed one for their three-way war. That's what I meant when I said it wasn't fleshed out - because it's not the same one we read about in the PGE. That one was formed by a king, not a queen.

Then you might want to check the in-universe publication date for the Redguard Pocket Guide. It's a Second Era text. It'd be pretty weird if that was referencing things like the Oblivion crisis, wouldn't it?

You lost me. What does the Oblivion Crisis have to do with anything?

Setting in motion the events that would lead to the founding of the Third Dominion, which is the one active in the 4e. Yeah, like I've said, I'm a little sleep deprived, and misread the post.

Rosveen wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

I know, but I don't care. With questions like this, out of game sources are just as interesting as the in game ones. Again, even if she wasn't in the games, she might have existed as a concept - and that's what I want to read about.

https://aurbis.c0da.es/ayrenn/ayrenn.pdf

That was published in october 2013. One could argue that it doesn't prove that the character comes from Kirkbride and was used by ZOS, because it could be Kirkbride, with some insider knowledge at what was being produced by ZOS, who built up a story around her. I admit to that.

However, at the end of the Grahtwood quest line, when Ayrenn kills Naemon and stands some sort of identity test in Elden Root, she suddenly asks (us) if "we have noticed there's something more to her", "if she's really what she seems to be", that sort of things. (I don't remember the exact phrasing).

That's why I personally adhere to the idea that Ayrenn is something very special in ES lore and we'll eventually know more. I also believe she's been created and imagined, along with her story, in the very early years of creation of the ES universe.
Also, don't you think the character is much, much deeper than her two counterparts ? Silly Jorunn and boring Eymeric ? That also shows that there's more to her and that her story wasn't created just for ESO. Just my opinion.

(Kirkbride-haters, C0DA-haters and "canon-rigid" lorefans, please ignore this message and refrain from derailing the discussion by rehashing the debates we all know by heart, thank you).

Sadly, this doesn't prove anything. In October 2013 the alliance leaders had long been officially unveiled, so Ayrenn was an established ESO character before MK wrote about KINMUNE. Heck, the closed beta tests started in the beginning of 2013, so some people had already met her in the game.

This is just MK having insider knowledge and ESO writing tying in with his creations as a tribute and recognition, which happened in a few other places too (most notably Sermon 37). It's certainly interesting, but it doesn't show us that Ayrenn "has been in ES lore for like... forever", like you said.

Yeah, I like Kirkbride, but his material is weird. On it's own that's fine, but the problem comes in when people think his work is still sanctioned by Bethesda (and by extension ZOS); it's not.

From what I understand, work on ESO started sometime after Shivering Isles shipped, meaning it's entirely possible Aryenn existed, at least in draft form, as early as 2007, but she wasn't incorporated into the setting's canon until ESO dropped, so far as I know.

I mean, there's a missed opportunity, as characters and plot points related to ESO could have been shuffled into the Skyrim library without much context, but, here we are.

starkerealm · June 2018

Bruccius wrote: »

lygerseye wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

Radinyn wrote: »

I'm pretty sure queen wasn't in lore until ESO.

That is correct. There is no mention about the events of ESO in the previous games.

I believe one of the prevailing theories is that the events in ESO take place during a Dragon Break, so not only is history recorded inconsistently, it’s also incomplete.

In other words, nothing matters! LOL

That's not how a Dragon Break works, though. Everything taking place within the Dragon Break is canon.

Yeah, the metaphysics for Dragon Breaks are bonkers, once you start to unpack them. Basically, one shockingly coherent way to look at a Dragon Break is the time you spend playing the game. When you reload an old save, or restart with a different character you're engaging in "non-linear" time.

Summerset Spoiler:

Amusingly, you can actually see this in the Psijic Order questline, at the end, when alternate versions of Josajeh start popping up. Normally, that's something you'd be doing to the other inhabitants. Playing different permutations of your character, in a single player game. You'd also, normally, never get to see them at the same time, but, that's where the Staff of Towers comes in.

This is kinda what I meant when I was talking about Kirkbride earlier. As I recall, one of the problems facing Morrowind was that Daggerfall had multiple endings, so the Dragon Break was introduced as a mechanic to justify all of them simultaneously. The result is the borderline incomprehensible material he excels at, answering the question without really explaining it.

Start sorting it out, and there's a joke about how Tamriel is a video game, floating around just under the surface.

JJBoomer · June 2018

xeNNNNN wrote: »

lygerseye wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

Radinyn wrote: »

I'm pretty sure queen wasn't in lore until ESO.

That is correct. There is no mention about the events of ESO in the previous games.

I believe one of the prevailing theories is that the events in ESO take place during a Dragon Break, so not only is history recorded inconsistently, it’s also incomplete.

In other words, nothing matters! LOL

That theory is mostly coming from people who don't want the stories in this game to be cannon. Its a rather biased theory and considering the psijic questline (not the summerset story) its incorrect regardless.

Not to mention, the psijics are aware of dragon breaks when they happen, as the player is told. so if this whole reality was a dragon break, pretty sure they'd know.

starkerealm · June 2018

JJBoomer wrote: »

xeNNNNN wrote: »

lygerseye wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

Radinyn wrote: »

I'm pretty sure queen wasn't in lore until ESO.

That is correct. There is no mention about the events of ESO in the previous games.

I believe one of the prevailing theories is that the events in ESO take place during a Dragon Break, so not only is history recorded inconsistently, it’s also incomplete.

In other words, nothing matters! LOL

That theory is mostly coming from people who don't want the stories in this game to be cannon. Its a rather biased theory and considering the psijic questline (not the summerset story) its incorrect regardless.

Not to mention, the psijics are aware of dragon breaks when they happen, as the player is told. so if this whole reality was a dragon break, pretty sure they'd know.

You would think, except... I mean, does this seem normal? The gameplay, I mean.

As in, you kill a dude, then four minutes later, he's back up and at it, like you haven't gotten to him yet.

You go, back to old zones, and it's like no time has passed? Maybe a day, but, usually, you can take incredibly time sensitive stuff, and just screw around for years without doing anything.

The Psijic say, "we know a Dragon Brake when we see one" And, that's probably true. But, given the circumstances of ESO, I'm not 100% certain they see it, if it's there. If you take anything from that questline, it should be that the Psijics are not omniscient. This one might be different, it might lack the telltale sines they're looking for.

maboleth · June 2018

I find it funny how people say this is canon, this is not canon. By whom?

If there weren't ES games, there wouldn't be any canon. ES games make new and expand existing lore.
ESO is generally so large and takes into account the whole Tamriel, it's perfectly normal that there would be so many new things introduced and not found anywhere else before.

We can already see in ES:Legends that many ESO elements, characters and lore were used and will be used. My 5th sense tells me that ESO will be THE ES game for Bethesda for many years to come. If Beth ever makes ES VI, they will take into account many things found in ESO, be it architecture, characters, past events or similar.

starkerealm · June 2018

maboleth wrote: »

I find it funny how people say this is canon, this is not canon. By whom?

BGS sets that one, though I suspect Lawrence Schick has some leeway to work with.

I'm not 100% certain on ZOS's position, but Bethesda set canon as what appeared in the games. (This is a little out of date), like I said, the Pocket Guides (or at least the second one) is apparently considered canon, and the novels are a question mark for me. I know they're referenced in Skyrim, but I don't know on their status.

Ultimately, like all canons, someone in a position of authority dictates what is, and is not, part of the official collection. In the case of The Elder Scrolls, that authority is BGS.

maboleth wrote: »

If there weren't ES games, there wouldn't be any canon. ES games make new and expand existing lore.
ESO is generally so large and takes into account the whole Tamriel, it's perfectly normal that there would be so many new things introduced and not found anywhere else before.

Yeah, that's kinda the definition of a canon. You have a large body of works by multiple creators, and you sift through that to determine which ones are, or are not, officially part of that collection. That's what a canon is.

maboleth wrote: »

We can already see in ES:Legends that many ESO elements, characters and lore were used and will be used. My 5th sense tells me that ESO will be THE ES game for Bethesda for many years to come. If Beth ever makes ES VI, they will take into account many things found in ESO, be it architecture, characters, past events or similar.

Yeah, there've basically been three eras for TES. Arena and Daggerfall are virtually unrecognizable. There's even entire chunks of in game lit that have been expunged from the first two games. Morrowind locked in a lot of the lore we recognize as being, "The Elder Scrolls." Alduin, Dragon Breaks, the Dwarves and their disappearances, even, to some extent, the list of gods, didn't really crystallize until TES3. To be clear, things like the Daedric Princes existed before Morrowind, but pre-Morrowind lore is almost unrecognizable in comparison to what followed.

Now, we're starting to see consistent visual themes getting baked in. There've been elements of this before, but what we're seeing now are far more unified aesthetics. Legends is a pretty good way to see how The Elder Scrolls' aesthetics are coming together into a unified identity. I mean, there's stuff that comes from all the previous games, but the entire package? A lot of that is ESO.

lygerseye · June 2018

Rosveen wrote: »

Bruccius wrote: »

lygerseye wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

Radinyn wrote: »

I'm pretty sure queen wasn't in lore until ESO.

That is correct. There is no mention about the events of ESO in the previous games.

I believe one of the prevailing theories is that the events in ESO take place during a Dragon Break, so not only is history recorded inconsistently, it’s also incomplete.

In other words, nothing matters! LOL

That's not how a Dragon Break works, though. Everything taking place within the Dragon Break is canon.

Oh yeah, I missed that one. It's exactly the opposite: everything matters.

You misinterpret my stance... I completely agree, everything that happens in a DB matters, because everything happened (the biggest reason I like the idea). The “nothing matters” was referencing the lore inconsistencies, the non-mentions of Ayrenn in subsequent history. Once the DB was over, inhabitants of Tamriel were left with a hodge-lodge of stories, many conflicting, many unexplained, much of what happened was just unknown. It’s conceivable that the story line we played where Ayrenn takes the throne also has a DB counterpart where she did not, and her name was lost to history as a result.

The reality is that because ESO history was created after ES 1-5 (and the un-numbered games), it’s impossible to go back and add in the history. By definition, almost everything has to be retconned to fit. Fortunately for the ESO writers, the concept of the Dragon Breaks already existed, so it gave them lots of room to be sloppy.

Bruccius · June 2018

starkerealm wrote: »

JJBoomer wrote: »

xeNNNNN wrote: »

lygerseye wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

Radinyn wrote: »

I'm pretty sure queen wasn't in lore until ESO.

That is correct. There is no mention about the events of ESO in the previous games.

I believe one of the prevailing theories is that the events in ESO take place during a Dragon Break, so not only is history recorded inconsistently, it’s also incomplete.

In other words, nothing matters! LOL

That theory is mostly coming from people who don't want the stories in this game to be cannon. Its a rather biased theory and considering the psijic questline (not the summerset story) its incorrect regardless.

Not to mention, the psijics are aware of dragon breaks when they happen, as the player is told. so if this whole reality was a dragon break, pretty sure they'd know.

You would think, except... I mean, does this seem normal? The gameplay, I mean.

As in, you kill a dude, then four minutes later, he's back up and at it, like you haven't gotten to him yet.

You go, back to old zones, and it's like no time has passed? Maybe a day, but, usually, you can take incredibly time sensitive stuff, and just screw around for years without doing anything.

The Psijic say, "we know a Dragon Brake when we see one" And, that's probably true. But, given the circumstances of ESO, I'm not 100% certain they see it, if it's there. If you take anything from that questline, it should be that the Psijics are not omniscient. This one might be different, it might lack the telltale sines they're looking for.

This is vital to keep in mind when discussing lore. Gameplay =/= Lore. As someone active on an Elder Scrolls wiki, I've come across these discussions quite a lot.

It's the same reason why we can carry a hundred or more greatswords in our inventory and still sprint along a field, it's meant to have an enjoyable game. MMO's always work with this gameplay feature (excluding important characters that die as part of a questline).

I mean, if we look at TES V, for example, as far as time is concerned. Yeah, people will acknowledge some events. But the Civil War in the game? Everybody acts as if it never ended. Well, everybody except for the people directly involved.

To come back on the Novels and Canon;

''Yes, we consider the Elder Scrolls novels canon to TES lore.'' -Pete Hines

There's also:

Does Bethesda consider Obscure Texts and developer comments as "actual lore" or "canon"?

''It depends.''

Which further elaborates on our discussion regarding Kirkbride.

Xoelarasizerer · June 2018

I dunno if there's anything specific on the downfalls of the three alliances or deaths of their leaders.

If I had to guess, Ayrenn may have been unsuccessful in pushing her less bigoted beliefs (that high elves should rule as a responsibility to the other races to help them, not just as a privilege of dominating over them as their superiors.) Perhaps even Proxy Queen Alienware losing faith in Ayrenn over time, the rest of Summerset eventually siding against Ayrenn and the 1st Dominion for perhaps being seen as more and more gradually radical against their collective superiority complex.

Basically Summerset vs. Aldmeri Dominion, her other allies crumble around her from the taxing ongoing war and the fact the hero queen uniting them couldn't even keep the land she is meant to rule on her side.

But that's more a guess on the 1st A.D's downfall than Ayrenn's death. Maybe her death was an uneventful and tragic lucky shot from an enemy soldier on the battlefield, instead of some political coup from Proxy Alienware or whomever. Maybe She, Jo-Rizzle and Emeric tried to hug it out but the players on their sides just killed all three so they could keep fighting for 200 years over who got to be Emperor of Cyrodiil for the next few hours at a time.

Maybe Ayrenn found a way Back to the Future(tm) as her Dominion started to fall apart around her, so she could go continue her mining duties. With the help of Divayth Fyr dressed as Doc Brown, of course. "GOTTA GET BACK IN TIIIME!~"

DoctorESO · June 2018

Night_Wolf2112 wrote: »

Reading all the recent post about AD and Thalmor and the like.... I may have missed it, QUESTION... is there a lore book out there about the death of our beloved Queen? I would love to read the story!

She doesn't die. She becomes a vampire and goes on to the rule the Underworld (see the film series for the cross-over). Just kidding.

I don't think there is any lore about her death, and I believe she first appeared in ESO.

SilverIce58 · June 2018

I don't know why people don't consider the novels to be canon or don't know if they are or not. I mean, it's an official piece of work that Bethesda helped develop. Here's a source that says talks about it: https://www.imperial-library.info/interviews-greg-keyes

DanteYoda · June 2018

I don't get the hate for Queen Ayrenn shes about the only leader in ESO thats worth the time of day.. I've played all the factions and shes the only leader that genuinely cares about everyone and wants to see her faction stable and progress, at least in game context..

Its her people and race thats the issue not the leadership..

The other factions are so disjointed and tbh pointless i'm surprised the Covenant and Pact stayed together long enough to reach the end of the stories..

starkerealm · June 2018

Bruccius wrote: »

This is vital to keep in mind when discussing lore. Gameplay =/= Lore. As someone active on an Elder Scrolls wiki, I've come across these discussions quite a lot.

In most cases, this is a very good point.

Bruccius wrote: »

It's the same reason why we can carry a hundred or more greatswords in our inventory and still sprint along a field, it's meant to have an enjoyable game. MMO's always work with this gameplay feature (excluding important characters that die as part of a questline).

Your greatsword example is a good articulation for why gameplay and lore shouldn't always be taken as connected. A similar example would be quicksaving in Fallout.

However. We are talking about a game that has already gone out of its way to establish connections between the lore and the gameplay mechanics.

For example, respawning is something that, in most online games, can be taken as a contrivance for the purposes of furthering the mechanics. When you respawn in Call of Duty or reload an old save in Doom, there's no intrinsic idea that this is somehow bound into the nature of the world you're in. You're simply availing yourself of a mechanic designed to make the play experience more enjoyable (or, make it possible at all.)

That's not The Elder Scrolls.

When you die in ESO, and you revive, this isn't simply a contrivance to allow you to continue using the same character. It is an in game action that ties directly into the lore. Lore which is then used as part of the storyline, first as a background element, and later as a major plot point in the Alik'r and Bangkorai.

In fact, the entire conclusion of Bangkorai's main plot is the antagonist looking for a way to persistently rid themselves of an opponent who can come back from death an unlimited amount of times.

That's not gameplay divorced from lore, this is an example of gameplay mechanics being directly referenced in the lore. If you're paying attention, you can even glean a great deal more information from this, and other encounters scattered through the game, about the true nature of the player character in ESO.

When you engage in a textual analysis of a work, you need to examine it and determine what is, and what is not, relevant. Excising irrelevant components needs to be done carefully, as you can lose critical portions of the material in the process.

With video games, that actually includes examining the game mechanics, and determining which factors should be discarded (like your ability to carry 140 mauls in your pack, the other 60 are on your horse, not that it matters) and what should not.

Ordinarily, things like saving and loading are not reasonable considerations, as they simply serve a utility function to make the piece more managable, however, because of Kirkbride, The Elder Scrolls decided to grab a lot of mechanics that would normally be disregarded, and drag them in.

Bruccius wrote: »

I mean, if we look at TES V, for example, as far as time is concerned. Yeah, people will acknowledge some events. But the Civil War in the game? Everybody acts as if it never ended. Well, everybody except for the people directly involved.

The Civil War is a really complex topic because of development factors. Originally the entire system was supposed to be much more dynamic, however system limitations on the 360 severely curtailed the system. This included things like dynamic warfare, where both sides could attack and defend different holds. There were additional quest structures, including things like recruiting Giants to fight for the Stormcloaks. Dynamic economic changes as war conflicts destroyed mills and other infrastructure. Even the size of the battles had to be scaled back, as a 360 will hard crash if more than 50 NPCs are rendered at once (it might actually be lower than that), which resulted in tiny skirmishes being passed off as, "battles."

Cell limits also applied restrictions on how NPC AIs could be activated, and the version of the game that shipped had a nominal limit of 20 active AI participants at a time (as I recall.)

So, how much of that do we take as lore? Well, pretty much none of it, except for the knowledge that somehow the Stormcloaks could have rallied the Giants to fight for Skyrim.

There's similar things with Morrowind and Oblivion. Original plans for the former saw Dagoth forces pouring down out of Red Mountain and gradually conquering cities and occupying the map as the calendar ticked forward. I forget what systems Oblivion tried to implement that the 360 hardware couldn't handle. Something with the cities being destroyed, the way Kvatch was, I think, but, I'm not certain.

If Michael Kirkbride had decided to simply pick an outcome from Daggerfall and say, "yep, that's the ending that happened," we'd be fine. Instead he created this weird system, that, at the very least reflects the idea of multiple playthroughs all occurring simultaneously. This should sound familiar if you've played ESO.

You stand in The Gold Coast, during The Sweetroll Killer. Naryu and Raz both recognize you as a friend who's been through multiple adventures with each. The problem is, Raz is Dominion, and you're an Eye of the Queen, and Naryu is an assassin for the Morag Tong. She met you while you were working as an agent of the Pact. Here's the problem, both of these events were happening at the same time.

You played through one of their campaigns, Molag Bal invaded Tamriel, and was forced out, then you were sent back to before the invasion started and played through a completely, mutually exclusive, campaign. You know, pretty much the base line description of a Dragon Break. There is no possible way for Naryu and Raz to know you from your time in their alliance, when you were also working for the other one.

The Vestige landed in the water off the coast of Skyrim, and they landed in the water off the coast of Elswyr, and they landed in the water off the coast of Stros M'kai. All three of these events happened at the same moment, but only one can occur.

That's a Dragon Break, and the Psijic Order missed it.

Aliyavana · June 2018

starkerealm wrote: »

Bruccius wrote: »

This is vital to keep in mind when discussing lore. Gameplay =/= Lore. As someone active on an Elder Scrolls wiki, I've come across these discussions quite a lot.

In most cases, this is a very good point.

Bruccius wrote: »

It's the same reason why we can carry a hundred or more greatswords in our inventory and still sprint along a field, it's meant to have an enjoyable game. MMO's always work with this gameplay feature (excluding important characters that die as part of a questline).

Your greatsword example is a good articulation for why gameplay and lore shouldn't always be taken as connected. A similar example would be quicksaving in Fallout.

However. We are talking about a game that has already gone out of its way to establish connections between the lore and the gameplay mechanics.

For example, respawning is something that, in most online games, can be taken as a contrivance for the purposes of furthering the mechanics. When you respawn in Call of Duty or reload an old save in Doom, there's no intrinsic idea that this is somehow bound into the nature of the world you're in. You're simply availing yourself of a mechanic designed to make the play experience more enjoyable (or, make it possible at all.)

That's not The Elder Scrolls.

When you die in ESO, and you revive, this isn't simply a contrivance to allow you to continue using the same character. It is an in game action that ties directly into the lore. Lore which is then used as part of the storyline, first as a background element, and later as a major plot point in the Alik'r and Bangkorai.

In fact, the entire conclusion of Bangkorai's main plot is the antagonist looking for a way to persistently rid themselves of an opponent who can come back from death an unlimited amount of times.

That's not gameplay divorced from lore, this is an example of gameplay mechanics being directly referenced in the lore. If you're paying attention, you can even glean a great deal more information from this, and other encounters scattered through the game, about the true nature of the player character in ESO.

When you engage in a textual analysis of a work, you need to examine it and determine what is, and what is not, relevant. Excising irrelevant components needs to be done carefully, as you can lose critical portions of the material in the process.

With video games, that actually includes examining the game mechanics, and determining which factors should be discarded (like your ability to carry 140 mauls in your pack, the other 60 are on your horse, not that it matters) and what should not.

Ordinarily, things like saving and loading are not reasonable considerations, as they simply serve a utility function to make the piece more managable, however, because of Kirkbride, The Elder Scrolls decided to grab a lot of mechanics that would normally be disregarded, and drag them in.

Bruccius wrote: »

I mean, if we look at TES V, for example, as far as time is concerned. Yeah, people will acknowledge some events. But the Civil War in the game? Everybody acts as if it never ended. Well, everybody except for the people directly involved.

The Civil War is a really complex topic because of development factors. Originally the entire system was supposed to be much more dynamic, however system limitations on the 360 severely curtailed the system. This included things like dynamic warfare, where both sides could attack and defend different holds. There were additional quest structures, including things like recruiting Giants to fight for the Stormcloaks. Dynamic economic changes as war conflicts destroyed mills and other infrastructure. Even the size of the battles had to be scaled back, as a 360 will hard crash if more than 50 NPCs are rendered at once (it might actually be lower than that), which resulted in tiny skirmishes being passed off as, "battles."

Cell limits also applied restrictions on how NPC AIs could be activated, and the version of the game that shipped had a nominal limit of 20 active AI participants at a time (as I recall.)

So, how much of that do we take as lore? Well, pretty much none of it, except for the knowledge that somehow the Stormcloaks could have rallied the Giants to fight for Skyrim.

There's similar things with Morrowind and Oblivion. Original plans for the former saw Dagoth forces pouring down out of Red Mountain and gradually conquering cities and occupying the map as the calendar ticked forward. I forget what systems Oblivion tried to implement that the 360 hardware couldn't handle. Something with the cities being destroyed, the way Kvatch was, I think, but, I'm not certain.

If Michael Kirkbride had decided to simply pick an outcome from Daggerfall and say, "yep, that's the ending that happened," we'd be fine. Instead he created this weird system, that, at the very least reflects the idea of multiple playthroughs all occurring simultaneously. This should sound familiar if you've played ESO.

You stand in The Gold Coast, during The Sweetroll Killer. Naryu and Raz both recognize you as a friend who's been through multiple adventures with each. The problem is, Raz is Dominion, and you're an Eye of the Queen, and Naryu is an assassin for the Morag Tong. She met you while you were working as an agent of the Pact. Here's the problem, both of these events were happening at the same time.

You played through one of their campaigns, Molag Bal invaded Tamriel, and was forced out, then you were sent back to before the invasion started and played through a completely, mutually exclusive, campaign. You know, pretty much the base line description of a Dragon Break. There is no possible way for Naryu and Raz to know you from your time in their alliance, when you were also working for the other one.

The Vestige landed in the water off the coast of Skyrim, and they landed in the water off the coast of Elswyr, and they landed in the water off the coast of Stros M'kai. All three of these events happened at the same moment, but only one can occur.

That's a Dragon Break, and the Psijic Order missed it.

If you play on a vestige that started off in summerset and hasn't met darien yet, this dialogue will change to say that in oblivion time works differently and implies that darien will meet you. My theory is that the vestige is the champion of coldharbor and darien is the champion of meridia and being the vessals of daedra affects how time flows to them. Which explains why the vestige can be in multiple places at once (cadwells silver and gold) and how darien can meet you before you meet him.

zaria · June 2018

JobooAGS wrote: »

lygerseye wrote: »

xeNNNNN wrote: »

lygerseye wrote: »

Rosveen wrote: »

Radinyn wrote: »

I'm pretty sure queen wasn't in lore until ESO.

That is correct. There is no mention about the events of ESO in the previous games.

I believe one of the prevailing theories is that the events in ESO take place during a Dragon Break, so not only is history recorded inconsistently, it’s also incomplete.

In other words, nothing matters! LOL

That theory is mostly coming from people who don't want the stories in this game to be cannon. Its a rather biased theory and considering the psijic questline (not the summerset story) its incorrect regardless.

Dragon Breaks are found throughout ES lore, not just ESO. Nothing to do with people wanting the game to be canon or not. It wasn’t created just for this game. Personally, I like the idea of the Dragon Break, and I DO want it all to be canon.

Kinda hard to have the 3 alliances all controlling cyrodill to be canon, unless zos pulls a fast one and states that imperial legions loyal to the empire (and not to daedra or molag bal) managed to defeat the 3 alliances, the rogue legions and the daedra at the same time.

Same issue as the civil war in Skyrim, solution is that nobody remember in 200 years as it had no long term impact.
Nobody care that an bunch of warlords crowned themselves as emperors, they still only controlled their armies nothing else.
Good historical parallel is the civil wars in Rome.
But yes you are supposed to do the main quest.

DoctorESO · June 2018

It makes sense if you do the storylines in the intended order. Main quest before DLCs, and DLCs in a certain order.

starkerealm · June 2018

DoctorESO wrote: »

It makes sense if you do the storylines in the intended order. Main quest before DLCs, and DLCs in a certain order.

Yeah, it's when you break sequence intentionally, and then start looping back through out of order that things get weird. I've actually got a mental note to clear Summerset before hitting Clockwork City to see if anything changes. (I doubt it will, but you never know.)

wenchmore420b14_ESO · June 2018

Just have to add my 2 Drakes o this discussion..

As far as "Thalmor", they are a political organization, like Democrat or Republican, and do not become a powerful party till the after effects of TES4: Oblivion, apprx 3E500.
Canon is "In_Game Source."
Anything written by Julan LeFey, Michael Kirkbride, Wynne McLaughlin, Ted Peterson, etc, that is out side "In Game" is nothing but fan fiction at that point.
Perhaps we need Lady Nerevar from https://www.imperial-library.info/ or @ZOS_Lawrence_Schick to weigh in on this...
We summon you OH Lore Master!!!!
Huzzah!!!

Aluneth · June 2018

You can read about her death in a lore book in Morrowind. Her closest advisor resurrected her brother (for the 28th time), and no one took her seriously when she cried out for help, as they invaded the throne room. Her brother might have been resurrected as a lich, 27 times prior to this, but he was a noble and honorable man according to the queen, so how could he be butchering her in the throne room? Nonsense.

DoctorESO · June 2018

Aluneth wrote: »

You can read about her death in a lore book in Morrowind. Her closest advisor resurrected her brother (for the 28th time), and no one took her seriously when she cried out for help, as they invaded the throne room. Her brother might have been resurrected as a lich, 27 times prior to this, but he was a noble and honorable man according to the queen, so how could he be butchering her in the throne room? Nonsense.

Do you have the title of this book, or a link to the text?

Aluneth · June 2018

DoctorESO wrote: »

Aluneth wrote: »

You can read about her death in a lore book in Morrowind. Her closest advisor resurrected her brother (for the 28th time), and no one took her seriously when she cried out for help, as they invaded the throne room. Her brother might have been resurrected as a lich, 27 times prior to this, but he was a noble and honorable man according to the queen, so how could he be butchering her in the throne room? Nonsense.

Do you have the title of this book, or a link to the text?

I would love to give you a link, but I can't copy it because of the huge Crown Store advertisement that is in the way.

Aebaradath · June 2018

Aluneth wrote: »

DoctorESO wrote: »

Aluneth wrote: »

You can read about her death in a lore book in Morrowind. Her closest advisor resurrected her brother (for the 28th time), and no one took her seriously when she cried out for help, as they invaded the throne room. Her brother might have been resurrected as a lich, 27 times prior to this, but he was a noble and honorable man according to the queen, so how could he be butchering her in the throne room? Nonsense.

Do you have the title of this book, or a link to the text?

I would love to give you a link, but I can't copy it because of the huge Crown Store advertisement that is in the way.

ba8dab53d0c15bd3d7f2332b84e53718.300x231x125.gif

starkerealm · June 2018

Aluneth wrote: »

DoctorESO wrote: »

Aluneth wrote: »

You can read about her death in a lore book in Morrowind. Her closest advisor resurrected her brother (for the 28th time), and no one took her seriously when she cried out for help, as they invaded the throne room. Her brother might have been resurrected as a lich, 27 times prior to this, but he was a noble and honorable man according to the queen, so how could he be butchering her in the throne room? Nonsense.

Do you have the title of this book, or a link to the text?

I would love to give you a link, but I can't copy it because of the huge Crown Store advertisement that is in the way.

It's okay. Just show us, on the journal entry, where Sheogorath touched your Editic Memory entry.