UESP Forums

I disagree with your thinking.

You seem to hold 'lore' to higher standard than in game evidence.

Just because something is referred to as something doesn't mean that's what it is. I mean I could buy a dodge challenger and me and my friends and call it a mustang, doesn't make it so. Same with the heart, sure it's called the heart of 'Lokhan', but so what?

It's simply an object of an origin unknown to those who wielded it, regardless of what the tribunal may think, they were not all powerful as we say, so knowing that it's safe to say they also were not omniscient, so what right do they have to claim what they say is truth.

Conversely, yes Shor is gone, but that was more for gameplay purposes than anything. Even still this is an Occam's razor moment.

Here you more direct and personal sources feeding you one thing, compared to ,while yes more, but indirect sources. Again every elven scholar can be wrong. Why would you not take Tsun's word over the word of others if the man's very own gatekeeper calls him such, why would you take anyone else's word over his.

It's like taking a traveler from New York firsthand knowledge of Beijing over an actual resident. And I know the proper comeback or retort to that one is well an educated visitor would know about the city than a uneducated peasant or bum who does live there, which would be okay, if it wasn't for the fact that Tsun's position would be more like taking that advice of that of the mayor's.

And I don't follow your separate divine entity idea, are you saying Aur-eil is an entirely different god than akatosh. As far as I know it's only a difference in name, ala Allah/Yahweh. And I prefer to say Shor over Lorkhan, no way though are the two entities different beings all together, and I know there's evidence for it in lore, but here's where I take issue with the MK stuff.

Yes the man has an explanation for everything, and I know at one point he said all these gods could in fact be different, but have we seen anything in game to state otherwise. No, than until we do that Lore is not canon. Guy's to often you do read all this lore and think it's canon simply because its on the wiki but if it isn't stated in a book or by a character than it's not there.

And I also take issue with CHIM, because not once have I seen any reference to it in Skyrim or Oblivion, I know it was stated in Morrowind, but to my knowledge it was simply a lore excuse to dick around with the console.

And as for MK, his lore is not a TES Lore, at this point it's fanficiton, where the better parts are actually incorporated. And honestly this guy doesn't seem to be the best choice for what is and is 't lore, I mean after I read that garbage about one of the gods eating their own ejaculate, I couldn't read any other piece of lore from him, I mean this is the guy you want to put on a pedestal?

And as for dragons that's simply false. Dragons come from nowhere. They've always been as said by the dremora, not once does anyone say dragons come from there. Yes there were dragons in Akavir as I'm sure there was also a dragon cult,but it was merely one of several on Nirn. Dragons also lived in skyrim and atmora, doesn't mean they're from there.

And we know they're lesser Aedra, they're from akatosh directly and immortal. That's how we know and we have all that information given to us by a primary source, an actual dragon, why you would take anyone else's word on the subject it beyond me, so what if a few books say they're from there.

They also said the Tsaesci were vampire snakes and we know after 2 games of contradicting material that is not the case despite the protest of some people. The dragons always were, and who are we to say Alduin has never preformed his tasks before? If he is the world eater and has eaten the world before, than there would not have been an Akavir before him.

And if dragons always were then they predate all of Nirn itself, so they have no earthly origin.

Heh. Get in line.



Yeah, well. I figured it was a safe position considering this is the lore forum and all. Still, if it's a whoppin' you've a wantin'...



Again, I think maybe you don`t have a good definition of lore. We're discussing the collected beliefs and legends as well as the facts and Canon. Lorkhan is a universally recognized deity and a huge part of the Tamrielic mythos.



Actually they were. The Tribunal had absolute divine abilities regarding knowing the past, present and future. Vivec used his ability to search through all realms of existence to confirm the total absence of the Dwemer race. He once flooded Morrowind with his power. This is recorded by Imperial scholars including the countless of Bruma. People may question the Tribunal`s morality or motives but not their divinity.



All I said is we never physically saw Shor. I was using your own wrongheaded logic against you. You can either admit I exposed a flaw in it or not but don't try to change what type argument was. That is not honest.



What is it Tsun says I claimed was false? I never questioned Shor's station or power. I rightly stated he was absent.



I honestly have no idea what kind of rhetoric you're spewing there but it has more to do with you and your imagined straw man version of me and my friends than anything so have at it, hoss. I'm gonna be the adult here and actually stay on topic.



They are two distinct deities from two different cultural beliefs so yes I very much keep them separate. It's a very simple and straightforward concept. If you've gonna preach Occam' s razor maybe you should not scoff when I utilize it. I realize they represent a similar concept but so does Alduin and we know how that panned out.



Again, you seem to be having a personal problem there. You and others I have encountered seem to lump me together with some imaginary shadow cult centered around Michael. It's simply unfounded and ludicrous. I actually am one of the strongest and most consistent voices against taking any lore as gospel. I always compare and contrast the available sources. I never said Monomyth was correct. I said it's lore and still in games. It's right there in Skyrim. Another example is Mankar' s Commentaries. Obviously vastly different from the universe we see but still lore if you define lore properly.



It's in Mythic Dawn Commentaries in Silus' museum in Dawnstar. It appears in Vivec' s Lessons in Morrowind and in the source text for the Whiterun street preacher's claim about Talos. The godhead is mentioned in a Black Book and Paarthurnax mentions allows and bending earthbones.



Still hung up on all this are you? Again your concept of what lore is borders on tragic. As does your sense of what current lore writers think of MK apparently. Skyrim' s main writer was Kurt Kuhlmann. He is good friends with the man you irrationally detest and thought enough of him to reference several of his out of game texts in Skyrim. That's really all I can say about that.

And as for dragons that's simply false. Dragons come from nowhere. They've always been as said by the dremora, not once does anyone say dragons come from there. Yes there were dragons in Akavir as I'm sure there was also a dragon cult,but it was merely one of several on Nirn. Dragons also lived in skyrim and atmora, doesn't mean they're from there.



Paarthurnax admits he cannot see beyond Time. Therefore he admits through proxy he can't contemplate the birth of Akatosh or the Dovah. His ideas about his father are religious ideas. We can't assume it's literal. As far as we know Alduin was the earliest physical being ever created on Nirn and took lordship through his strength and linear station. Where he came from is conjecture.



You should recheck your sources if you believe the only lore we have on Akaviri Dragons calls Tsaesci snakes. The oldest source is PGE and it speaks of foreign but human invaders with red Dragons. Annals of the Dragonguard and Rise And Fall Of The Blades are added in Skyrim and speak of Akaviri men who hunt Dragons.
I also never claimed Alduin has not eaten the world before. In fact I argue often he's probably done it multiple times. You seem to have an unfortunate habit of putting words in my mouth. Please stop.



They are beings of flesh and blood. They have lungs, stomachs and hearts. They don't procreate but they are corporeal. If Alduin eats it all he eats them too. They can't predate Time itself. If Alduin resets Akatosh then they must be devoured and recreated each time.

Wow, dude your mad at me and I have nothing but respect for you nor was I trying to put words in your mouth or insult. All I was Simply trying to say was that the proper name for the god you refer to as Lorkhan should be Shor.

And that dragons should now be considered lesser Aedra and not Akaviri, any thing you took as an inst was on you and not my intention, and if you were offended in any way I'm sorry.

So lets clean slate this as it seems I've offended you somehow.

So just to try to start he argument over again on a better foot, I'll respond to your retort in the morning, sorry I've been working on my phone lately so it's been hard to gather my thoughts and express them in a better written format

He's not mad at you. The spirits name is Lorkhan. He existed long before Man became Man so they do not dictate who he is.


Why do people keep calling dragons Aedra? Aedra does not mean strong things from good things. It means our ancestors. Dragons are in know way the ES species ancestors nor did they take place in Creation. They are as much Aedra as any other species.


Pilaf is saying that you don't know what you are talking about. Really only you should be offended.

Pilaf should try and take a less haughty tone. Teaching is never about proving how smart you are.

But in regards to Shor, how do we know who he is. My whole rant was this though, I know you guys love the lore, and guys why would I be here debating this if I didn't too so don't think I'm some outsider, the lore supplements the game. It is not supposed to be a stand alone entity different from the game, it's subservient to it.

Often times you forget it follows the games and not the other way around, so in that regard to me lore is only anything stated in game. I mean sometimes you guys look for lore answers where there are none. I remember the thread regarding why the legions armor changes all three games.

There is no lore explanation for that, in reality Beth just wanted to update the armor, and make it fresh, there's no need to find an answer in lore for that as it is purely a stylistic choice.

But in regards to Shor, this is the first game where we have hard, primary firsthand knowledge of him, we got to his realm where his name is Shor. He is called such by all there, even by a minor God who has first hand knowledge of him.

So there is stronger evidence for him being referred to as Shor than Lorkhan, and at the least Ill still call him such becasue we can agree the two are one in the same correcr?

And in regards to Dragons, yes they're Aedric, in the same vein as a dremora is to Dagon, so to are dragons to akatosh. They're immortal and beings that predate Nirn, as more than enough evidence supports my claim than the other.

They could of simply had a cult there and we're drive oven by the Tsaesci there, it doesn't mean they're from there. Don't you think if that was the cAse we would of been to that by some one in game or in book. No we're not, in fact we're told the very claim I'm making that's why I'm calling them such and many other people on this board know this as well

Wisdom right here.

No. Every single thing in the post above the above post is wrong. Also Dragons do not predate Nirn. Dragons are not Aedra, they are not the same thing as Dremora are to Dagon, in fact Dremora only serve Dagon because they want to. Dragons are the children of Akatosh, Dremora are Daedra mercenaries that happen to work for Dagon. Dragons do not predate Creation. They have only been there since. Aedra does not mean predate Creation, immortal, or really strong. It means our ancestors. Akatosh is an Aedra because he gave his life for Nirn. He became a part of Nirn and thus became a part of all life that sprang from it. Akatosh is literally one of the ancestors of all life on Nirn. I don't see why you don't get what Aedra means. You are simply throwing in conjecture to support your argument, even though that conjecture makes no sense at all and is in fact not supported by in game evidence or otherwise.

What are you talking about I know what they are, the gods who were tricked by Shor to give up parts of their being to make Nirn.

Dragons predate Nirn, not creation. Not once did I say that, so it should be you watching out for putting words in other people's mouth.

And no dremora are daedra in service to Dagon, they are at his whim since they reside in his realm.

You're too hung up on me tryi g to say they actively took part in creation, I never said that. When I say they're Aedric it means they're spawned off an Aedra in this case akatosh.

It's merely a word to group them together and I fail to see how they aren't a counterpart to dagons dremora.

You say I'm spouting conjecture when it's all there. They're stated to be immortal creatures that come from akatosh, not once are they called Akaviri. They're Aedric, not Aedra.

Creation is the making of Nirn. Really, it doesn't get more simple than that. If you don't get that, then really we shouldn't continue this conversation. It is called Creation because Nirn is being created. Do you get this now? I truly hope so.

In the actual lore, go read it sometime, it is said that Dremora willingly serve Dagon. They respect strength. That is why they serve Dagon, not because they reside in his realm. Nowhere is this said.

Aedric does not mean that they spawn off an Aedra. Where have you read that it means that, or are you just being presumptuous? I only see the latter. Aedric means it is an Aedra. If Aedric meant spawn off an Aedra, everything alive on Nirn would be Aedric, and it is not.

I'm not getting snappy or anything, but none of what you are saying is true, or even hinted at being true. You are just stating things that do not make sense.

Why must it be hinted or in a book.

A) Nirn is the planet, Mundus is the universe which was created. Nirn has been destroyed before, via Alduin. Alduin and his ilk have existed before Nirn, this is not the first and only kalpa. This world has ended and will end and dragons have, as always, existed before them.

B) Dremora are dagons creation as dragons are akatosh.

Dragons are Aedric because hey're not some simple mortal creation like the races of Tamriel they're on a higher level of existence then them. Yes they are Aedric because they are closer to akatosh then they are to the other divines.

None of the races are built specifically like the dragons are to akatosh nor are they given the powers and authority as they are.

Look you're hung up on Aedric being a god. All I'm saying is this. Dragons aren't from Akavir.

If akatosh is god, then the dragons are his angels, does that make it easier to understand. They're divine.

No. Everything above is wrong. All of it. Mundas is not the universe. Mundsas is the space that Nirn was created in, it also contains the Aedric spheres. Oblivion surrounds Mundas. Alduin eats Nirn, and the cycle continues, but it's still the same planet. Nirn has never been destroyed. Only reborn.

Your definition of Aedric is wrong. I can't get this across to you, so I'm just going to stop. If you want to just headcanon your own lore fine, but you can't state it here as if it's true. Being higher than mortal does not make you Aedric. Being an Aedra makes you Aedric. Being part of the Convention makes you an Aedra. Dragons were not a part of this. They are not Aedra. How is this so hard for you?

Alright fine then they're not Aedra. It doesn't really matter then, the main of point of contention was they're not Akaviri. And looks like was wrong about Mundus. You know you could have saved yourself the extra posts by simply saying so rather than stating how hard it is to get through to me every other sentence.

However Nirn hasn't been reborn its been outright destroyed and an intake book specifically mentions this.

The Hist, Elfhoney, are all remnants of the previous world and bits of pieces of those precious worlds were shaped to form Tamriel and Nirn. I will try to find It for you, but I know I've seen this stated somewhere.

Ironically, Kirkbride is the most vocal source I've seen for that particular idea.

The Hist are actually Daedric, though. It's in the novels. They come from a realm of Oblivion.

And btw your idea of dremora being mercenaries IS wrong as the very source you've been trying to smack me down with confirms what everyone should already know

the Daedra Lords created the Daedric Realms, and all the ranks of Lesser Daedra, great and small. And, for the most part, the Daedra Lords were well pleased with this arrangement, for they always had worshippers and servants and playthings close to hand.

From the monomyth itself.

Dragons are divine beings of Aedric origin, fair enough? At the least can we all agree these lizard are not simy just that. Big scalies from the TES Asian land

It can indeed make sense<_< but at the same time we've seen non-daedric beings exist in oblivion, though surely not by nature or merely is instead a far lesser daedra.

Not saying I disagree>_> I am in a way neutral. We already know they had a realm of their own that got vastly destroyed, we also know a alternative species known as the Um-Hist are said residents of Oblivion. It is also implied that Black Marsh is a fragment of their realm, which can be understandable. As it is, the Hist we know are a separate species but related and have deep ties with the Argonians that they nurture so. They even acknowledge Sithis as their original creator, choosing neither Daedra or Aedra for credit like we see in other cultures
So while I can understand all this, I don't think calling them daedra is proper>_> they could very well be the ancestors for the Argonians and have shown compassion to sacrifice their needs for another. They are very much seen as the original life forms of Tamriel. So in the very least we can trace what little we can assume of their origins to Oblivion, but they should not be defined as a Daedra

Still, we know so little of their ways and is hard to delve into. Correct my wording if it be wrong though>_> one can not multitask without issues...

When it comes to the Hist, it's all pretty hazy, yes, but I think it's safe to say that they didn't participate in the creation of Mundus, though they existed at the time. That's the definition of Daedra, to my knowledge.

I have a question that's been kind of poking at me lately. Are the realms of Oblivion infinite in number and variety? Could there be entire civilizations out there that know nothing about Mundus, about mortality, about the drama and goals of Convention?

What about there being multiple Conventions, distinct Mund... i. Mundi. That sounds right. What if the mythology about Tamriel's importance in the Aurbis is actually really myopic, like Earth being the center of the universe? Infinite spaces have no centers. Who's to say Mundus is unique, or even special? We might be seeing just the history of one particular world, while infinitely many more have their own unrelated, but contextually more important, dramas?

And if that's the case, there must be infinitely many Daedra and Aedra orbiting (heh) their own Conventions, meddling with those mortals, experimenting with the nature of the Godhead in their own ways.

All of that hinges on whether Oblivion's realms are infinitely varied and numbered. It feels like they should be, and I seem to recall some sources stating that (but of course Google is spectacularly unhelpful with terms like "elder scrolls oblivion infinite"; no, thank you, I do not need cheats and dupe glitches for TES4) while others deny it. Apparently it's possible to just up and create new ones, so I don't see any reason to think they're all that fixed.

The simple definition of Daedra as to Aedra is 'Not our Ancestors' and 'Our Ancestors'. It's a pretty simple definition, but it really is how it seems. While you can argue this term applies to only the Mer or even Man, why can't it be applied by beast folks? It's really just which angle you look at it.

As for the multiple 'Mundi', there is a form of that>_> Shadow Magic allows you to a similar thing. Shadows were not simply the absence of light, but a reflection of possible worlds created by forces in conflict. In a means, it bring slight to parallel worlds and also remains the only power that has the potential to rival an Elder Scroll.. something even the gods would never challenge..

However excluding that, be it theory it is still possible. Keep in mind, creation was only possible thanks to Anu and Padomay. Currently they reside beyond the void, but who is to say they cannot repeat their actions again? We really can't debate much on it, but considering how powerful the et'Ada are collectively, anything is possible when you compare them to their primal origins.

As for what I know about the realms of oblivion, as I would assume would relate with Aetherius, are created from within the void as it gains individuality. Dieties wishing to create a new plane of existence must initially create a space for it in the Void. It may sound easy.. but it's not. However we can agree there are boundless planes in oblivion, and even the existence of unknown lords. It's just something beyond our fathom

This might seem a bit random but I've been thinking lately. What is the lore explanation for a Dunmer like Karliah having purple eyes. Cause I thought all Dunmer were cursed with red eyes by Azura.

Somebody at Beth thought it would be cool.

Assuming for a moment that all Dunmer have red eyes and only red eyes, Karliah might not be a full-blooded Dunmer. Her father is not known.

Do we know when the coming of age is for each race?

No, but naturally Men mature faster.

Only makes sense<_< if your life span is significantly greater, you have more time to develop

Yea it'd bet that elves have an extremely long adolescent period that might contribute to their hatred of the world.
Think about it, like a 40 year period of teenage angst