UESP Forums

There have been few topics, but I couldn't find one younger than a year and I didn't feel like bumping one of them. My personal theory is:
The battles for Solitude and Windhelm will happen concurrently, and both cities will fall. Battles for other holds will not be mentioned. This way, all players would have their grand triumph canonized... somewhat. Following that:
A) A new leader (perhaps Elifis herself - she isn't even deposed if Stormcloaks win, remember?) would take over Stormcloaks and cement their victory.
B) Despite loss of Solitude, the Empire would manage to destroy the Stormcloak
C) Both factions are left weakened and leaderless, thanks to that and Thalmor manipulations (they don't want either side to win, as some book in the Embassy stated IIRC), Skyrim is left shattered without proper leader and every hold is for itself. (I think this is most likely, as it is the most neutral approach)

What do you think?

Both and neither.

Bethesda will of course, be very lazy about it, and we'll hear no more of it. That's what I've come to expect from them.

Dragon Break. Every ending is canon, and it's the only way to canonize divergent endings like this.

The only real question is, how long will it be? Months, years, decades?

It's possible that the whole of Fourth Era might later be considered a Dragon Break. Throughout TES history, time has tended to get wonky without a Dragonborn Emperor. ESO has certainly reinforced that perception.



The context is fuzzy, but I believe Prince Attrebus is referring to the events of Oblivion here. Meaning, when Martin shattered the Amulet of Kings and summoned the avatar of Akatosh, this was perceived as a Dragon Break. Since the White-Gold Tower was theoretically rendered obsolete by Martin's actions and no longer protected from Oblivion invasions afterwards, that seems to make the most sense. Of course, it's also possible it was just a figure of speech - the dragon represents the Empire, so the Septim Dynasty's fall could hypothetically be referred to as the time when the "Dragon broke", without implying the timey-whimey effects of an actual Dragon Break.

So, theoretically, Martin triggers a sort of lukewarm Dragon Break (they aren't necessarily big and noticeable events) which runs for over 200 years, finally ending with the events of Skyrim. Either that, it was a much more truncated Break beginning with the events of the game and ending probably a few years, maybe decades, down the road.

Don't forget the Civil War itself re-enacting Convention.

The Empire will canonically win, I think. It's just too important a factor in TES universe to be effectively reduced to a minor state. Of course, a Daggerfall style Dragon break is possible. As is some half-assed hand wave in the lines of "in the end it matters not who won, as war is always terrible blah blah". Still, the most probable winner is the Empire.

I think the Thalmor would move in once they were ready and 'win' the civil war wiping out whoever thought that had initially prevailed

i like the idea of the dragon breaks

I think something big will happen in Skyrim after the events of the game (probably something Thalmor-related) and it will be important enough to make the entire Civil War more or less irrelevant. So the official history of Tamriel will say that the Nords fought against the Empire but then the entire province was conquered/flooded/invaded/burned to the ground. This way they don't really have to come out and say anything concrete about the outcome of the war.

Or they can just say that the war continued in one form or another for decades after the Dragonborn won a temporary victory for one side or the other. The Empire moved in to regain full control, then there was another uprising, then the Legion sent reinforcements, then a new rebel leader emerged, and so on. The conflict may still be there when the story of the new game begins.

I don't think a dragonbreak would be right solution. Of course it would make sense with World-eater and shattering the amulet etc., but I think it would be little cheap if they pulled it every time there are different possible outcomes.
Also, I can't imagine how it would work. If it happened exactly like in Daggerfall, we would have Ulfric as High king, bowing to the Empire. I don't think such position would be stable. Basically he wins the war, but at the same time Skyrim is reunited into the Empire. Whose rules would apply? If Empire's, would Ulfric basically just sit on throne without accomplishing any of his goals? If Ulfric's, Thalmor would not tolerate it and a war would immediately start.
Now thinking about it, the latter sounds plausible enough, but still I don't think a dragonbreak should be pulled every other game.

A war is inevitable, may as well start it on human terms.

The assassination of Titus Mede II provides a way out of the quandary. No need for a dragonbreak. I think the history we will read about in TES6: Dominion will go something like this:

The Civil War raged back and forth, with both sides claiming victory at one point or another, and both Ulfric and Tullius killed. After Titus Mede II's assassination, he was exposed as a cooperative asset (i.e., a puppet) of the Aldmeri Dominion, as the Stormcloaks believed him to be. The Stormcloaks agreed to rejoin Imperial Skyrim under terms agreeable to them (such as having a major say in appointing a new Emperor). The Civil War was over.

I'm voting for "No clear winner."

Nobody ever suspects the Akaviri Inquisition...

as the nominal descendants of the Akaviri invaders, perhaps the reason why the Blades are so hounded by the dominion is that the Thalmor DO suspect the Akaviri Inquisition lol

...

Never thought of that, but I agree to it.

Mede's assassination actually just reinforces the likelihood that a Dragon Break will occur, because the Dark Brotherhood has a branching questline, too. Mede isn't necessarily killed.

People seem to be resisting the idea of a dragon break because they view it as some sort of cop-out. But I think we can agree that it's infinitely preferable for them to explain these discrepancies in some way rather than ignore them. Bethesda has already gone to great lengths to commit to the idea that all player choices are canon, and there's no reason to believe that they will stop that practice now. And the only feasible way to keep all Skyrim events as "true" is a Dragon Break.

What we should be thinking about, I think, are possible intervening events which can substantially align the divergent realities. A Thalmor takeover, for example, would pretty much nullify the historical significance of the divergent Skyrim quest endings. I think it would make sense if such an event or events would serve as suitable points in time for a Dragon Break to end. The Middle Dawn ended around the time of the outbreak of the Thrassian Plague, which was so devastating that it killed half the continent, which may support the notion that such things can help bring the end of a Break.

A Dragon Break is caused by a major discrepancy in reality, one which makes the normal flow of time impossible. In the case of the Warp in the West, it was half dozen or so Brass Gods rampaging across the Iliac Bay region. But it/they were destroyed by an undead wizard, iirc. When the discrepancy was removed, the Break soon ended, even though the effects of the rampage remained. Nothing about that situation contradicts the notion that a Break could occur due to the events of Skyrim.

In Skyrim, we have serious discrepancies. An Emperor is either assassinated, or not. An Empire either suppresses a rebellion, or gets thrown out of the province. Jarls are all over the place. And, oh yeah, a significant aspect of the Dragon God of Time breaks loose from a wound in time and space, and then he is defeated, and his influence upon the heavens removed.

Long story short, this situation fits perfectly with one where we would expect a Dragon Break to occur, and there's no other satisfactory resolution for the discrepancies the divergent Skyrim questlines create.

If Mede survives through the events in Skyrim, there's always the chance he bites it somewhere else later on.

I mean, the fellow you rescue at the end of Arena dies in front of you during the tutorial of Oblivion.

Huh???

Live or die in one game, it does not matter: They're dead in another game down the line.

Not always true.. then again TES is known for cutting loose ends<_< the whole thing with Titus for one, whether he dies by the DB's hand or lives.. he'll certainly die at a later time. Outcome of the war? Even if the Stormcloaks win, it doesn't matter one bit if the Empire just turns around and reconquers it, effectively wasting any effort>_> or just completely nullify the aftermath with a 3rd party.. as in the Dominion invading and defeating whom ever the victor was. A Dragon Breaks doesn't necessarily need to occur, seeing as most branching stories can easily be ignored or labeled as irrelevant to the next installment.

Uriel Septim the 7th.

I don't know whether I agree with that in its entirety...

After discussion with a friend, we came to the conclusion that the outcome of the Skyrim Civil War would be null and void. The Aldmeri Dominion – or, more accurately, the Thalmor – would just wipe through Skyrim and obliterate those who stood in their way. We never saw true Thalmor power in Skyrim. There is a probability that Skyrim could be left ravaged and crumbling before the events of TES:VI.

I do believe that Mede would need to be killed for continuity. Regardless of whether or not the Dragonborn joined the Dark Brotherhood, it's still feasible to say the Assassins Guild plucked him off of their own accord. Both Tullius and Ulfric, as important figures in Skyrim's recent history, would probably be knocked off too.

Ah, of course. *facepalm
I really did hope that after jumping a significant time period between IV and V, Bethesda would do something in TES: VI to culminate everything we had going on in V. But unless they do really shake things up immediately following the events of Skyrim, i can't see them being able to work around all the alternate threads :/

DB is a separate questline and Mede most likely had heirs, his assassination does not cause a slightest issue in the events. His death is almost guaranteed to be canonized, even if empire won the war.

Don't you get the bit about "half a dozen Brass Gods" a little backwards? There is only one Numidium, due to broken timeline several factions used it at the same time, the dragongreak is what allowed such event to happen, not a result of the event.

Yes, dragonbreak is really a deus-ex-machine solution, I believe it should only be used when necessary, and it is not necessary now. Also, it is not half as flawless as you describe. Skyrim can't be both independent and not, Talos can't be both banned and legal, no matter how you twist the timelines, there needs to be a winner.
For example, in Daggerfall, the only real winners are Empire and Mannimarco. Underking also got what he wanted, but he did so in every possible ending. Other factions benefited, they gained power, but their victory was NOT canonized. They gained power at the expense of lesser powers, but none of them gained dominance over whole region, as they did in their respective endings. They ended up sharing the power with each other and all were subjugated by the Empire.
Daggerfall had way too many endings and all possibilities involved someone else obtaining a unique artifact of huge importance. Skyrim has but two outcomes, and the only conflict is who triumphs at the end, which as I described, is the only thing that can't be solved by a dragonbreak.

Just a general reply to the recent posts, mostly addressing Bulvik.

A Dragon Break can solve anything. I was just discussing in another thread how, due to a Dragon Break, it's possible (however unlikely) that Orcs and Dwemer are the same race. A Dragon Break can rewrite the reality of the TES-verse. I haven't seen anything which suggests the Civil War outcomes are somehow the only things which are immune.

I imagine that's why people are resistant to a Dragon Break, they consider it too powerful of a concept, which is then considered "cheap". But it's a part of TES, we have parameters for when it might occur, and they're satisfied by Skyrim, so let's accept that and move on.

If you saw someone lying in an alleyway with a small, bloody hole in their chest, you would think "gun". You wouldn't think, "Nah, guns are a cheap way to kill someone. Must have been a bow and arrow."

You're obfuscating the issue when you speak of canonizing victors. Canonizing victory has never been the goal. Canonizing player choices is. Yes, there needs to be a winner, but all player choices along the way must remain "true". Further, as a practical matter, Stormcloak fans would erupt in criticism if, after the game, the Empire just swoops in right after anyways and retakes Skyrim. So the solution has to not only recognize player choices, but respect them. The Warp in the West successfully did that.

My main point regarding the Warp in the West was, once the biggest divergence in the realities (i.e., Numidium) was removed, the Dragon Break soon ended. But again, not seeing anything about it which suggests a Break wouldn't happen because of the events of Skyrim.

Yes, Mede would die eventually, but there would be a period of discrepancy. A month, a year, ten years, whatever; where he would still be alive for a time if the player chose to destroy the Dark Brotherhood rather than join it. Of course he will die eventually, as does everyone, it's just a matter of how, where, and when. History tends to take note of such things. Bethesda's options remain that they either gloss over the details or else reconcile them in the only way possible. And since there is another discrepancy, one too big to gloss over, the latter option will be taken regardless.

The Dragon Break has never been absolutely "necessary". After Daggerfall, Bethesda could've just set the next game, say, a thousand years into Tamriel's future, and left the whole matter alone. But they evidently didn't think this would make for a better game, didn't think that fans would be satisfied by this. And that reasoning holds true now, too. But if Bethesda wants to reconcile the different player events, not just ignore them, then yes, a Dragon Break is necessary.

Even if you're resistant to the idea of a Dragon Break, you should still be thinking about intervening events which will mitigate the significance of the Skyrim player choices. The only other (much, much less preferable) solution Bethesda could apply is to let the results of the choices become obscured/lost to history, and such things only become lost when they become insignificant.

Skyrim can't be both independent and not, Talos can't be both banned and legal, etc. So what intervening events could occur that would reconcile these discrepancies? Again, exploring that is the only real productive conversation to be had on this topic.

How does a choice matter if it has no effect? Thanks to a dragonbreak it would be canonized I killed Ulfric, but how does it matter if he ended up being alive afterwards due to dragonbreak screwing up timelines? I would definitely not feel like my choices were canonized. Does it really count as having happened if it only happened in some dead-end pocket timeline which does not affect anything? I don't think so.
The final results cannot be affected by dragonbreak. Once it ends, things are set, and they are set the way they are, no compromises.
As for Mede, why can't lore just say he was assassinated? Maybe it could even say that it is "rumored" to have been DB.
As for your analogy with guns and arrows, I don't think it is accurate, because it is observation of what already happened, not a choice of what should be chosen as right approach. I would compare it more to cutting a tomato with a titanium katana instead of a kitchen knife. As I said, it is completely possible for both Tulius and Ulfric to die, you don't need to be twisting timelines for both events to occur.