Is Skyrim too factioned and polarized?

[logansrun]

I think the point there is that the fact that you are “Dragonborn” is only situationally addressed and taken into account when it suits the plot or story line. The rest of the time, you’re treated like everyone else, if not worse. This is one of the exceptions I take with the writing.

You aren’t really treated like the “larger than life” hero you’re supposed to be. I mean really, just think about it for a moment. The Dragonborn is supposed to be the rarest of heroes, a real “hero’s hero”, as it were, the best of the best, and the strongest of the strong.

Among the ranks of the Dragonborn are the likes of Saint Alessia, Reman Cyrodiil and Tiber Septim himself, the founder of the Septim Dynasty. I’ll ignore the obvious disconnect about who the real “First Dragonborn” was between Miraak and Alessia, and on what basis, for now.

Regardless, not only is your character “Dragonborn”, but the “Last Dragonborn” destined to defeat Alduin upon his return, so very possibly the most powerful Dragonborn ever so no matter what tools you employ or what trade you adopt, you’re about as close to a “god” as one can get in game terms.

Especially considering you’re entire purpose is to fell the very same dragons revered as “gods” among mortals (Even though a giant can effectively accomplish the same task. Where are their worshippers?). with the addition of the “Dragonborn” expansion, the game effectively makes all Dragon Priests “Dragonborn”.

You (kinda) get the Blades, who were sworn to protect the Dragonborn Emperors, which should (kinda) tell you something right there. The point is, the main character should be, or at least become, the central figure of the game, in all respects, including politically (ala Nerevarine).

Instead, the best you can do is get “Thaned”. Not only should the Jarls defer to the Dragonborn, but so should the Moot in naming a new High King, and arguably, the Emperor, considering your potential role in ending the Mede Dynasty. If all that doesn’t qualify you as the most central and pivotal figure in the game, what does?

But instead of being recognized as such, you are more or less treated like a common lackey of every Jarl in the game regardless of the fact that you could single-handedly depose them at a moment’s notice on a whim. I can only consider that the product of one thing. Poor development.

Hell, even the Daedric Lords show you more respect naming you each of their respective “champion”. I don’t really get that one either though, how you can be the “champion” of every Daedric Lord. It would seem to me you should pick one to actually “champion”. What the hell kinda choice is “all” besides being overly and overtly self-indulgent?

[rcbecker123]

I like the idea of only gaining thaneship under one jarl and if you wish to join another Jarl you must resign from the first. Theres no way to be loyal to more than one really. Also you should play a larger part in the area where you are thane, as a person of title why else would they give you options for land or a home. The jarl can call you and your supporters in time of need for the hold, this adds to the cival war quest. Why else would you defend White Run as a thane. Also town guards would show more respect to you as a thane of the province since you hold title. In real life they be in prison or dead for such verbal offenses to a lord or titled character. Also as stated how can you be a champion to more than one deadric lord who most are enemies to each other. I see a conflict of interest there.

[Dark Spark]

...You aren’t really treated like the “larger than life” hero you’re supposed to be. I mean really, just think about it for a moment. The Dragonborn is supposed to be the rarest of heroes, a real “hero’s hero”, as it were, the best of the best, and the strongest of the strong. ...

The seed of this problem is that the Dragonborn can be anyone: from a Redguard Legionairre disgraced by a miscarriage of justice who tries to restore his good name; an Orismer shaman quietly removed from society who observes and records the goings-on of the world but can't interact "properly" within it; a young Breton noblewoman so used to high society, she looks like she'd last all of three seconds in the wilderness; to a Dunmer bard whom no one takes seriously, which suits him fine because he's also a skilled sneak-thief who likes it when the bad guys underestimate his capabilities.

So many heroes, but only one story into which to shove them. If our hero fit the classic mold, you can craft that story to make it so that kings and generals kneel at his command. But with the Elder Scrolls it's always possible our hero doesn't fit that mold, so the story suffers from a "flattening out" to accomondate this possibility.

It sucks, I know.

[rcbecker123]

Yeah Im not saying make the DB a god or super hero but simple things like earning respect from the guards or if the jarl actually had a few lines to say to his thane besides I have a city to run. Most of the things that would improve the game are simple things. Infact most of the things I dislike about the game are very minor issues that could have been different or corrected in an update. Also it would be nice to have a third option in things like the cival war something that worked for neutral DBs. At any one point you could help both sides like clearing forts of bandits allowing the army to move in and thus being friends with the fort members. dont even start me on things like horse armor or saddlebags man that is just to hard to add to the game Ha ha.