[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

That's a nice ideal, Thori, but one I think is demonstratably innacurate. If we think back to our own Sheo and CoC, where's our character? We meet Sheogorath in TES V but we don't meet our CoC. The Mad God tells us he remembers it, but apart from memory, the last vestiges of what was once our character has been swept away and replaced by Sheogorath. On the same subject, there was also Jyggalag.

Mankar Camoran is another example of someone becoming someone else, although in his case he did it to himself. Then there's Trinimac becoming Malacath... These just off the top of my head, pretty sure i can find more examples. So let's not argue for the sake of arguing, eh?

[/blockquote]

The CoC doesn't become someone other than himself, he takes Sheogorath's aspect, with all the traits it includes, but he doesn't become the original Sheogorath. He retains his own memories. To the general people it doesn't make any difference, but still he doesn't become someone else, he becomes something else. His function changes, and to the world that it more important than his personality, but he is not somebody else, he is himself with a new function.

How exactly does Mankar become somebody else? Becoming a changed version of himself doesn't count as that.

Malacath, samely, is a changed version of Trinimac, not some other fellow.

I'm pretty sure you can find a lot of other examples of people changing and becoming different versions of themselves as well as people assuming new functions in the world, but none of it contradicts what I said.

The example that illustrates it the best is, again, Vivec and Sotha's words about him. Take every possible version of what Vivec can be in any version of the universe. He can be anything - "every race, every gender, every hero, both divine and finite..." -  yet he will still be some version of Vivec. Every person always changes, every moment of their life, but a different version of yourself is not someone else, it's still you.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

And that's a bad thing....?

[/blockquote]

Well, depends on the reader, I guess. In my eyes, MK's texts aren't 100% canon. Some of them help to understand the logic behind certain parts of lore and fill the gaps. But others don't offer any logic to understand, they are basically stating "this thing is this way because I say so".

It's... you know, like him saying that Pelinal was a cyborg from the future. On the first glance, it should be significant, the fact that there can be cyborgs from the future in Tamriel is a big detail. Yet, nothing in the actual game lore supports it directly or otherwise. It's a statement that cannot be proved either right or wrong, so on what basis should I believe it and accept it as a part of lore? Just because MK said so? Well, sorry, but this is not enough for me.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

Conquest of the world mirroring the creation of Mundus, yes. Factor in the Ehlnofey wars and it becomes a little easier to see. Also, do you have a source saying Talos murdered millions?

[/blockquote]

The Ehlnofey wars weren't a part of the creation process, they took place when the world already existed. Also, there have been empires before Talos' empire, so what is the difference?

Well, maybe not millions, maybe it was hundreds of thousands, the exact numbers aren't the point here. Every time he used the Numidium, he killed lots of innocent people. In Hammerfell, Elsweyr, Alinor. The part where he has the Numidium assembled - in Elsweyr of course, not in Cyrodiil, because who cares about those Khajiit, right? - it speaks volumes. His conquest of Hammerfell - the bloodiest war in the history of the province. And then Alinor. The whole thing seems a lot like if he was tossing around nuclear bombs or something like that, only worse.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/JusticiarThorien]Justiciar Thorien[/url] said:[/b]

The CoC doesn't become someone other than himself, he takes Sheogorath's aspect, with all the traits it includes, but he doesn't become the original Sheogorath. He retains his own memories. To the general people it doesn't make any difference, but still he doesn't become someone else, he becomes something else. His function changes, and to the world that it more important than his personality, but he is not somebody else, he is himself with a new function.

How exactly does Mankar become somebody else? Becoming a changed version of himself doesn't count as that.

Malacath, samely, is a changed version of Trinimac, not some other fellow.

I'm pretty sure you can find a lot of other examples of people changing and becoming different versions of themselves as well as people assuming new functions in the world, but none of it contradicts what I said.

The example that illustrates it the best is, again, Vivec and Sotha's words about him. Take every possible version of what Vivec can be in any version of the universe. He can be anything - "every race, every gender, every hero, both divine and finite..." -  yet he will still be some version of Vivec. Every person always changes, every moment of their life, but a different version of yourself is not someone else, it's still you.

[/blockquote]

I think we might have a very different interpretation of what it means to stop being oneself. Starting with Malacath, we can split hairs all day as to whether he's Trinimac who changed or becomes something else entirely. For me, it's a polar shift and a transformation of AE, and I find this passage from Lord of Souls to poignantly portray how Malacth feels about that:

“Around them rose a garden of slender trees, and wound about the trunks were vines festooned with lilylike flowers. A multitude of spheres moved, deep in the colorless sky, as distant and pale as moons. [Attrebus] heard birds chirping, but it was a doleful sound, as if something with a vague memory of having been a bird was trying to reproduce sounds it no longer felt.” Malacath appears to feel some sort of sadness towards this locale, reproducing it in his realm. He describes it as a “shadow of a garden, this echo of something that once was.”

Within Malaacth there is the echo of a memory of Trinimac. That's all that's left of Auriel's Greatest Knight.

With the CoC, I'm not sure there's any basis to say he "doesn't become the original Sheogorath." The Uncle Sheo we meet seems so much like the old Sheogorath that I can't tell the difference - same voice and everything. The Sheo our character meets in SI says something to the effect of "It's a family title, passed down from me to myself every few thousand years." No matter which way I look at it, The CoC is Sheogorath now.

Manky C. He uses the word "nymic" quite a bit. We can infer it's someone's name, their identity:

“Greetings, novitiate, and know first a reassurance: Mankar Camoran was once like you, asleep, unwise, protonymic. We mortals leave the dreaming-sleeve of birth the same, unmantled save for the symbiosis with our mothers, thus to practice and thus to rapprochement, until finally we might through new eyes leave our hearths without need or fear that she remains behind. In this moment we destroy her forever and enter the demesne of Lord Dagon.”

Know that then you are royalty, a new breed of destroyer, whose garden shall flood with flowers known and unknown, as it was in the mythic dawn. Thus shall you return to your first primal wail and yet come out different. It shall this time be neonymbiosis, master akin to Master, whose Mother is miasma.

As for Vivec... Perhaps consider Sotha Sil's words while also bearing in mind Vivec achieved CHIM. He may want to be everything else but he has to always be Vivec.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/JusticiarThorien]Justiciar Thorien[/url] said:[/b]

Well, depends on the reader, I guess. In my eyes, MK's texts aren't 100% canon. Some of them help to understand the logic behind certain parts of lore and fill the gaps. But others don't offer any logic to understand, they are basically stating "this thing is this way because I say so".

It's... you know, like him saying that Pelinal was a cyborg from the future. On the first glance, it should be significant, the fact that there can be cyborgs from the future in Tamriel is a big detail. Yet, nothing in the actual game lore supports it directly or otherwise. It's a statement that cannot be proved either right or wrong, so on what basis should I believe it and accept it as a part of lore? Just because MK said so? Well, sorry, but this is not enough for me.

[/blockquote]

That's fair :) The thing to bear in mind is that the things categorised as texts are often complete and explanitory. However, an equal number of things are forum posts or just things he has typed in a casual setting in response to someone's question. Often we're seeing his reply without context of what he was replying to. They're preserved anyway because it gives us a glimpse through the keyhole.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/JusticiarThorien]Justiciar Thorien[/url] said:[/b]

The Ehlnofey wars weren't a part of the creation process, they took place when the world already existed. Also, there have been empires before Talos' empire, so what is the difference?

Well, maybe not millions, maybe it was hundreds of thousands, the exact numbers aren't the point here. Every time he used the Numidium, he killed lots of innocent people. In Hammerfell, Elsweyr, Alinor. The part where he has the Numidium assembled - in Elsweyr of course, not in Cyrodiil, because who cares about those Khajiit, right? - it speaks volumes. His conquest of Hammerfell - the bloodiest war in the history of the province. And then Alinor. The whole thing seems a lot like if he was tossing around nuclear bombs or something like that, only worse.

[/blockquote]

I still see no source here :D Is this Justiciar propaganda? :P

Okay, semantics again. My bad. "Prior to convention" is probably more accurate to describe the similarities between Tiber and Lorkhan's deeds. Something that is often overlooked is the AoK and how that keeps getting lost and found over the ages in a repeated pattern. Tiber Septim was the last one to find it again, and that itself carries great mythic importance.

Malacath and Trinimac... Well... I somewhat remember being a little girl, but I am no longer her. The me of now and the me of 25 years ago may as well be different people. Yet, both are me. Mankar also is talking about this. It's not becoming someone else, it's becoming a different version of yourself.

What I mean by becomeing someone else is as if I stopped being me and became literally someone else, like my sister, or really any random person. Like, another existing person, not another, future or alternate or whatever version of me.

With Sheogorath it's also not becoming someone else but assuming a new job, sort of. The CoC becomes the god of madness. He doesn't become the previous fellow who might have done the same in the past (well, a hypothetical one, since we don't know if it ever happened). His new function is so much greater than his mortal self, that his personality gets lost in it. But it is still there, maybe a very tiny part of Sheogorath, but still there. And surely to you it doesn't matter, nor does it matter to any person on Nirn, since they won't even know. But it matters to the CoC aka Sheogorath, because it's a part of him.

And about Vivec, Sotha Sil doesn't say he has to be Vivec, he says ""he CAN only be Vivec". Also, Hjalti has CHIM too, so he too can only be Hjalti)))

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

That's fair :) The thing to bear in mind is that the things categorised as texts are often complete and explanitory. However, an equal number of things are forum posts or just things he has typed in a casual setting in response to someone's question. Often we're seeing his reply without context of what he was replying to. They're preserved anyway because it gives us a glimpse through the keyhole.

[/blockquote]

I don't categorize texts, I study each statement separately AND in context. Some of the ideas in his texts really are explanatory and make sense, and this those I have no issues. But some sound... like he is writing a fanfic on someone else's story, and it is also a rather nonsensical fanfic. Like it's another C0DA. And the fact that he is the original author doesn't change anything. It feels as if the images in his head are very different from what we see in the game. 

Also, more often than not, people copypast the whole conversation, not just his responses.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

I still see no source here :D Is this Justiciar propaganda? :P

Okay, semantics again. My bad. "Prior to convention" is probably more accurate to describe the similarities between Tiber and Lorkhan's deeds. Something that is often overlooked is the AoK and how that keeps getting lost and found over the ages in a repeated pattern. Tiber Septim was the last one to find it again, and that itself carries great mythic importance.

[/blockquote]

Sources: the text from Redguard, PGE 1st Edition, Dragon Break Study, the Second Era timeline and some other articles on the Imperial Library that I don't remember names of.

Did Lorkhan create an empire? Never found it mentioned anywhere, maybe I've missed something. However, even if he did, there are quite a few people who conquered lands and created empires, not only Hjalti. And the story of how Hjalti found the Amulet of Kings reminds me strongly of Alessia. There are, in fact, a lot of similarity between the two, except the fact that one was rebelling against an oppressor and the other was an oppressor. As for Hjalti being the last to find it, what exactly does it mean?

Tbh, all the events that happened in Hjalti's empire (according to the Brief History of the Empire, the Second and Third Era timeline), and the stuff related to Alessia and Reman make me take all of the Imperial beliefs with a full plate of salt. No other culture in Tamriel, not even the Nords with their love for metaphors and exaggerations, doesn't have as much propaganda as the Imps have.

If anything, judging by Hjalti's apparent attitude in Arcturian Heresy, he himself didn't understand or support Lorkhan's ideas and just wanted as much power as possible. He probably went along with the whole thing just because he liked the idea of being an emperor. His behavior in The Real Barenziah contributes to this image as well.

I don’t know Thori, you make it sound like the CoC had a haircut or put on a pair of glasses like he's Clark Kent :D  I agree about becoming a different version of yourself, a new you so to speak, but I don’t think it’s something we have an irl equivalent for. Like, I could potentially change genders but I’d still be me. I think this is something far more extreme, you know? To be reborn and come out different with just the memory of who you were. Back to Sheogorath, the way he describes the events of TES IV is not how my CoC would have described it… but it’s definitely how Sheogorath would phrase it. So we can see the memory is there but little else, same with Malacath. So I think it is literally he stopped being the CoC and became somebody else – The mad god.

Good point about Vivec and Hjalti, although to be fair it was Talos who attained CHIM. So to say Hjalti achieved CHIM is as true as saying Wulfharth did or that Arctus did ;) So perhaps it’s more accurate to say Vivec can only be Vivec while Talos can only be Talos.

Truthfully, and after playing through that dialogue with Seht a few times now and watching it many more times on YT, the dialogue with Sotha Sil at the end makes the CWC dlc for me - I find it utterly perfect. I can’t help but think it serves as an emotional need fulfilled, too. Sil specifically asks us to join him at the Elegiac Replication, a place that seems to be an elegy to truth and regret. It’s like, Sotha Sil is the ultimate fatalist. He rejects cause and effect to a certain degree, and his dialogue to us feels pretty meta-game in that he appears to be very conscious of the idea that everything that has happened is because it must in order for that moment to happen. He talks about people being bound by their nature, how he holds no anger towards Almalexia and is regretful but accepting of the deeds each of them have done. I think in a very real way he is talking about what they did having to happen because it must happen because they are fictional characters. Sil seems so close to understanding the nature of reality in regards to TES.

He goes on to talk about the various fictions and mythologies surrounding the Warrior Poet and how Vivec has become so adapt at creating fiction he can blur the line between what is real and what is not that he has learned how to break that boundary. Sil tells us Vivec both does and does not believe his own tales. But no matter what he does or how he spins it, Vivec can only be Vivec. I really think he means that in a meta context, that Vivec cannot escape the past or the fact he is as bound by the dictates of the overall narrative story as Seht himself is. The dialogue appears to be a refutation of the idea of Vivec attaining CHIM. Cleverly and what adds to the perfection of the piece in my eyes, is that Sotha Sil might be the unreliable narrator in this exchange. He is so close to understanding the nature of reality as we the player (not our characters) does to the point he can almost talk directly to us. Ultimately, though, he falls short of that appreciation whereas Vivec doesn’t. Or maybe Sil knows it all too well and that is the wellspring of the deep sorrow within him.

Regarding the MK categories, I didn’t mean how you categorised them but how TIL seems to which is where I go for them :) They’ll put complete and explanatory material under “texts” but many of the other things which you describe as “because I said so” are in the “forum posts” category. So I just meant that there is often a gulf of difference between a well thought-out piece of writing to a quick response in a discussion forum. That might explain why some things come across the way they do while others seem more in-keeping with what we recognise. Sometimes he might be teasing, sometimes he might be being enigmatic for the sake of a discussion – it’s hard to know the shared, collective emotion when removed from the moment. Also and iirc, he and Kurt Kuhlmann were working on their own project at the time of TES III's development. I think the guys at Bethesda were like, "just incoporate it into our project." That might explain why there seems this disparity at times. Kuhlmann is still there as far as I know.

In regards to Lorkhan, Talos and how the actions of the latter mirror pre-convention (sorry, can’t quote due to being in work), I don’t think we can look at it in a 1:1 basis as a checkbox exercise. Mantling requires a specific set of things that need doing, but in this context I think those things need to share thematic and mythic similarities rather than “well Lorkhan never founded an empire so how is it similar?” More emotion, less logic if you get me. What things do both stories have in common? What themes are present in both? There’s a sense of fulfilment when the empire is formed and successfully unites all of Tamriel, finally men and mer are united under one banner and can consider each other equals. There’s a sense that what started way back in the Dawn has finally moved forward.

You rightly point out that Orsinium wasn’t part of the empire as an independent Province (I’m not counting Pyandonea as it’s a separate continent like Akavir), but it was part of High Rock, itself a separate Province within the empire. I’m not sure why the empire didn’t see fit to include the orcs, they had been part of the empire before during Reman’s day.

I’m out of time. Thanks for the sources :) Yet I still see nothing to indiacate he "murdered millions" or even hundreds of thousands. In fact, there's nothing telling me what this super weapon actually does. Thoughts?

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

I don’t know Thori, you make it sound like the CoC had a haircut or put on a pair of glasses like he's Clark Kent :D  I agree about becoming a different version of yourself, a new you so to speak, but I don’t think it’s something we have an irl equivalent for. Like, I could potentially change genders but I’d still be me. I think this is something far more extreme, you know? To be reborn and come out different with just the memory of who you were. Back to Sheogorath, the way he describes the events of TES IV is not how my CoC would have described it… but it’s definitely how Sheogorath would phrase it. So we can see the memory is there but little else, same with Malacath. So I think it is literally he stopped being the CoC and became somebody else – The mad god.

[/blockquote]

I think there are RL equivalents. I'd say every traumatic event that can happen to a person can be counted as such, to some extent. But most of all, amnesia. When one loses the memory of being himself, doesn't know how it feels or how it should feel to be himself, yet, is still himself.

With Sheogorath, as I said, it's assuming a role that is greater than yourself. The role overshadows the personality to the point where it's almost nonexistent. However, it still doesn't mean that he becomes someone else. He becomes a version of himself that is the mad god.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

Good point about Vivec and Hjalti, although to be fair it was Talos who attained CHIM. So to say Hjalti achieved CHIM is as true as saying Wulfharth did or that Arctus did ;) So perhaps it’s more accurate to say Vivec can only be Vivec while Talos can only be Talos.

[/blockquote]

Talos IS Hjalti. Whatever propaganda he might spread to shape the people's opinion of him, the truth remains. Also, Wulfharth/Zurin merged entity lived longer than Hjalti, so I don't see where this idea that they all three merged together stems from.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

Truthfully, and after playing through that dialogue with Seht a few times now and watching it many more times on YT, the dialogue with Sotha Sil at the end makes the CWC dlc for me - I find it utterly perfect. I can’t help but think it serves as an emotional need fulfilled, too. Sil specifically asks us to join him at the Elegiac Replication, a place that seems to be an elegy to truth and regret. It’s like, Sotha Sil is the ultimate fatalist. He rejects cause and effect to a certain degree, and his dialogue to us feels pretty meta-game in that he appears to be very conscious of the idea that everything that has happened is because it must in order for that moment to happen. He talks about people being bound by their nature, how he holds no anger towards Almalexia and is regretful but accepting of the deeds each of them have done. I think in a very real way he is talking about what they did having to happen because it must happen because they are fictional characters. Sil seems so close to understanding the nature of reality in regards to TES.

He goes on to talk about the various fictions and mythologies surrounding the Warrior Poet and how Vivec has become so adapt at creating fiction he can blur the line between what is real and what is not that he has learned how to break that boundary. Sil tells us Vivec both does and does not believe his own tales. But no matter what he does or how he spins it, Vivec can only be Vivec. I really think he means that in a meta context, that Vivec cannot escape the past or the fact he is as bound by the dictates of the overall narrative story as Seht himself is. The dialogue appears to be a refutation of the idea of Vivec attaining CHIM. Cleverly and what adds to the perfection of the piece in my eyes, is that Sotha Sil might be the unreliable narrator in this exchange. He is so close to understanding the nature of reality as we the player (not our characters) does to the point he can almost talk directly to us. Ultimately, though, he falls short of that appreciation whereas Vivec doesn’t. Or maybe Sil knows it all too well and that is the wellspring of the deep sorrow within him.

[/blockquote]

I totally love Sotha, he is the coolest guy in the whole of TES. He is the ultimate seer, and as such, he can't not be a fatalist. When one can see the mechanics of how things work, one inevitably would see everyone, including oneself, sort of as fictional characters. I don't think he rejects cause and effect, it's more like he understands how things work on a higher level and sees the cause that is behind causes and the effect that goes beyond effects. He understands things instead of just feeling them, and that, imo, makes him a much more reliable narrator than anyone else out there.

If anything, aren't we all bound by our nature and many many other things just like fictional characters?

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

Regarding the MK categories, I didn’t mean how you categorised them but how TIL seems to which is where I go for them :) They’ll put complete and explanatory material under “texts” but many of the other things which you describe as “because I said so” are in the “forum posts” category. So I just meant that there is often a gulf of difference between a well thought-out piece of writing to a quick response in a discussion forum. That might explain why some things come across the way they do while others seem more in-keeping with what we recognise. Sometimes he might be teasing, sometimes he might be being enigmatic for the sake of a discussion – it’s hard to know the shared, collective emotion when removed from the moment. Also and iirc, he and Kurt Kuhlmann were working on their own project at the time of TES III's development. I think the guys at Bethesda were like, "just incoporate it into our project." That might explain why there seems this disparity at times. Kuhlmann is still there as far as I know.

[/blockquote]

Umm... you know... I may be a blonde, but my IQ is not 60. I can tell the difference between a standalone text and a part of a discussion. Also, as a person who writes stories (however shitty they are), I know how one's perception of one's own story can change. Not to mention that two people can see the same story in a completely different light, even if they discuss it.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

In regards to Lorkhan, Talos and how the actions of the latter mirror pre-convention (sorry, can’t quote due to being in work), I don’t think we can look at it in a 1:1 basis as a checkbox exercise. Mantling requires a specific set of things that need doing, but in this context I think those things need to share thematic and mythic similarities rather than “well Lorkhan never founded an empire so how is it similar?” More emotion, less logic if you get me. What things do both stories have in common? What themes are present in both? There’s a sense of fulfilment when the empire is formed and successfully unites all of Tamriel, finally men and mer are united under one banner and can consider each other equals. There’s a sense that what started way back in the Dawn has finally moved forward.

[/blockquote]

This is a very subjective point of view. Do you realize that what gives you a sense of fulfillment, someone else can perceive with a sense of loss and despair? You say united under one banner, I say subjugated under one tyranny, stripped of their traditions and forced into a corrupted destructive system. It all depends on the perspective.

I guess that is what both stories have in common. All cool for some and a prison for others.

Sorry but "more emotions less logic" is not a way I would ever go. Facts tell the truth, emotions deceive. It's the way that every propaganda stands on. Let myself be blinded and manipulated? No, thanks. 

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

You rightly point out that Orsinium wasn’t part of the empire as an independent Province (I’m not counting Pyandonea as it’s a separate continent like Akavir), but it was part of High Rock, itself a separate Province within the empire. I’m not sure why the empire didn’t see fit to include the orcs, they had been part of the empire before during Reman’s day.

[/blockquote]

Pyandonea is a continent? I've always thought it was an archipelago, not unlike Summerset Isles. As for why Hjalti didn't see fit to include the Orcs, maybe this is why:

"So the One teaches us. We must unite against the malicious and the brutish, the miscreated -- the Orcs, trolls, goblins, and other worse creatures -- and not strive against one another." This is what he says in The Real Barenziah. Apparently, in Hjalti's eyes, Orcs stand in the same row with goblins and trolls.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

I’m out of time. Thanks for the sources :) Yet I still see nothing to indiacate he "murdered millions" or even hundreds of thousands. In fact, there's nothing telling me what this super weapon actually does. Thoughts?

[/blockquote]

Time is always in shortage))

Well, whatever it technically does, it's doubtlessly something horrible. The siege of Alinor that lasted 1 hour is the biggest implication. All of the Imperial army wasn't enough to conquer Alinor, yet, the Numidium somehow did it in 1 hour. Then the fact that "Talos, he "annexed" a swath of our bounty-land in Ana'quinal and cleared the Khajiiti out by force. There's where he built the Hall of Colossus - a mighty name for a secret testing warehouse - and that's where Big Walker was born. And that's why that part of our Elsweyr is still poisoned glow-rock, where no cats go." Idk about you, but this sounds a lot like nuclear stuff to me. And finally that battle at Stros M'Kai that according to the PGE was "the bloodiest massacre in history". Judging by the fact that it was a small part that remained from the Crown army against the army of the Empire AND a dragon, so there's little doubt about which of the sides was massacred there.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/JusticiarThorien]Justiciar Thorien[/url] said:[/b]

Talos IS Hjalti. Whatever propaganda he might spread to shape the people's opinion of him, the truth remains. Also, Wulfharth/Zurin merged entity lived longer than Hjalti, so I don't see where this idea that they all three merged together stems from.

[/blockquote]

Is is me or are we just going around in circles now? :D Talos Is Hjalti, true. Yet Talos Is Wulfharth and Arctus, too. The concept of merging stems from the 36 Lessons. Throughout the sermons there are sentences like, "Six are the walking ways, from enigma to enemy to teacher." These walking ways are paths to transcendence. In the Lessons they crop up and can be obscure unless you're already familiar with other concepts, such as:

At which Vivec spoke aloud, 'Boethiah-who-is-you wore the skin of Trinimac to cleanse the faults of Veloth, my Queen, and so it should be again. This is the walking way of the glorious.'

So that's potentially mantling, the fourth walking way, or maybe the first way - prolix tower.

The idea of souls merging is most visible in the sixth walking way:

Each of the aspects of the ALMSIVI then rose up together, combining as one, and showed the world the sixth path

I think the best thing to do is to go through the sermons and find where these things are mentioned and the description of them, then use oog sources to find out a bit more. So in the instance of the fourth walking way, one oog source from MK says:

The Stormcrown manted by way of the fourth: the steps of the dead. Mantling and incarnation are separate roads; do not mistake this. The latter is built from the cobbles of drawn-bone destiny. The former: walk like them until they must walk like you. This is the death children bring as the Sons of Hora."

It's not quite as simple as that, though. The Stormcrown appears to be Mantling Wulfharth, but in the Talos event we also have some tonal architecture going on, we have the dragon break going on, and we have this enantiomorph going on which results in the sixth walking way and souls fusing together. Lots of different ways to change reality. By and large it's detective work - you don't need to play for long before you wonder at the lack of sources. People play TES V and ask themselves whether Talos is a god or not, and in answering that question come across the lore-hole, or absence of sources. The same thing happens when players pursue the question of what happened to the Dwemer - soon there comes a point in which in-game sources dry up or become too hard to follow. That sort of detective work then requires a certain degree of acceptance. Like, in the absence of a source, any source then becomes a possibility. "Eliminate the impossible. Whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/JusticiarThorien]Justiciar Thorien[/url] said:[/b]

I totally love Sotha, he is the coolest guy in the whole of TES. He is the ultimate seer, and as such, he can't not be a fatalist. When one can see the mechanics of how things work, one inevitably would see everyone, including oneself, sort of as fictional characters. I don't think he rejects cause and effect, it's more like he understands how things work on a higher level and sees the cause that is behind causes and the effect that goes beyond effects. He understands things instead of just feeling them, and that, imo, makes him a much more reliable narrator than anyone else out there.

If anything, aren't we all bound by our nature and many many other things just like fictional characters?

[/blockquote]

Well I do too! :D However, I also bear in mind he is a total dick, too. For him the end justifies the means and the fact everything is pre-ordained excuses him. "Oh, but I had to break my oath and betray and murder my friend and captain Indoril Nerevar. I hd to carry out those sick experiments and put my friends Llothis, Felms, and Olms into big, mechanical monstrocities. The truth is that my actions, both good and evil, are inevitable. Locked in time."

He's totally reliable in that he is the mouth of exposition and is giving the player closure and also telling us what is going to happen next. Yet he's unreliable because he presents the truth as he sees it, and conveniently, can't tell us exactly what is going on despite earlier telling us "I bear the cruel weight of certainty. Total, absolute, relentless certainty." I think it's all rather brilliant.

So yeah, I think we are all bound by our natures to an extent. With TES, though, those natures - our AE - can be changed. The Hero or Prisoner has the freedom to be whatever they want at any time, while others can change their AE through actions. Our CoC takes on the Mad God's AE and so we become the Mad God, for example.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/JusticiarThorien]Justiciar Thorien[/url] said:[/b]

Umm... you know... I may be a blonde, but my IQ is not 60. I can tell the difference between a standalone text and a part of a discussion. Also, as a person who writes stories (however shitty they are), I know how one's perception of one's own story can change. Not to mention that two people can see the same story in a completely different light, even if they discuss it.

[/blockquote]

I didn't mean to imply you were thick, was just trying to address this thing you said: "Yet, nothing in the actual game lore supports it directly or otherwise. It's a statement that cannot be proved either right or wrong, so on what basis should I believe it and accept it as a part of lore? Just because MK said so? Well, sorry, but this is not enough for me."

So sometimes what he says can be verified or is fully fleshed-out such as the Psijic Endeavour, other times what he says are just soundbites in the form of forum posts. It's down to you if you accept or reject, but often rejection leaves you with no source at all. In the absence of an in-game source, we go for the most reliable oog source. Imo that is better than nothing at all.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/JusticiarThorien]Justiciar Thorien[/url] said:[/b]

This is a very subjective point of view. Do you realize that what gives you a sense of fulfillment, someone else can perceive with a sense of loss and despair? You say united under one banner, I say subjugated under one tyranny, stripped of their traditions and forced into a corrupted destructive system. It all depends on the perspective.

I guess that is what both stories have in common. All cool for some and a prison for others.

Sorry but "more emotions less logic" is not a way I would ever go. Facts tell the truth, emotions deceive. It's the way that every propaganda stands on. Let myself be blinded and manipulated? No, thanks.

[/blockquote]

Of course I totally get that. The merish and Yokudan myths of creation express that sense of loss and despair and, indeed, seem to be gospel truth to you. I admit I'm biased towards the opposite and I lose patience with Altmeri philosophy very quickly. They chose to isolate themselves, think they're better than everyone, believe their traditions are better and more truthful than anyone else... Yet it all can be proven utter bullshit. One thing I can't verify is that Lorkhan's intent with the creation of the world was to have segregation so I chose to believe he didn't want that. The Altmer apparently do, and while I respect their wishes, I think they lose more than they gain from that.

Talos, then, echoes Lorkhan's actions: Lorkhan tricked, forced or convinced all these et'ada to join him in making the world. Talos tricked, forced or convinced all these body politics to join his empire. Thematically similar actions with the same emotional resonance.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/JusticiarThorien]Justiciar Thorien[/url] said:[/b]

Time is always in shortage))

Well, whatever it technically does, it's doubtlessly something horrible. The siege of Alinor that lasted 1 hour is the biggest implication. All of the Imperial army wasn't enough to conquer Alinor, yet, the Numidium somehow did it in 1 hour. Then the fact that "Talos, he "annexed" a swath of our bounty-land in Ana'quinal and cleared the Khajiiti out by force. There's where he built the Hall of Colossus - a mighty name for a secret testing warehouse - and that's where Big Walker was born. And that's why that part of our Elsweyr is still poisoned glow-rock, where no cats go." Idk about you, but this sounds a lot like nuclear stuff to me. And finally that battle at Stros M'Kai that according to the PGE was "the bloodiest massacre in history". Judging by the fact that it was a small part that remained from the Crown army against the army of the Empire AND a dragon, so there's little doubt about which of the sides was massacred there.

[/blockquote]

Indeed it is. I've just done 56 hours and stayed up very late to watch the ESO: Elsweyr reveal. Am vtired :D

I know those sources. My point was to show you that lore-hole. We can rif from it and make leaps of deductive reasoning, and can challenge each other on those leaps, but sometimes explaining how those leaps happen in our minds is hard to articulate. To you it makes total sense Walk-Brass left such a staggering number of golden corpses, each glistening beneath Alinor's sun that the elves had to submit. You go as far as to put a number on the dead. But we cannot quantify that number. The emperor's intent wasn't to destroy but to conquer. I have no doubt that if destruction was the intent that Walk Brass could do it in short order. There is no doubt at all that it could have devastated Summerset, and truly is a horrific thing to exist. Yet it wasn't used for the purpose of destruction alone. Overwhelming force was demonstrated, in the face of which the Altmer pissed their pants.

Similar with PGE's description of the Battle of Stros M'Kai. I can't fault your reasoning but am confused as to how you go about choosing what to ignore and what to accept. The full story according to that source is that the Crowns licked the Forebears, the Forebears retaliated, then the Crowns under Prince A'tor went on such a massive offensive that the Forebears asked the Imperials for help. The combined might of the Forebears and Imperials crushed the Crowns in what is the bloodiest massacre in Redguard history. Yet you sympathise with the Crowns for that defeat and vilify the Forebears and the Empire despite the source indicating the Crowns started it? I shake my head at the waste of life, but it's hard to sympathise with the Crowns going by that source alone.

It was a civil war, the empire shrewdly joined the side of the Forebears in order to gain Hammerfell for the empire. Ironically, it was the actions of another Hero, Cyrus the Redguard, who secured ultimate victory for the Crown faction and forced a new treaty on the empire, a treaty which allowed Hammerfell to operate as an independent province within the empire much like Morrowind.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

Is is me or are we just going around in circles now? :D Talos Is Hjalti, true. Yet Talos Is Wulfharth and Arctus, too. The concept of merging stems from the 36 Lessons. Throughout the sermons there are sentences like, "Six are the walking ways, from enigma to enemy to teacher." These walking ways are paths to transcendence. In the Lessons they crop up and can be obscure unless you're already familiar with other concepts, such as:

At which Vivec spoke aloud, 'Boethiah-who-is-you wore the skin of Trinimac to cleanse the faults of Veloth, my Queen, and so it should be again. This is the walking way of the glorious.'

So that's potentially mantling, the fourth walking way, or maybe the first way - prolix tower.

The idea of souls merging is most visible in the sixth walking way:

Each of the aspects of the ALMSIVI then rose up together, combining as one, and showed the world the sixth path

I think the best thing to do is to go through the sermons and find where these things are mentioned and the description of them, then use oog sources to find out a bit more. So in the instance of the fourth walking way, one oog source from MK says:

The Stormcrown manted by way of the fourth: the steps of the dead. Mantling and incarnation are separate roads; do not mistake this. The latter is built from the cobbles of drawn-bone destiny. The former: walk like them until they must walk like you. This is the death children bring as the Sons of Hora."

It's not quite as simple as that, though. The Stormcrown appears to be Mantling Wulfharth, but in the Talos event we also have some tonal architecture going on, we have the dragon break going on, and we have this enantiomorph going on which results in the sixth walking way and souls fusing together. Lots of different ways to change reality. By and large it's detective work - you don't need to play for long before you wonder at the lack of sources. People play TES V and ask themselves whether Talos is a god or not, and in answering that question come across the lore-hole, or absence of sources. The same thing happens when players pursue the question of what happened to the Dwemer - soon there comes a point in which in-game sources dry up or become too hard to follow. That sort of detective work then requires a certain degree of acceptance. Like, in the absence of a source, any source then becomes a possibility. "Eliminate the impossible. Whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

[/blockquote]

I actually went and reread 36 lessons of Vivec (such a nice piece of propaganda, Hjalti apparently learned his art of propaganda from Vivec). Not once is there any mention of any entities (even the Almsivi) merging into one entity. The Almsivi are said to have "combined as one" because their divine power is combined, not themselves as entities. They are three different people, never ever had they merged into one in any way, they are not any sort of "oversoul" or anything. So why would you assume that happening with Hjalti, Wulfie and Zurin, I have no slightest idea.

The Dragon Break is what allows several versions of one event to happen at the same time, but where is it said that it also allows events that never happened t all to become real as if they happened (such as various propaganda)? I don't find any implications of it.

And what does tonal architecture to do with this? Isn't it the technology that (implemented by the Numidium) created the Dragon Break? Other than that, what else does it do? The way you say it, it sounds a lot like "ah, you know, it all happened by magic". Which means only that there is no sensible explanation and no logic behind it.

The whole mantling mechanic, this "walk like them until they walk like you" is basically the change of an aspect. It starts with the same thing that happens with Sheogorath and the CoC, and then goes further and changes the aspect. As if the CoC, instead of becoming the mad god, replaced the aspect of the mad god with something else. Which Hjalti seems to have done. He didn't become the god of change instead of Lorkhan, he replaced Lorkhan's aspect with his own.

And still, no evidence of any oversoul thing.

The 36 lessons give an understanding of whaat is the difference between the actual divine power and CHIM, and how the latter grants you the former. It is very evidentthaat these things don't just happen by magic. Also, it's very evident that the 36 lessons are a tale, and nothing of the events described in them happened the way it is described. No Draagon Brek has anything to do with it.

Yes, there are waays to change reality, but those ways still work within certain laws, not just any way you want. 

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

Well I do too! :D However, I also bear in mind he is a total dick, too. For him the end justifies the means and the fact everything is pre-ordained excuses him. "Oh, but I had to break my oath and betray and murder my friend and captain Indoril Nerevar. I hd to carry out those sick experiments and put my friends Llothis, Felms, and Olms into big, mechanical monstrocities. The truth is that my actions, both good and evil, are inevitable. Locked in time."

He's totally reliable in that he is the mouth of exposition and is giving the player closure and also telling us what is going to happen next. Yet he's unreliable because he presents the truth as he sees it, and conveniently, can't tell us exactly what is going on despite earlier telling us "I bear the cruel weight of certainty. Total, absolute, relentless certainty." I think it's all rather brilliant.

So yeah, I think we are all bound by our natures to an extent. With TES, though, those natures - our AE - can be changed. The Hero or Prisoner has the freedom to be whatever they want at any time, while others can change their AE through actions. Our CoC takes on the Mad God's AE and so we become the Mad God, for example.

[/blockquote]

I don't see how being a dick makes him a lesser seer. His mindset, by the way, also stems from him being a seer, because he obviously has fallen into one of the two most typical traps any seer might fall into. The end justifies the mean for him because he sees all the events as if they already happened and has accepted them, even as a part of him feels sad.

His inability to tell us what is going on is also a thing that can happen to a seer. Seers, even such great ones as him, don't see every single little detail of everything that happens in every moment. They know only certain key things. To some extent, it's always guess work. He may have a total, absolute and relentless certainty and complete understanding of what he knows, but he cannot know every little detaail of everything. No one can. But he still understands more than anyone else out there.

In TES, you can jump from your AE into another established AE, anon archetype (like Sheogorath). But that wouldn't turn you into the original person who established that archetype. Archetypes, even the most detailed ones, have some room for diversity though.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

I didn't mean to imply you were thick, was just trying to address this thing you said: "Yet, nothing in the actual game lore supports it directly or otherwise. It's a statement that cannot be proved either right or wrong, so on what basis should I believe it and accept it as a part of lore? Just because MK said so? Well, sorry, but this is not enough for me."

So sometimes what he says can be verified or is fully fleshed-out such as the Psijic Endeavour, other times what he says are just soundbites in the form of forum posts. It's down to you if you accept or reject, but often rejection leaves you with no source at all. In the absence of an in-game source, we go for the most reliable oog source. Imo that is better than nothing at all.

[/blockquote]

I've never sought an answer to the question if Pelly had wandered under Alessia's door in the middle of a rainy night or if he appeared before her out of the thin air, surrounded by lightnings like good old Arnie. So the statement that he was a cyborg from the future doesn't fill any gap in the lore for me, because there was no gap in the first place. It's more like J.K. Rowling saying that Dumbledore was gay, a thing that never was relevant to the story.

Some of his forum posts are relevant to the story, and they do make sense. But the ones I am talking about, they can be easily replaced with another statement, changing the whole context, and still not be supported or contradicted by anything in the lore. Which makes them "'cause I say so" explanations. So, basically, this leaves us with a choice: try to deduce our own explanation using the in-game sources and our minds, or accept his, even though there doesn't seem to be logic behind them. I trust logic other authority, so I choose the former.  

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

Of course I totally get that. The merish and Yokudan myths of creation express that sense of loss and despair and, indeed, seem to be gospel truth to you. I admit I'm biased towards the opposite and I lose patience with Altmeri philosophy very quickly. They chose to isolate themselves, think they're better than everyone, believe their traditions are better and more truthful than anyone else... Yet it all can be proven utter bullshit. One thing I can't verify is that Lorkhan's intent with the creation of the world was to have segregation so I chose to believe he didn't want that. The Altmer apparently do, and while I respect their wishes, I think they lose more than they gain from that.

Talos, then, echoes Lorkhan's actions: Lorkhan tricked, forced or convinced all these et'ada to join him in making the world. Talos tricked, forced or convinced all these body politics to join his empire. Thematically similar actions with the same emotional resonance.

[/blockquote]

Lol, nothing is gospel truth to me. All the creation myths tell the same story, only the connotations differ. No matter what version of creation myth I read, I tend to relate to the same side every time. I guess I'm biased too, because the Altmeri worldview is the closest to my own. I'm not saying they are perfect or without flaws, but in my eyes they are more right than anybody else out there. No matter how many times I try to look at things from the Nord/Imp perspective, I start getting disappointed and annoyed by it very quickly. Their (willing!) ignorance, their inability to think in the long perspective, their mindset based on the authority of the strong, their tendency to thoughtlessly throw away the things of real value for momentary whims, all this and much more doesn't let me relate to their worldview. Each attempt to try on the dhoes of such fellow makes me feel soiled. Can't help it.

We, yes, Talos echoes Lorkhan's actions, but he still doesn't take Lorkhan's aspect. He is not the god of change. No one thinks of him as such, no one associates him with that aspect. Instead, he is associated with the empire and human superiority. By worshipping Talos you don't give power to Lorkhan's aspect, so the two are still separate deities.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

Indeed it is. I've just done 56 hours and stayed up very late to watch the ESO: Elsweyr reveal. Am vtired :D

I know those sources. My point was to show you that lore-hole. We can rif from it and make leaps of deductive reasoning, and can challenge each other on those leaps, but sometimes explaining how those leaps happen in our minds is hard to articulate. To you it makes total sense Walk-Brass left such a staggering number of golden corpses, each glistening beneath Alinor's sun that the elves had to submit. You go as far as to put a number on the dead. But we cannot quantify that number. The emperor's intent wasn't to destroy but to conquer. I have no doubt that if destruction was the intent that Walk Brass could do it in short order. There is no doubt at all that it could have devastated Summerset, and truly is a horrific thing to exist. Yet it wasn't used for the purpose of destruction alone. Overwhelming force was demonstrated, in the face of which the Altmer pissed their pants.

[/blockquote]

This week the company where I work was moving to a new office, and guess who was in charge of all the logistics. Not to mention packing all the things. So every day of this week I would return home at midnight or later. Now I feel like a zombie and everything hurts from hauling boxes and desks.

I wonder how exactly you can demonstrate destructive power of something without doing st least dome destruction with it. I really doubt that anyone would believe Hjalti if he just showed them the Numidium and told them a tale of how powerful it is. The number is irrelevant, if he killed 10 Altmer it's still murder.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

Similar with PGE's description of the Battle of Stros M'Kai. I can't fault your reasoning but am confused as to how you go about choosing what to ignore and what to accept. The full story according to that source is that the Crowns licked the Forebears, the Forebears retaliated, then the Crowns under Prince A'tor went on such a massive offensive that the Forebears asked the Imperials for help. The combined might of the Forebears and Imperials crushed the Crowns in what is the bloodiest massacre in Redguard history. Yet you sympathise with the Crowns for that defeat and vilify the Forebears and the Empire despite the source indicating the Crowns started it? I shake my head at the waste of life, but it's hard to sympathise with the Crowns going by that source alone.

It was a civil war, the empire shrewdly joined the side of the Forebears in order to gain Hammerfell for the empire. Ironically, it was the actions of another Hero, Cyrus the Redguard, who secured ultimate victory for the Crown faction and forced a new treaty on the empire, a treaty which allowed Hammerfell to operate as an independent province within the empire much like Morrowind.

[/blockquote]

When I read an in-game book, I take into account not only te data in the book itself, but also who is the author. And also, I try to look at the events in the bigger perspective. So in the case of the Crowns and the Forebears, I don't see it as a matter of who started the first. It was a civil war between the rightful rulers (the Crowns) and a rebellious faction (the Forebears). Then the Forebears saw that they can't win, and relinquished the freedom of their people in order to win the war, by inviting the Empire to do it for them. And the Empire, a greater force than either of the two factions, crushed the Crowns in what was the bloodiest massacre of the Redguard history.

It looks like a situation when a 5-year-old kid took a toy from another 5-year-old kid, and then the latter kid called a 13-year-old who beat the first kid to half-death and took the toy for himself. Hard to sympathise with the second kid, tbh.

And Cyrus definitely was a nice fellow to his people. Strangely, no one says he was a Shezarrine. Or does someone?

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/JusticiarThorien]Justiciar Thorien[/url] said:[/b]

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

Is is me or are we just going around in circles now? :D Talos Is Hjalti, true. Yet Talos Is Wulfharth and Arctus, too. The concept of merging stems from the 36 Lessons. Throughout the sermons there are sentences like, "Six are the walking ways, from enigma to enemy to teacher." These walking ways are paths to transcendence. In the Lessons they crop up and can be obscure unless you're already familiar with other concepts, such as:

At which Vivec spoke aloud, 'Boethiah-who-is-you wore the skin of Trinimac to cleanse the faults of Veloth, my Queen, and so it should be again. This is the walking way of the glorious.'

So that's potentially mantling, the fourth walking way, or maybe the first way - prolix tower.

The idea of souls merging is most visible in the sixth walking way:

Each of the aspects of the ALMSIVI then rose up together, combining as one, and showed the world the sixth path

I think the best thing to do is to go through the sermons and find where these things are mentioned and the description of them, then use oog sources to find out a bit more. So in the instance of the fourth walking way, one oog source from MK says:

The Stormcrown manted by way of the fourth: the steps of the dead. Mantling and incarnation are separate roads; do not mistake this. The latter is built from the cobbles of drawn-bone destiny. The former: walk like them until they must walk like you. This is the death children bring as the Sons of Hora."

It's not quite as simple as that, though. The Stormcrown appears to be Mantling Wulfharth, but in the Talos event we also have some tonal architecture going on, we have the dragon break going on, and we have this enantiomorph going on which results in the sixth walking way and souls fusing together. Lots of different ways to change reality. By and large it's detective work - you don't need to play for long before you wonder at the lack of sources. People play TES V and ask themselves whether Talos is a god or not, and in answering that question come across the lore-hole, or absence of sources. The same thing happens when players pursue the question of what happened to the Dwemer - soon there comes a point in which in-game sources dry up or become too hard to follow. That sort of detective work then requires a certain degree of acceptance. Like, in the absence of a source, any source then becomes a possibility. "Eliminate the impossible. Whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

[/blockquote]

I actually went and reread 36 lessons of Vivec (such a nice piece of propaganda, Hjalti apparently learned his art of propaganda from Vivec). Not once is there any mention of any entities (even the Almsivi) merging into one entity. The Almsivi are said to have "combined as one" because their divine power is combined, not themselves as entities. They are three different people, never ever had they merged into one in any way, they are not any sort of "oversoul" or anything. So why would you assume that happening with Hjalti, Wulfie and Zurin, I have no slightest idea.

The Dragon Break is what allows several versions of one event to happen at the same time, but where is it said that it also allows events that never happened t all to become real as if they happened (such as various propaganda)? I don't find any implications of it.

And what does tonal architecture to do with this? Isn't it the technology that (implemented by the Numidium) created the Dragon Break? Other than that, what else does it do? The way you say it, it sounds a lot like "ah, you know, it all happened by magic". Which means only that there is no sensible explanation and no logic behind it.

The whole mantling mechanic, this "walk like them until they walk like you" is basically the change of an aspect. It starts with the same thing that happens with Sheogorath and the CoC, and then goes further and changes the aspect. As if the CoC, instead of becoming the mad god, replaced the aspect of the mad god with something else. Which Hjalti seems to have done. He didn't become the god of change instead of Lorkhan, he replaced Lorkhan's aspect with his own.

And still, no evidence of any oversoul thing.

The 36 lessons give an understanding of whaat is the difference between the actual divine power and CHIM, and how the latter grants you the former. It is very evidentthaat these things don't just happen by magic. Also, it's very evident that the 36 lessons are a tale, and nothing of the events described in them happened the way it is described. No Draagon Brek has anything to do with it.

Yes, there are waays to change reality, but those ways still work within certain laws, not just any way you want. 

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

Well I do too! :D However, I also bear in mind he is a total dick, too. For him the end justifies the means and the fact everything is pre-ordained excuses him. "Oh, but I had to break my oath and betray and murder my friend and captain Indoril Nerevar. I hd to carry out those sick experiments and put my friends Llothis, Felms, and Olms into big, mechanical monstrocities. The truth is that my actions, both good and evil, are inevitable. Locked in time."

He's totally reliable in that he is the mouth of exposition and is giving the player closure and also telling us what is going to happen next. Yet he's unreliable because he presents the truth as he sees it, and conveniently, can't tell us exactly what is going on despite earlier telling us "I bear the cruel weight of certainty. Total, absolute, relentless certainty." I think it's all rather brilliant.

So yeah, I think we are all bound by our natures to an extent. With TES, though, those natures - our AE - can be changed. The Hero or Prisoner has the freedom to be whatever they want at any time, while others can change their AE through actions. Our CoC takes on the Mad God's AE and so we become the Mad God, for example.

[/blockquote]

I don't see how being a dick makes him a lesser seer. His mindset, by the way, also stems from him being a seer, because he obviously has fallen into one of the two most typical traps any seer might fall into. The end justifies the mean for him because he sees all the events as if they already happened and has accepted them, even as a part of him feels sad.

His inability to tell us what is going on is also a thing that can happen to a seer. Seers, even such great ones as him, don't see every single little detail of everything that happens in every moment. They know only certain key things. To some extent, it's always guess work. He may have a total, absolute and relentless certainty and complete understanding of what he knows, but he cannot know every little detaail of everything. No one can. But he still understands more than anyone else out there.

In TES, you can jump from your AE into another established AE, anon archetype (like Sheogorath). But that wouldn't turn you into the original person who established that archetype. Archetypes, even the most detailed ones, have some room for diversity though.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

I didn't mean to imply you were thick, was just trying to address this thing you said: "Yet, nothing in the actual game lore supports it directly or otherwise. It's a statement that cannot be proved either right or wrong, so on what basis should I believe it and accept it as a part of lore? Just because MK said so? Well, sorry, but this is not enough for me."

So sometimes what he says can be verified or is fully fleshed-out such as the Psijic Endeavour, other times what he says are just soundbites in the form of forum posts. It's down to you if you accept or reject, but often rejection leaves you with no source at all. In the absence of an in-game source, we go for the most reliable oog source. Imo that is better than nothing at all.

[/blockquote]

I've never sought an answer to the question if Pelly had wandered under Alessia's door in the middle of a rainy night or if he appeared before her out of the thin air, surrounded by lightnings like good old Arnie. So the statement that he was a cyborg from the future doesn't fill any gap in the lore for me, because there was no gap in the first place. It's more like J.K. Rowling saying that Dumbledore was gay, a thing that never was relevant to the story.

Some of his forum posts are relevant to the story, and they do make sense. But the ones I am talking about, they can be easily replaced with another statement, changing the whole context, and still not be supported or contradicted by anything in the lore. Which makes them "'cause I say so" explanations. So, basically, this leaves us with a choice: try to deduce our own explanation using the in-game sources and our minds, or accept his, even though there doesn't seem to be logic behind them. I trust logic other authority, so I choose the former.  

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

Of course I totally get that. The merish and Yokudan myths of creation express that sense of loss and despair and, indeed, seem to be gospel truth to you. I admit I'm biased towards the opposite and I lose patience with Altmeri philosophy very quickly. They chose to isolate themselves, think they're better than everyone, believe their traditions are better and more truthful than anyone else... Yet it all can be proven utter bullshit. One thing I can't verify is that Lorkhan's intent with the creation of the world was to have segregation so I chose to believe he didn't want that. The Altmer apparently do, and while I respect their wishes, I think they lose more than they gain from that.

Talos, then, echoes Lorkhan's actions: Lorkhan tricked, forced or convinced all these et'ada to join him in making the world. Talos tricked, forced or convinced all these body politics to join his empire. Thematically similar actions with the same emotional resonance.

[/blockquote]

Lol, nothing is gospel truth to me. All the creation myths tell the same story, only the connotations differ. No matter what version of creation myth I read, I tend to relate to the same side every time. I guess I'm biased too, because the Altmeri worldview is the closest to my own. I'm not saying they are perfect or without flaws, but in my eyes they are more right than anybody else out there. No matter how many times I try to look at things from the Nord/Imp perspective, I start getting disappointed and annoyed by it very quickly. Their (willing!) ignorance, their inability to think in the long perspective, their mindset based on the authority of the strong, their tendency to thoughtlessly throw away the things of real value for momentary whims, all this and much more doesn't let me relate to their worldview. Each attempt to try on the dhoes of such fellow makes me feel soiled. Can't help it.

We, yes, Talos echoes Lorkhan's actions, but he still doesn't take Lorkhan's aspect. He is not the god of change. No one thinks of him as such, no one associates him with that aspect. Instead, he is associated with the empire and human superiority. By worshipping Talos you don't give power to Lorkhan's aspect, so the two are still separate deities.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

Indeed it is. I've just done 56 hours and stayed up very late to watch the ESO: Elsweyr reveal. Am vtired :D

I know those sources. My point was to show you that lore-hole. We can rif from it and make leaps of deductive reasoning, and can challenge each other on those leaps, but sometimes explaining how those leaps happen in our minds is hard to articulate. To you it makes total sense Walk-Brass left such a staggering number of golden corpses, each glistening beneath Alinor's sun that the elves had to submit. You go as far as to put a number on the dead. But we cannot quantify that number. The emperor's intent wasn't to destroy but to conquer. I have no doubt that if destruction was the intent that Walk Brass could do it in short order. There is no doubt at all that it could have devastated Summerset, and truly is a horrific thing to exist. Yet it wasn't used for the purpose of destruction alone. Overwhelming force was demonstrated, in the face of which the Altmer pissed their pants.

[/blockquote]

This week the company where I work was moving to a new office, and guess who was in charge of all the logistics. Not to mention packing all the things. So every day of this week I would return home at midnight or later. Now I feel like a zombie and everything hurts from hauling boxes and desks.

I wonder how exactly you can demonstrate destructive power of something without doing st least dome destruction with it. I really doubt that anyone would believe Hjalti if he just showed them the Numidium and told them a tale of how powerful it is. The number is irrelevant, if he killed 10 Altmer it's still murder.

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

Similar with PGE's description of the Battle of Stros M'Kai. I can't fault your reasoning but am confused as to how you go about choosing what to ignore and what to accept. The full story according to that source is that the Crowns licked the Forebears, the Forebears retaliated, then the Crowns under Prince A'tor went on such a massive offensive that the Forebears asked the Imperials for help. The combined might of the Forebears and Imperials crushed the Crowns in what is the bloodiest massacre in Redguard history. Yet you sympathise with the Crowns for that defeat and vilify the Forebears and the Empire despite the source indicating the Crowns started it? I shake my head at the waste of life, but it's hard to sympathise with the Crowns going by that source alone.

It was a civil war, the empire shrewdly joined the side of the Forebears in order to gain Hammerfell for the empire. Ironically, it was the actions of another Hero, Cyrus the Redguard, who secured ultimate victory for the Crown faction and forced a new treaty on the empire, a treaty which allowed Hammerfell to operate as an independent province within the empire much like Morrowind.

[/blockquote]

When I read an in-game book, I take into account not only te data in the book itself, but also who is the author. And also, I try to look at the events in the bigger perspective. So in the case of the Crowns and the Forebears, I don't see it as a matter of who started the first. It was a civil war between the rightful rulers (the Crowns) and a rebellious faction (the Forebears). Then the Forebears saw that they can't win, and relinquished the freedom of their people in order to win the war, by inviting the Empire to do it for them. And the Empire, a greater force than either of the two factions, crushed the Crowns in what was the bloodiest massacre of the Redguard history.

It looks like a situation when a 5-year-old kid took a toy from another 5-year-old kid, and then the latter kid called a 13-year-old who beat the first kid to half-death and took the toy for himself. Hard to sympathise with the second kid, tbh.

And Cyrus definitely was a nice fellow to his people. Strangely, no one says he was a Shezarrine. Or does someone?

[/blockquote]

Sorry for the late reply, Thorien. Work leaves me so little time for in-depth discussions :( Glad you read the Sermons again, always good fun to pick through :D So, in terms of propaganda - yes and no, I think. We know Vivec wasn't born a god, birthed by Sotha Sil and Almalexia as he claims in the 36 Lessons... But that doesn't make it not true. Because of the whole Dragon Break at Red Mountain thing, history is able to be rewritten, new timelines created, and after they get reconciled by the Time Dragon into a single timeline.  Therefore it's possible that the things within the 36 Lesons both did and didn't happen. But that's a huge piece of reductionism. I still feel the best way to grasp these concepts is by using Rotten Deadite's New Whirling School and reading his interpretations :) In a way, Sil's dialogue about Vivec may represent this: "Vivec knows the boundaries that separate fact from fiction. He knows them so well that's he's learned how to break them. He exists inside his verse, but recognizes the lies. The contradictions." Sil could be telling us something deeper here, that the boundaries between fiction (Temple doctrine or Heirographa of which the 36 Lessons are part of) and fact (Apographa or the hidden writings of the Temple) were broken by Vivec.

Evidence of souls combining into one can be seen in the work of far better scholars than I in their quest to discover the fate of the Dwemer, seen in Final Report to Trebonius. In that text, which I think remains the general consensus, we can see how using the Heart of Lorkhan and Kaggy's Tools fused all the souls of the Dwemer into the skin of their brass god. It's like, we've got this detective story - finding out what happened and why things are the way they are is not something that can so easily be done, and it's then far easier to dismiss it all as lies or propaganda. But the real scholarship is there to be analysed and understood in The Imperial Library.

The Tribunal come along and use these same tools on the Heart to become ALMSIVI - the oversoul of the three Tribunes. So we've got this gradient system going on: Pahome as the supergradient of Sithis; then Sithis as the supergradient of Lorkhan; and Lorkhan as the supergradient of ALMSIVI.

So in response to what you said here:

They are three different people, never ever had they merged into one in any way, they are not any sort of "oversoul" or anything. So why would you assume that happening with Hjalti, Wulfie and Zurin, I have no slightest idea.

The Dragon Break is what allows several versions of one event to happen at the same time, but where is it said that it also allows events that never happened t all to become real as if they happened (such as various propaganda)? I don't find any implications of it.

If we can say for certain that a Dragon Break allows several versions of one event to happen but doesn't allow events that were made up and fictional to happen, then we need to eliminate the impossible and learn that what remains, however improbable, must be the truth: Ie, that the 36 Lesons aren't entirely fictional. The Dwemer managed a version of it, the Tribunal used the same tools and same Heart to become ALMSIVI, and Talos used a simulacrum of the Heart to achieve the same soul-stacking and fusion. If you can refute the Final Report then you are on the way to refuting the rest, but then you have all the different accounts of what happened at Red Mountain to wade through, also. Which account of Red Mountain is the true story? None, some, all?

So what's tonal architecture got to do with the Dwarves using Kagrenac's Tools on the Heart of Lorkhan, then the Tribunal doing the same, and eventually Talos' enantiomorph? Pretty much everything, I'd say.

Sotha Sil being a dick has nothing to do with him being a seer. I mentioned that as an aside to remind you of hypocrisy :D As much as we love Sil, however cool he is, the things he has done are unseakably evil. But that's by the by, it's his inability to See which makes him an unreliable narrator - especially after he tells us just how certain he is: "Total, absolute, relentless certainty." Yet you're happy to wave that off as "His inability to tell us what is going on is also a thing that can happen to a seer" ? So Sotha Sil is totally, absolutely and relentlessly certain except when he's not? Yeah... :D

I get you about the cyborg from the future thing in regards to Pelinal. As much as I love it all, I have limits too. The loveletter from the fifth era is as far as I'm comfortable with in terms of the future. I mean, the idea it's there in the Song:

"The Star-Made Knight" [and he] was arrayed in armor [from the future time]. And he walked into the jungles of Cyrod already killing, Morihaus stamping at his side froth-bloody and bellowing from excitement because the Pelinal was come...

...Pelinal called out Haromir of Copper and Tea into a duel at the Tor, and ate his neck-veins while screaming praise to Reman, a name that no one knew yet."

Yet, like you, for me the details of that future and the nature of this "diamond soaked red with the blood of elves, [whose] facets could [un-sector and form] into a man" is something I don't dwell on overmuch.

We, yes, Talos echoes Lorkhan's actions, but he still doesn't take Lorkhan's aspect. He is not the god of change. No one thinks of him as such, no one associates him with that aspect. Instead, he is associated with the empire and human superiority. By worshipping Talos you don't give power to Lorkhan's aspect, so the two are still separate deities.

I think... Is there even a god of change? Sithis is change, not a god of it. Lorkhan is the get of Sithis, and Shezarrines are the avatars of Lorkhan - change given form. What they do brings about change. The Missing God's role in the Imperial Pantheon is described as "the spirit behind all human undertaking." Pretty nebulous but has connotations with change. Talos is similar, his decription goes like:

Tiber Septim, Talos, the Dragonborn, Heir to the Seat of Sundered Kings, is the greatest hero-god of Mankind, and worshipped as the protector and patron of just rulership and civil society. Tiber Septim conquered all of Tamriel and ushered in the Third Era and the Third Empire. In his aspect of Ysmir, 'Dragon of the North,' Tiber Septim is also invoked as the patron of questing heroes.

So is he the god of just rulership and civil society or is he the protaector of it? Isn't the latter what Lorkhan seems to be all about? Whenever shit happens, there he is to bring about the change needed to protect the world.

I've got to go out a bit, sorry you had a bad week too :) The logistics of relocating a firm must be almost chaos. Bet you're glad that's over. Or is it still going on?

And Cyrus definitely was a nice fellow to his people. Strangely, no one says he was a Shezarrine. Or does someone?

Not a Shezarrine, no, but something very similar that could be a Yokudan equivalent: The HoonDing. "Yokudan spirit of "perseverance over infidels." The HoonDing has historically materialized whenever the Redguards need to "make way" for their people. In Tamrielic history this has only happened twice." Cyrus was one of those.

Ah, it's ok. My work leaves me with very little free time too, but I try to not let it stop me, mostly by doing a small part at a time. The move is over, thank goodness, and it wasn't much of chaos because I had two days to prepare and organized all the stuff in advance, but it still was a lot of heavy boxes and lots of dust. I am still short of time though, because it's the time of year that is the nightmare of all bookkeepers and accountants. Haven't had any time even to write my stories. So I'm going to split this post into a few parts, for it is going to be long.

I can't write much tonight (unless I want to get only two hours or soof sleep) because it's late and tomorrow promises to be exhausting, so I'll read the texts you linked here and answer tomorrow, is it agreeable?)))

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/JusticiarThorien]Justiciar Thorien[/url] said:[/b]

Ah, it's ok. My work leaves me with very little free time too, but I try to not let it stop me, mostly by doing a small part at a time. The move is over, thank goodness, and it wasn't much of chaos because I had two days to prepare and organized all the stuff in advance, but it still was a lot of heavy boxes and lots of dust. I am still short of time though, because it's the time of year that is the nightmare of all bookkeepers and accountants. Haven't had any time even to write my stories. So I'm going to split this post into a few parts, for it is going to be long.

I can't write much tonight (unless I want to get only two hours or soof sleep) because it's late and tomorrow promises to be exhausting, so I'll read the texts you linked here and answer tomorrow, is it agreeable?)))

[/blockquote]

Completely agreeabale :D Man, we're like Phrastus and Lady Cinnabar - perhaps if we stop arguing I'll get this article written :D