The value of lore and the season of dragons, cats, and necromancy

tinythinker · January 2019

Watchdog wrote: »

Some my not have finished the main quest yet, hence the spoiler tags. The main quest doesn't make much sense to me for a necromancer character.
I am pretty certain Meridia won't co-operate with a necromancer.

That's one reason I asked if those responding trust the Loremaster and the writing team. It's definitely a challenge. If it's just a skill line you picked up out of necessity, it's easier to reconcile. In some cases for things like this they add some unique dialogue, in other cases they just let the inconsistency go/ignore it.

Ermiq · January 2019

@Bruccius

Bruccius wrote: »

@Eremith
Necromancy is actually legal in most of Tamriel, just shunned. Some folk take this shunning too far and go to violence, resulting in fewer necromancers. The ones that do exist probably do so illegally, as necromancy has certain rules one has to follow.

Only the Dunmer of Morrowind made it illegal. Oh, and the Mages Guild; but they only did so following the rise of Arch-Mage Hannibal Traven.

Oh, come on! Not this again. I'm a bit tired of explaining this to people who know nothing about the lore, but ok, I'll do it again.

Hannibal Traven wasn't the first one who made necromancy illegal in Mages Guild. It's just a common misconception. People just don't read books carefully.
Let's read the Hannibal Traven's "The Black Arts on Trial" which is commonly used by players to justify necromancy in Mages Guild:
http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/The_Black_Arts_On_Trial

The Psijic Order of the Isle of Artaeum, precursor to our own Mages Guild, also forbade its [necromacy] use, not only because it was dangerous, but their belief in the holy and unholy ancestor spirits made it heretical. Again, despite this, we hear many stories of students and masters who ignored this stricture. When Vanus Galerion left Artaeum, he may have disagreed with the Psijics on much, but he also refused to allow Necromancy to be taught in the Guild.

So, at first, here Hannibal says that Psijics' Order also forbids necromancy. Did you know that? Obviously, you didn't. Also, obviously you know nothing about Redguards and Arkay, do you?
At second, he also says Vanus Galerion has made necromancy forbidden in Mages Guild. Not Traven did it, but Vanus did it in the very first days of the Guild, the Mages Guild has been founded with this restriction against necromancy in mind.

Let's read further:

Almost 1100 years have passed since the time of Vanus Galerion, and there have been many archmagisters to lead his guild. The question of Necromancy has continued to be asked. The strictures against it in the Guild have never been lifted, but attitudes about it have shifted back and forth over the years. Some archmagisters have been inclined to ignore it entirely, some have fought very actively against it, and still other archmagisters have been rumored to be Necromancers themselves.

"...The strictures against it in the Guild have never been lifted..." - which means, despite there were many discussions about necromancy and many Guild members continued to ask for necromancy, official policy of Mages Guild considering necromancy always have been "forbidden/not allowed/rescricted".

Next:

In my new role as Archmagister of the Mages Guild, it is my duty to set policy on this matter. Though I have my own opinions on the Black Arts, I took counsel with two of the most learned mages in the Empire, Magister Voth Karlyss of Corinth and Magister Ulliceta gra-Kogg of Orsinium, and we debated for two days.

"...my new role as Archmagister..." - this book was wrote by Hannibal in his very first days of his Archmagister role in the Guild. And as any other new man in charge, he started to determine new policies and new states for the organization he has took care of. And to make a decision about the future of necromancy in Mages Guild, he took the counsel.
The conclusion was:

Conclusion:
The risks of studying Necromancy outweigh its usefulness. The Guild does not wish to censor the study of any of its members, but it will not tolerate studies in the Black Arts, except in limited form for the purpose of combating its evil adherents. This may only been done by rare individuals who have proven themselves both highly skilled and highly cautious, and then only with my express permission and supervision.

So, just like prior to Traven's rule, restrictions against necromancy in Mages Guild hasn't been changed.

I have no idea, why people think Traven was the one who made necromancy forbidden, because, as we can see in this book, he actually didn't make it strictly forbidden either. He just documented their discussion, and made a decision which is going to be there during the time he's in charge.

As always, I see people justifying necromancer class and they say about the lore, but then it turns out that they know nothing about the lore actually.

Kingdaboss123 · January 2019

Every point you have stated was written in the 3rd era not 2nd so no lore has been broken so far.

Ermiq · January 2019

@Kingdaboss123
What? Show me at least one document that disapproves Hannibal's words about Vanus Galerion in this book. I hope you know who is Vanus and what era he lived in. In case you don't, he lived in 2nd era, and it's him who is an Archmagister of Mages Guild during ESO timeline.

Kingdaboss123 · January 2019

Eremith wrote: »

@Kingdaboss123
What? Show me at least one document that disapproves Hannibal's words about Vanus Galerion in this book. I hope you know who is Vanus and what era he lived in. In case you don't, he lived in 2nd era, and it's him who is an Archmagister of Mages Guild during ESO timeline.

I do know who vanus is he hated necromancy yes but he allowed the use soul trapping but not with black soul gems.

Kingdaboss123 · January 2019

Read this.
https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Guild_Memo_on_Soul_Trapping

Smaxx · January 2019

Quoting myself from Reddit… Warning, this is long!

A short essay: Why I wouldn’t worry about lore despite ESO: Elsweyr

So, we finally know for sure that ESO’s next chapter will be about Elsweyr. And Dragons. And Necromancers. And immediately there were quite a few concerned voices about ZOS throwing lore out of the window for a quick cash grab. There are certainly some valid concerns, but I'm still hyped and can't wait to learn and see more. Why? Well, let's see if I can write a [del]short[/del] somewhat short explanation.

But is that really the case? Are they bending lore? I don’t think so.

Sure thing: They’re clearly trending towards what the fan base wants, they’re catering to us, but is that really a bad thing? If they’d release stuff we don’t want to buy and only force us to buy it by bundling stuff we’d still want… it would be the same situation, just in a more negative way, wouldn’t it?

Back on topic: I think we all agree that Elsweyr itself as a zone should work fine and could be interesting. There aren’t any lore issues inherently involved here. That’s fine.

But now let’s look at the first point of controversy and raised eyebrows: Dragons. Dragons over Elsweyr. It hasn’t been mentioned in history books so far, so it can’t be true? The same could be true for most base game contents and most previous DLCs. They’re expanding the world, the lore, and the history, rather than just retelling stories we’ve seen, heard, or read about in the past. ESO is a prequel of sorts after all. Always remember we’ve got like 800 years after ESO for events to be forgotten (or forcibly removed from history books; no Dragon Break needed).

So how do we get the extinct dragons back to Elsweyr? It seems like this time we’re not talking about a reanimated dragon skeleton akin to Dragon Bones DLC. We’re talking about actual dragons. But shouldn’t they be dead until Alduin’s return in the Fourth Era? No, certainly not. If you don’t follow the dialogs and books in Skyrim you might get the impression that dragons were back in Tamriel just due to Alduin’s mythical return, which isn’t the whole story.

Skyrim includes the book Atlas of Dragons, 2E 373, which presents a list of dragons that are known and confirmed to be killed as well as four dragons to be alive:

Ahbiilok – […] He is believed to be lairing somewhere in Morrowind.

Mirmulnir - Last sighted in the Reach in 2E 212.

Nahfahlaar - Repeated alliances with mortal protectors which have prevented his elimination. His last known protector was the King Casimir II of Wayrest, which the Dragonguard successfully ended in 2E 369. He escaped and current location is unknown.

Paarthurnax - […] He is now known to lair on the Throat of the World under the protection of the Greybeards of High Hrothgar.

2E 373: This is merely 200 years before the events of ESO. Not a long time from a dragon’s perspective. Paarthurnax clearly won’t be an antagonist here, staying at High Hrothgar. Ahbiilok? Unlikely, since he’s said to hide in Morrowind. Similar for Mirmulnir. But what about Nahfahlaar? He’s been in High Rock, but what if he escaped to the far south east? It’s a stretch, true, but not impossible. In addition, there could be a fifth dragon.

But this means we’ll only see one dragon, right? Otherwise it would have been written down. No, not necessarily. During the events of TES5: Skyrim it’s revealed that Alduin is capable of resurrecting other dragons using the “Slen Tiid Vo” shout. But do we really know whether other dragons are capable of doing so? I haven’t touched Skyrim for ages and I’m not 100% sure here either. Even if no other dragon in Skyrim used this shout, it doesn’t mean they aren’t capable of. They might not have done it out of respect for Alduin. But if Alduin isn’t around, since he’s basically banished into time itself…

So you might still be not convinced, since it's not mentioned in history? Stories get lost, even famous ones. The Khajiit have books, right? Yes, they have books to some extent, but they're also very focused on oral traditions Let's just cite the book The Tale of Dro'Zira (which I'm a huge fan of), which has been written down by an Imperial:

The following is a tale overheard, as told by a Khajiit father to his cub, while making camp with one of their caravans. I have attempted to transcribe it as he told it, for the Khajiit do not often speak of their history to outsiders. In truth I do not believe he would have spoken at all, but for the vast helping of Moonsugar he had consumed that night.

But even if you don't want to use this as an excuse, there's a potentially even better one: Abnur Tharn himself. According to the teaser he's somehow involved, because he's got a plan to end the Three Banners War. What was the last time you remember him having a good plan – even if it wasn't his own, where he "acquired knowledge" –, which totally backfired? Ever heard of the Planemeld? What do you mean it wasn't mentioned in previous TES games happening at a later time? The events somehow got lost? What if this new plan is once again a big screw up, not even necessarily involving the dragons directly… What if Abnur Tharn – who's clearly infallible and just surrounded by incompetent assistants and advisers – just had to make sure some other recordings don't last for the ages, tainting the name of his family? Maybe is sister did something? And in the end the books and historians might have accidentally been eaten by a dragon or stolen by a Daedra or something like that…

So and necromancers breaking the immersion, because nobody likes necromancers… yeah, really… like the Daggerfall Covenant saying that necromancy is not allowed and punished by death or similar, but then sends their own necromancers to "do their thing" far away in Stonefalls? (It's mentioned in a letter, I just don't remember the title, sorry.) Oopsie, we don't talk about that. Dunmer society even uses necromancy at an almost daily basis, e.g. to guard their ancestors' tombs or to ask for advice. ESO even pokes a bit at this question in Dragon Bones, where it's mentioned that some of the blood magic utilized by the Undaunted is in fact a more basic form of necromancy. The only area where this might be a slight problem, especially when practiced in the open, would be Alik'r and other regions with many Redguards. But then again this also provides a solution…

Big part of Alik'r's plot lines in ESO are about >!necromancy and the soldiers and troops largely being unable to do anything against the undead, because they're still considered sacred…!< Even if you hate necromancy and you openly ban it, if there's a necromancer with a giant bone colossus (or a werewolf or a vampire) standing at your door step you don't start punching them in the face, screaming about the bad bad dark arts etc. (unless you're a bandit or some other kind of random enemy out there in the woods).

So overall, I'm not worried. I want to see what they do with what they've got, the whole promise, etc. The biggest "issue" are necromancers, yes, but then again it's often still true that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", even if it includes dark arts. And isn't that also part of what they basically made their tag lines? Former enemies uniting against a bigger threat?

Ermiq · January 2019

Smaxx wrote: »

So and necromancers breaking the immersion, because nobody likes necromancers… yeah, really… like the Daggerfall Covenant saying that necromancy is not allowed and punished by death or similar, but then sends their own necromancers to "do their thing" far away in Stonefalls? (It's mentioned in a letter, I just don't remember the title, sorry.) Oopsie, we don't talk about that. Dunmer society even uses necromancy at an almost daily basis, e.g. to guard their ancestors' tombs or to ask for advice. ESO even pokes a bit at this question in Dragon Bones, where it's mentioned that some of the blood magic utilized by the Undaunted is in fact a more basic form of necromancy. The only area where this might be a slight problem, especially when practiced in the open, would be Alik'r and other regions with many Redguards. But then again this also provides a solution…

Big part of Alik'r's plot lines in ESO are about >!necromancy and the soldiers and troops largely being unable to do anything against the undead, because they're still considered sacred…!< Even if you hate necromancy and you openly ban it, if there's a necromancer with a giant bone colossus (or a werewolf or a vampire) standing at your door step you don't start punching them in the face, screaming about the bad bad dark arts etc. (unless you're a bandit or some other kind of random enemy out there in the woods).

So overall, I'm not worried. I want to see what they do with what they've got, the whole promise, etc. The biggest "issue" are necromancers, yes, but then again it's often still true that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", even if it includes dark arts. And isn't that also part of what they basically made their tag lines? Former enemies uniting against a bigger threat?

DC and AD necromancers/skinstealers in EP lands... IIRC, they were doing that without their headquarters resolution. They were renegades and war criminals, which is actually quite common thing in any war.

Dunmer spirit magic is not a necromancy, n'wah!

The human populations of Tamriel associate Dunmeri ancestor worship and spirit magic with necromancy; in fact, this association of the Dark Elves with necromancy is at least partly responsible for the dark reputation of Dunmer throughout Tamriel. This is generally an ignorant misconception, for necromancy outside the acceptable clan rituals is a most abhorrent abomination in the eyes of the Dunmer.

The Dark Elves would never think of practicing sorcerous necromancy upon any Dark Elf or upon the remains of any Elf. However, Dark Elves consider the human and orcish races to be little more than animals. There is no injunction against necromancy upon such remains, or on the remains of any animal, bird, or insect.

Blood magic considered to be necromancy... Well, maybe, from someone's point of view. But from the Mages Guild and Shad Astula point of view, necromancy is soul trapping, reanimating and manipulating dead creatures and creating black soul gems. They didn't mention blood magic in their documents and dissertations so far.

Claudman · January 2019

Smaxx wrote: »

So and necromancers breaking the immersion, because nobody likes necromancers… yeah, really… like the Daggerfall Covenant saying that necromancy is not allowed and punished by death or similar, but then sends their own necromancers to "do their thing" far away in Stonefalls? (It's mentioned in a letter, I just don't remember the title, sorry.) Oopsie, we don't talk about that. Dunmer society even uses necromancy at an almost daily basis, e.g. to guard their ancestors' tombs or to ask for advice. ESO even pokes a bit at this question in Dragon Bones, where it's mentioned that some of the blood magic utilized by the Undaunted is in fact a more basic form of necromancy. The only area where this might be a slight problem, especially when practiced in the open, would be Alik'r and other regions with many Redguards. But then again this also provides a solution…

Big part of Alik'r's plot lines in ESO are about >!necromancy and the soldiers and troops largely being unable to do anything against the undead, because they're still considered sacred…!< Even if you hate necromancy and you openly ban it, if there's a necromancer with a giant bone colossus (or a werewolf or a vampire) standing at your door step you don't start punching them in the face, screaming about the bad bad dark arts etc. (unless you're a bandit or some other kind of random enemy out there in the woods).

So overall, I'm not worried. I want to see what they do with what they've got, the whole promise, etc. The biggest "issue" are necromancers, yes, but then again it's often still true that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", even if it includes dark arts. And isn't that also part of what they basically made their tag lines? Former enemies uniting against a bigger threat?

I don't get this argument at all...

How are Vampires, Sorcerers, Werewolves and the Undaunted skill line aren't immersion breaking, but Necromancers are?

In DC you're allowed to play through an anti-Werewolf Questline AS A WEREWOLF. Vampires are also the spawn of Molag Bal's loins and should be treated with distrust literally everywhere...And Sorcerers? Sorcerers summon Daedra which are the primary antagonist of this game thus far and play with the Dark Arts. Don't forget that the Undaunted skill line already has Necromancy skills.

If immersion is such a big concern, we should be locked off from a lot of quests for race reasons (Argonians shouldn't be able to do some of EP's quests and non-Argonians shouldn't be doing the quest for Murkmire...Non-Elves also should be having a lot of trouble doing the quests for Vvardenfell and Summerset), class reasons and curse reasons.

EDIT: Never trust a book of lore at face value. Just because a Dragon is said to be in Morrowind, doesn't mean they're going to still be at Morrowind.

Ermiq · January 2019

Claudman wrote: »

Smaxx wrote: »

So and necromancers breaking the immersion, because nobody likes necromancers… yeah, really… like the Daggerfall Covenant saying that necromancy is not allowed and punished by death or similar, but then sends their own necromancers to "do their thing" far away in Stonefalls? (It's mentioned in a letter, I just don't remember the title, sorry.) Oopsie, we don't talk about that. Dunmer society even uses necromancy at an almost daily basis, e.g. to guard their ancestors' tombs or to ask for advice. ESO even pokes a bit at this question in Dragon Bones, where it's mentioned that some of the blood magic utilized by the Undaunted is in fact a more basic form of necromancy. The only area where this might be a slight problem, especially when practiced in the open, would be Alik'r and other regions with many Redguards. But then again this also provides a solution…

Big part of Alik'r's plot lines in ESO are about >!necromancy and the soldiers and troops largely being unable to do anything against the undead, because they're still considered sacred…!< Even if you hate necromancy and you openly ban it, if there's a necromancer with a giant bone colossus (or a werewolf or a vampire) standing at your door step you don't start punching them in the face, screaming about the bad bad dark arts etc. (unless you're a bandit or some other kind of random enemy out there in the woods).

So overall, I'm not worried. I want to see what they do with what they've got, the whole promise, etc. The biggest "issue" are necromancers, yes, but then again it's often still true that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", even if it includes dark arts. And isn't that also part of what they basically made their tag lines? Former enemies uniting against a bigger threat?

In DC you're allowed to play through an anti-Werewolf Questline AS A WEREWOLF.

Yep, the same problem as necromancer class.

Claudman wrote: »

Smaxx wrote: »

So and necromancers breaking the immersion, because nobody likes necromancers… yeah, really… like the Daggerfall Covenant saying that necromancy is not allowed and punished by death or similar, but then sends their own necromancers to "do their thing" far away in Stonefalls? (It's mentioned in a letter, I just don't remember the title, sorry.) Oopsie, we don't talk about that. Dunmer society even uses necromancy at an almost daily basis, e.g. to guard their ancestors' tombs or to ask for advice. ESO even pokes a bit at this question in Dragon Bones, where it's mentioned that some of the blood magic utilized by the Undaunted is in fact a more basic form of necromancy. The only area where this might be a slight problem, especially when practiced in the open, would be Alik'r and other regions with many Redguards. But then again this also provides a solution…

Big part of Alik'r's plot lines in ESO are about >!necromancy and the soldiers and troops largely being unable to do anything against the undead, because they're still considered sacred…!< Even if you hate necromancy and you openly ban it, if there's a necromancer with a giant bone colossus (or a werewolf or a vampire) standing at your door step you don't start punching them in the face, screaming about the bad bad dark arts etc. (unless you're a bandit or some other kind of random enemy out there in the woods).

So overall, I'm not worried. I want to see what they do with what they've got, the whole promise, etc. The biggest "issue" are necromancers, yes, but then again it's often still true that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", even if it includes dark arts. And isn't that also part of what they basically made their tag lines? Former enemies uniting against a bigger threat?

Vampires are also the spawn of Molag Bal's loins and should be treated with distrust literally everywhere...

Experienced vampire can hide his nature.

Claudman wrote: »

Smaxx wrote: »

So and necromancers breaking the immersion, because nobody likes necromancers… yeah, really… like the Daggerfall Covenant saying that necromancy is not allowed and punished by death or similar, but then sends their own necromancers to "do their thing" far away in Stonefalls? (It's mentioned in a letter, I just don't remember the title, sorry.) Oopsie, we don't talk about that. Dunmer society even uses necromancy at an almost daily basis, e.g. to guard their ancestors' tombs or to ask for advice. ESO even pokes a bit at this question in Dragon Bones, where it's mentioned that some of the blood magic utilized by the Undaunted is in fact a more basic form of necromancy. The only area where this might be a slight problem, especially when practiced in the open, would be Alik'r and other regions with many Redguards. But then again this also provides a solution…

Big part of Alik'r's plot lines in ESO are about >!necromancy and the soldiers and troops largely being unable to do anything against the undead, because they're still considered sacred…!< Even if you hate necromancy and you openly ban it, if there's a necromancer with a giant bone colossus (or a werewolf or a vampire) standing at your door step you don't start punching them in the face, screaming about the bad bad dark arts etc. (unless you're a bandit or some other kind of random enemy out there in the woods).

So overall, I'm not worried. I want to see what they do with what they've got, the whole promise, etc. The biggest "issue" are necromancers, yes, but then again it's often still true that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", even if it includes dark arts. And isn't that also part of what they basically made their tag lines? Former enemies uniting against a bigger threat?

And Sorcerers? Sorcerers summon Daedra which are the primary antagonist of this game thus far and play with the Dark Arts.

Eremith wrote: »

OtarTheMad wrote: »

Eremith wrote: »

@Odnoc

Eremith wrote: »

while playable Necromancers are actually lore-friendly in terms of overall TES lore, in ESO particularly they just couldn't exist. You know, like 90% of the ESO stories/quests are based on fighting against Wormcult and other necromancers, and we know that many Tamriel people (especially Redguards, non-Telvanni Dunmers, Mages Guild and Psijics') most likely wouldn't make a deal with necromancers. If it were a good singleplayer game, there would be unique dialogues, reactions, entire quest lines would be changed or even unavailable if you play as a Necromancer. But I know ZOS, I know how exactly they do implement new content into the game. Players using necromancy just going to be completely ignored by NPCs, Vanus Galerion will let them to become a Mages Guild members, and so on.
I would deal with Necromancer class in ESO if it were implemented correctly, with some new unique mechanics, so they could become a rightfull part of the game's world, you know. But they won't, I'm sure. As I see it, the only way to accept a Necromancer player in ESO for me is just to say "yeah, whatever, he's not a necro, I didn't see that dead body he just had raised up from that grave".

Speaking about dragons... It's ok if it will be only a couple of them, they might be hiding somewhere in the Nirn during the 2nd era, there's no inconsistencies lore-wise.

@OtarTheMad
I'm not 'just don't like them'. If you're any interested in my opinion you could take a look at my comments history in my profile. I've wrote a lot about necromancer class already, and I don't want to repeat it all again to everyone who don't see the reasons why necromancer player shouldn't be exist in ESO.

I am not going to scroll thru your comment history lol but I will use what you quoted as a guide. You're judging something before we even understand it honestly. Honestly we can be necromancers and still not agree with what is happening with Mannimarco and Molag Bal. As for seeing dead bodies in town, yes, that's a little odd but any odder than a Sorc summoning daedra in a time when a Daedric Prince is trying to destroy Nirn? Or a NB running around town and murdering all the people? We can be The Vestige and be evil.

What's wrong with daedra summoning? See, daedra are not considered to be evil nor good in TES mostly. Moreover, these so-called lesser daedra such as Clanfeers, Twilights and Scumps are classified as nothing more than just some kind of animals, and there's nothing wrong with a master sorcerer being able to summon and control them. Ask Divayth Fyr.
Also, from what I know, Conjuring school (except its Necromancy branch) has never been forbidden in Tamriel.

Claudman wrote: »

Smaxx wrote: »

So and necromancers breaking the immersion, because nobody likes necromancers… yeah, really… like the Daggerfall Covenant saying that necromancy is not allowed and punished by death or similar, but then sends their own necromancers to "do their thing" far away in Stonefalls? (It's mentioned in a letter, I just don't remember the title, sorry.) Oopsie, we don't talk about that. Dunmer society even uses necromancy at an almost daily basis, e.g. to guard their ancestors' tombs or to ask for advice. ESO even pokes a bit at this question in Dragon Bones, where it's mentioned that some of the blood magic utilized by the Undaunted is in fact a more basic form of necromancy. The only area where this might be a slight problem, especially when practiced in the open, would be Alik'r and other regions with many Redguards. But then again this also provides a solution…

Big part of Alik'r's plot lines in ESO are about >!necromancy and the soldiers and troops largely being unable to do anything against the undead, because they're still considered sacred…!< Even if you hate necromancy and you openly ban it, if there's a necromancer with a giant bone colossus (or a werewolf or a vampire) standing at your door step you don't start punching them in the face, screaming about the bad bad dark arts etc. (unless you're a bandit or some other kind of random enemy out there in the woods).

So overall, I'm not worried. I want to see what they do with what they've got, the whole promise, etc. The biggest "issue" are necromancers, yes, but then again it's often still true that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", even if it includes dark arts. And isn't that also part of what they basically made their tag lines? Former enemies uniting against a bigger threat?

Don't forget that the Undaunted skill line already has Necromancy skills.

So far, the necromancy in TES is (by Mages Guild and Shad Astula classifications): reanimating and manipulating dead creatures, soul trapping and creating black soul gems. Undaunted skill line has no such skills. Why do you consider Undaunted skills a necromancy? Because of Blood Altar maybe? Well, it's seems like either blood magic or summoning some daedric thing from Oblivion (or both), but it's not a necromancy.

Claudman · January 2019

@Eremith

Bone Shield and Necrotic Orb.
Bone Shield is manipulating the remains of the dead and Necrotic Orb implies necrotic energy. Bone Shield for all intents and purposes is Necromancy, it's not the art of raising the dead, but it is an art of using the remains of the dead to conjure a ward upon yourself...Thus making it Necromancy since it's still manipulation of dead remains.

Experienced vampires can only hide their APPEARANCE, a skilled vampire hunter can still easily detect a vampire with detect life and as shown in many quests there are various entities which can detect your lack of animus (soul). This means that the vampiric aura which vampires radiate could also be detected and even detected by other vampires, Daedra, Ghosts, etc...

I agree that the DC quests has the same problems, but this is an oversight common in TES since TES2: Daggerfall. Vampires doing vampire-hunting quests or Necromancers doing necromancer-hunting quests. This isn't like saaaay Divinity: Original Sin 2 where if you're hunting Sourcerers as a Sourcerer an NPC will call you out on it...Immersion breaking will occur regardless, maybe because the writers expect you to make up your own reason as to why the NPCs cannot tell you're a Necromancer/Vampire/Werewolf/etc.? :shrug:

Rohamad_Ali · January 2019

This one only has one thing on his mind ...

3da7b9392aea5b8cbd51da2cdd496851--funny-animals-adorable-animals.jpg

Training .

Bruccius · January 2019

Eremith wrote: »

@Bruccius

Bruccius wrote: »

@Eremith
Necromancy is actually legal in most of Tamriel, just shunned. Some folk take this shunning too far and go to violence, resulting in fewer necromancers. The ones that do exist probably do so illegally, as necromancy has certain rules one has to follow.

Only the Dunmer of Morrowind made it illegal. Oh, and the Mages Guild; but they only did so following the rise of Arch-Mage Hannibal Traven.

Oh, come on! Not this again. I'm a bit tired of explaining this to people who know nothing about the lore, but ok, I'll do it again.

Hannibal Traven wasn't the first one who made necromancy illegal in Mages Guild. It's just a common misconception. People just don't read books carefully.
Let's read the Hannibal Traven's "The Black Arts on Trial" which is commonly used by players to justify necromancy in Mages Guild:
http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/The_Black_Arts_On_Trial

The Psijic Order of the Isle of Artaeum, precursor to our own Mages Guild, also forbade its [necromacy] use, not only because it was dangerous, but their belief in the holy and unholy ancestor spirits made it heretical. Again, despite this, we hear many stories of students and masters who ignored this stricture. When Vanus Galerion left Artaeum, he may have disagreed with the Psijics on much, but he also refused to allow Necromancy to be taught in the Guild.

So, at first, here Hannibal says that Psijics' Order also forbids necromancy. Did you know that? Obviously, you didn't. Also, obviously you know nothing about Redguards and Arkay, do you?
At second, he also says Vanus Galerion has made necromancy forbidden in Mages Guild. Not Traven did it, but Vanus did it in the very first days of the Guild, the Mages Guild has been founded with this restriction against necromancy in mind.

Let's read further:

Almost 1100 years have passed since the time of Vanus Galerion, and there have been many archmagisters to lead his guild. The question of Necromancy has continued to be asked. The strictures against it in the Guild have never been lifted, but attitudes about it have shifted back and forth over the years. Some archmagisters have been inclined to ignore it entirely, some have fought very actively against it, and still other archmagisters have been rumored to be Necromancers themselves.

"...The strictures against it in the Guild have never been lifted..." - which means, despite there were many discussions about necromancy and many Guild members continued to ask for necromancy, official policy of Mages Guild considering necromancy always have been "forbidden/not allowed/rescricted".

Next:

In my new role as Archmagister of the Mages Guild, it is my duty to set policy on this matter. Though I have my own opinions on the Black Arts, I took counsel with two of the most learned mages in the Empire, Magister Voth Karlyss of Corinth and Magister Ulliceta gra-Kogg of Orsinium, and we debated for two days.

"...my new role as Archmagister..." - this book was wrote by Hannibal in his very first days of his Archmagister role in the Guild. And as any other new man in charge, he started to determine new policies and new states for the organization he has took care of. And to make a decision about the future of necromancy in Mages Guild, he took the counsel.
The conclusion was:

Conclusion:
The risks of studying Necromancy outweigh its usefulness. The Guild does not wish to censor the study of any of its members, but it will not tolerate studies in the Black Arts, except in limited form for the purpose of combating its evil adherents. This may only been done by rare individuals who have proven themselves both highly skilled and highly cautious, and then only with my express permission and supervision.

So, just like prior to Traven's rule, restrictions against necromancy in Mages Guild hasn't been changed.

I have no idea, why people think Traven was the one who made necromancy forbidden, because, as we can see in this book, he actually didn't make it strictly forbidden either. He just documented their discussion, and made a decision which is going to be there during the time he's in charge.

As always, I see people justifying necromancer class and they say about the lore, but then it turns out that they know nothing about the lore actually.

Provincial law > Guild law.

Also, it's made abundantly clear that Traven did change the regulations. Hell, the very book you just quoted proves as much. Refusing to allow members to teach Necromancy is different from not allowing Necromancers into the guild.

Fyi, you really ought to look up the difference of cultural values and laws. There tend to be differences.

I find it funny you presume a TESwikian of over three years of editing experience ''doesn't know the lore''. But whatever makes you sleep at night, princess.

Sinlar · January 2019

Magic is always about intent.
Necromancy that engaged the dead to become a helpful force to further a worthy cause.
Would be viewed differently than necromancy that was used to enslave the dead against their wills.

Just as a sorcerer's summoned daedra are viewed differently, as they are clearly assisting in helping with whatever worthy cause the sorcerer has become involved with.

As for the rest, this one looks forward greatly to meeting the Big Cats.

Ermiq · January 2019

Bruccius wrote: »

Provincial law > Guild law.

For citizens, yes. For Mages Guild members? Nope. Local restrictions are always > common ones.
A student who wants to study necromancy says to an Archmagister: "It's allowed by province law".
Guess what Archmagister will answer. "Then go find some province farmer and ask him to teach you".

Bruccius wrote: »

Also, it's made abundantly clear that Traven did change the regulations. Hell, the very book you just quoted proves as much.

Made abandontly clear by whom? Wiki-editors? Yes, every wiki, uesp and others say that. They all say "Traven has banned necromancy (no proof links and no details, just believe us)", and suddenly every wiki guest starts to be sure that prior to Traven necromancy was fully allowed in MG.

Bruccius wrote: »

Refusing to allow members to teach Necromancy is different from not allowing Necromancers into the guild.

Who said "teach"? Did Traven say "teach"?

Conclusion:
The risks of studying Necromancy outweigh its usefulness. The Guild does not wish to censor the study of any of its members, but it will not tolerate studies in the Black Arts, except in limited form for the purpose of combating its evil adherents. This may only been done by rare individuals who have proven themselves both highly skilled and highly cautious, and then only with my express permission and supervision.

See, as I see it, "studying" term is fully acceptable to anyone, whether it newbie students or experienced members/mentors. Or maybe you think teachers are not studying? Maybe you see it as "okay, mister Dedicated Necromancer, to become the Guild member you have to swear you won't continue your Black Arts research and studying" - "yep, I swear" - "fine, welcome to the Guild!". Also, the Guild is not like an usual school where are teachers and students. It's more like university where people do kind of self-studying more than just sitting and listening the teacher.

Bruccius wrote: »

Fyi, you really ought to look up the difference of cultural values and laws. There tend to be differences.

Sure, an Imperial mage, the Guild member, could have a liberal view on necromancy. But I want to ask, does it make the Guild policies and Archmagister Vanus' decisions may be ignored by this Imperial mage?

Bruccius wrote: »

I find it funny you presume a TESwikian of over three years of editing experience ''doesn't know the lore''. But whatever makes you sleep at night, princess.

And I find it funny "TESwikian of over three years of editing experience" think he knows the lore. It works both ways, you know.

Also, shame on you for being one of those who let the "Necromancy was banned in MG by Traven" misconception to spread around the world.

Deathlord92 · January 2019

I’m looking forward to it I think 2019 will be an amazing year for eso 👍

Bruccius · January 2019

Eremith wrote: »

Bruccius wrote: »

Provincial law > Guild law.

For citizens, yes. For Mages Guild members? Nope. Local restrictions are always > common ones.
A student who wants to study necromancy says to an Archmagister: "It's allowed by province law".
Guess what Archmagister will answer. "Then go find some province farmer and ask him to teach you".

Bruccius wrote: »

Also, it's made abundantly clear that Traven did change the regulations. Hell, the very book you just quoted proves as much.

Made abandontly clear by whom? Wiki-editors? Yes, every wiki, uesp and others say that. They all say "Traven has banned necromancy (no proof links and no details, just believe us)", and suddenly every wiki guest starts to be sure that prior to Traven necromancy was fully allowed in MG.

Bruccius wrote: »

Refusing to allow members to teach Necromancy is different from not allowing Necromancers into the guild.

Who said "teach"? Did Traven say "teach"?

Conclusion:
The risks of studying Necromancy outweigh its usefulness. The Guild does not wish to censor the study of any of its members, but it will not tolerate studies in the Black Arts, except in limited form for the purpose of combating its evil adherents. This may only been done by rare individuals who have proven themselves both highly skilled and highly cautious, and then only with my express permission and supervision.

See, as I see it, "studying" term is fully acceptable to anyone, whether it newbie students or experienced members/mentors. Or maybe you think teachers are not studying? Maybe you see it as "okay, mister Dedicated Necromancer, to become the Guild member you have to swear you won't continue your Black Arts research and studying" - "yep, I swear" - "fine, welcome to the Guild!". Also, the Guild is not like an usual school where are teachers and students. It's more like university where people do kind of self-studying more than just sitting and listening the teacher.

Bruccius wrote: »

Fyi, you really ought to look up the difference of cultural values and laws. There tend to be differences.

Sure, an Imperial mage, the Guild member, could have a liberal view on necromancy. But I want to ask, does it make the Guild policies and Archmagister Vanus' decisions may be ignored by this Imperial mage?

Bruccius wrote: »

I find it funny you presume a TESwikian of over three years of editing experience ''doesn't know the lore''. But whatever makes you sleep at night, princess.

And I find it funny "TESwikian of over three years of editing experience" think he knows the lore. It works both ways, you know.
Also, shame on you for being one of those who let the "Necromancy was banned in MG by Traven" misconception to spread around the world.

Oh really, wiki editors? Why don't you replay TES IV?
''Arch-Mage Traven is the first to take such a hard stance on Necromancy. It upset more than a few people."
''The Mages Guild runs more or less like it always did, but we lost quite a few members when the practice of Necromancy was banned."
''Not only has Necromancy been banned in the Mages Guild, but the Guild won't deal with anyone who openly uses it."
''I don't know what Arch-Mage Traven has against Necromancy, but the first thing he did after taking over the Mages Guild was to ban its practice."
''The Mages Guild has made more than a few enemies since Necromancy was banned."
All of which are said by members of the Mages Guild.
Need I continue?

The part you quoted is from the conclusion part of the book, which is literally the reform of Arch Mage Traven, try again. Galerion only banned the teaching of the practice within the Guild, he never banned Necromancers from joining up.

Perhaps you ought to play the game, and read the sources, more carefully next time. As said, a TESwikian of three years has experience with this.

Ermiq · January 2019

Bruccius wrote: »

Oh really, wiki editors? Why don't you replay TES IV?
''Arch-Mage Traven is the first to take such a hard stance on Necromancy. It upset more than a few people."
''The Mages Guild runs more or less like it always did, but we lost quite a few members when the practice of Necromancy was banned."
''Not only has Necromancy been banned in the Mages Guild, but the Guild won't deal with anyone who openly uses it."
''I don't know what Arch-Mage Traven has against Necromancy, but the first thing he did after taking over the Mages Guild was to ban its practice."
''The Mages Guild has made more than a few enemies since Necromancy was banned."
All of which are said by members of the Mages Guild.
Need I continue?

The part you quoted is from the conclusion part of the book, which is literally the reform of Arch Mage Traven, try again. Galerion only banned the teaching of the practice within the Guild, he never banned Necromancers from joining up.

Perhaps you ought to play the game, and read the sources, more carefully next time. As said, a TESwikian of three years has experience with this.

Okay, I have to admit that you have reasons to say what you're saying. Oblivion was quite long ago and I wasn't much interested in the lore back then, to be honest.
And the words about the Guild doors became closed for Necromancers with Traven's rule, while there wasn't such ban before... Well, you've convinced me.

Vilhjálmur · January 2019

I'm personally just tired of seeing necromancers all the time, we see them during main quests, alliance quests and even other TES games such as Oblivion during the mages guild quest line, it has become a generic villain at this point and it just seems like such a basic option to have as a class, and with some abilities confirmed it just feels like a mix of sorcerer, nightblade and warden abilities with an edgy aesthetic to it, why can't they release something more unique instead of the same boring ass class type we've been fighting during the main and alliance quests, I'd rather see them get unique with stuff like sword singers, brawlers, monks, bards, alchemists, illusion masters, etc

Kingdaboss123 · January 2019

Vilhjálmur wrote: »

I'm personally just tired of seeing necromancers all the time, we see them during main quests, alliance quests and even other TES games such as Oblivion during the mages guild quest line, it has become a generic villain at this point and it just seems like such a basic option to have as a class, and with some abilities confirmed it just feels like a mix of sorcerer, nightblade and warden abilities with an edgy aesthetic to it, why can't they release something more unique instead of the same boring ass class type we've been fighting during the main and alliance quests, I'd rather see them get unique with stuff like sword singers, brawlers, monks, bards, alchemists, illusion masters, etc

I agree with everything you have said but what is a bard going too do?

Vilhjálmur · January 2019

Kingdaboss123 wrote: »

Vilhjálmur wrote: »

I'm personally just tired of seeing necromancers all the time, we see them during main quests, alliance quests and even other TES games such as Oblivion during the mages guild quest line, it has become a generic villain at this point and it just seems like such a basic option to have as a class, and with some abilities confirmed it just feels like a mix of sorcerer, nightblade and warden abilities with an edgy aesthetic to it, why can't they release something more unique instead of the same boring ass class type we've been fighting during the main and alliance quests, I'd rather see them get unique with stuff like sword singers, brawlers, monks, bards, alchemists, illusion masters, etc

I agree with everything you have said but what is a bard going too do?

Just examples, bards wouldn't really do much now that I see it lol, I just wanna see something different than necromancers since they're everywhere on the game

Korah_Eaglecry · January 2019

Kingdaboss123 wrote: »

Eremith wrote: »

@Kingdaboss123
What? Show me at least one document that disapproves Hannibal's words about Vanus Galerion in this book. I hope you know who is Vanus and what era he lived in. In case you don't, he lived in 2nd era, and it's him who is an Archmagister of Mages Guild during ESO timeline.

I do know who vanus is he hated necromancy yes but he allowed the use soul trapping but not with black soul gems.

If youve done the main storyline for the base game you met Vanus.

Tessitura · February 2019

I am seeing a lot of arguments about necromancy here, in fact it's the only contested subject. And a lot of the contention seems to be about what defines it. Lets be clear here, as a class, it historically was only bound by two things, the use of sapient souls, and raising of corpses, those are the two universally agreed upon things. Now that said, all kinds of other magic as been called necromancy by different people and cultures.

Lets look at some examples of this.

The Dunmer don't consider what they do with their ancestors to be necromancy, but most everyone else does, in fact, Dunmer don't consider it necromancy unless it is done to elves specifically.

The various Blood Magics used by the Undaunted are considered necromancy by some because it makes use of bodies, bodily fluids, and essences of life. Not to mention the use of bones to protect one's self, which, is obvious why it's considered that. The undaunted don\t see to care, in fact, they seem to only care about the bottom line, being Undaunted, methods seem to go widely not cared about.

Soul trapping and sanctioned corpse study in the mages guild is considered acceptable, now, they have various acceptions to their rules, but they still are very iron fisted in their restrictions on anything that might be questionable, and don't start looking the other way till after Vanus is gone.

In Cryodiil, necromancy is legal, and acceptable within reason, for many, many years, in fact, it's legal for far longer then it's illegal. Of course, the center of the Empire has always been a lot more liberal then many other provinces.

Ultimatly, Necromancy is one of the most loosely defined "schools' and or class in the history of TES, and is often a point fo debate for both the fictional people that live in the world, and us the fans that play the game. Keeping that in mind, I would say the devs have plenty of freedom with the making of this class, it's implementation, and how to justify it's lore. I think, it perfectly fine, cause, it can be justified in so many ways.

Now, lets talk a little about the meta, Necromancer's have been custom made classes for ever in TES, and it combines all kinds of magic types to make, that was always part of the fun of TES. IF any of you have seen the Necromancer class concept put out by the devs, then you know not all these abilities are corpse raising, and some look really cool, and would probably be considered acceptable by many cultures, also, if you haven't heard, they apparently plan on making the casting of necromancy abilities a criminal act. So, you will be breaking the law if people catch you casting dark arts stuff.

I don't think they are ignoring the difficulties with this class, they seem to be trying to address them, that said, it being a class isn't unreasonable, it a combination of many of the "Ideas" of necromancy, including soul, and blood magics.

I'd also like to add, that this setting has always had very loose lore in general, and plenty of lore breaking rewrites and odd changes with little to no explaination, we still love it regardless. The necromancer is one of those loosely defined, yet commonly in play elements that we deal with all the time. This is a chance to define it some, and take it back from that " EVIL ONLY " concept or misconception even. New lore will likely appear thanks to this class and will probably bring it back to the neutral camp that the black sheep of magics once sat in, in TES.

Korah_Eaglecry · February 2019

[*] From your personal perspective, how comfortable are you with a dragon war and players becoming necromancers?

Not uncomfortable at all. Most lore in ES games has room to be played with or changed thanks to the vast amounts of time and distance between events that we as players experience. So while many (in game sources) in ES:V believed most dragons were dead and those dragons remaining had been on the run since the Dragon War. There is plenty of room for a group of dragons to lay siege to a far away land in a far away time from the 4th Era and for those sources to be unaware of it.

[*] Which boundaries would make these things more or less acceptable to you (plot limits, plot devices, etc.)

The Lego Dragons actually concern me. Mostly because unlike Dolmens these Dragons technically are different from any other Dragon that shows up at these repeatables. With the Anchors you were repeatedly running into the same mobs, and named bosses. So the argument that these only happened once was much stronger. But with the Dragons changing in appearance every time suggests that these repeatables are not one time occurrances. Making it much more difficult to accept that this event in Tamriels history would be lost to time. At least with the Dolmens Molag Bal makes a threat that he would ensure the events of the Soulburst and everything tied to it, due to the Vestiges involvement, would be lost to history.

[*] Do you trust the Loremaster and other writers to pull this off in a way that you would find satisfactory in terms of sufficiently honoring established lore?

I'm not sure at this point. I think the writing team has done a great job with the world-building they've done so far. But that doesnt mean they arent capable of mistakes or biting off more than they can chew. And if there is any content they could possibly choke on, its the Dragons and how they implement them into the story.

[*] Are you looking forward to 2019's content more or less with this news?

Normally I would have pre-ordered the collectors edition by now. But I have'nt. As excited as I should be, I cant help but feel like Im better off curbing my enthusiasm til we get a better look at this Chapter.