bluegenre Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 4- Anything which MAY alter, add or negate a significant element (i.e. adding a whole nother element of magicka for instance) MUST provide a reasonable story behind it. As a side note, what about the developers *removing* magicka schools? I seem to recall this happening in both oblivion and skyrim. Would adding them back be lore friendly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jet4571 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 4- Anything which MAY alter, add or negate a significant element (i.e. adding a whole nother element of magicka for instance) MUST provide a reasonable story behind it. As a side note, what about the developers *removing* magicka schools? I seem to recall this happening in both oblivion and skyrim. Would adding them back be lore friendly? You mean Bethesda removed whole magic schools? If they did and you add them back it is Lore Friendly and doesnt require any explanation. Artifacts ofcourse may not have any business in the new game but can be added with a story as to why a unique item crossed a border. magic on the other hand isnt unique so should be all over the place already. If you bring back a school Bethesda chose not to include you are simply fixing what Bethesda should have done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icecreamassassin Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 4- Anything which MAY alter, add or negate a significant element (i.e. adding a whole nother element of magicka for instance) MUST provide a reasonable story behind it. As a side note, what about the developers *removing* magicka schools? I seem to recall this happening in both oblivion and skyrim. Would adding them back be lore friendly? Hmmm yeah I hadn't really noticed that they did that but it does look like they removed Thaumauturgy. It was only present in Daggerfall though, so it could be justified that it's a school of magic only used in high rock/hammerfell were it not for the fact that the spells were all simply absorbed into other schools like alteration, illusion and Mysticism. I would see no point to adding it back in as it seemed to be a mechanical experiment that they scrapped when Morrowind was in development, but if there is a particular theme behind it, I see no reason why adding it back couldn't be lore friendly, simply because it was a balancing choice rather than a canon choice (i.e. Thaumauturgy wasn't destoryed with the disappearance of Vivec for instance), it wouldn't be negating a Canonical choice to remove it, just as it would not negate canon to release a Mod that features Vivec reappearing to aid the Dunmer on Solthiem, though if canon LATER establishes a canononical explaination of the fate of "saint Vivec" then the mod would of course be retroactively made "lore-unfriendly" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icecreamassassin Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 (edited) 4- Anything which MAY alter, add or negate a significant element (i.e. adding a whole nother element of magicka for instance) MUST provide a reasonable story behind it. As a side note, what about the developers *removing* magicka schools? I seem to recall this happening in both oblivion and skyrim. Would adding them back be lore friendly? You mean Bethesda removed whole magic schools? If they did and you add them back it is Lore Friendly and doesnt require any explanation. Artifacts ofcourse may not have any business in the new game but can be added with a story as to why a unique item crossed a border. magic on the other hand isnt unique so should be all over the place already. If you bring back a school Bethesda chose not to include you are simply fixing what Bethesda should have done. I would say it is lore friendly to add it back in ONLY if there was no canonical reason for it's removal. If it was a mechanical rebalancing, and it was added back in, in a balanced fashion, then I'd say go for it. I've always felt it was VERY gitchie that all the Daedric princes artifacts mysteriously and magically and convieniently end up in the province that we happen to be playing the game in. It's the "dream team" syndrome as I call it where deveoplers always feel the need to present the same old content because of it's "epic" nature. Now I understand that the Daedra princes award their boon, their bearer eventually dies and they reclaim it, but it would be nice if a few of them went astray in places OTHER THAN the provience the game is featured in, and that the Daedra prince had a new artifact of power to bestow in its stead, then in later games, the wayward old artifact could show back up as a shattered and hollow powerless version because the Daedra lord recalled all the power from the artifact to put it in a different one in the previous game. It would just feel like less of the "Same old Same old" and give a little more ebb and flow continuity to it I feel. And again with Thaumaturgy, it was only in one game and had spells which are currently in other schools (and were previously in other schools before it), so I have no problem ignoring it as a failed balancing concern EDIT: Just looked it up some more, didn't even realize they removed Mysticism from Skyrim, which is rather bizare IMO. a case someone makes is that the ashlanders of Morrowind live by that school and it's not something that should just be removed willy nilly. So I think adding it back in and rebalancing the spells would be actually in the best interest of the canon of the game, especially since the developers don't have ANY lore behind why they switched it up. I could understand ditching a school of magic if and ONLY if, the place you are playing doesn't use that kind of magic AND everyone there is in the same mindset, but you have races from all over Tamriel, so it makes sense for the developer to not mess with it Edited February 10, 2014 by icecreamassassin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jet4571 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 (edited) Well ofcourse if Bethesda removed the whole magick school and tied it's removal to the story adding it back without giving a story behind why it is back would not be lore friendly. lore says when X died the magic school was lost so bringing it back with no explanation is conrtradicting lore and contradicting lore is automaticaly not lore friendly. If they just removed it in a new game without any explanation such as mysticism then adding it back wouldnt require an explanation. That would be like bringing back greaves as an armor slot and spliting all vanilla armors into cuirais and greaves. And really if the spells were properly balanced the same as the ones in the older game one could argue it is actualy lore itself. Yeah deadric artifacts and many unique items being carried over from one game to the next is rather lame, but it is a common mechanic to bring familiarity from one game to the next. The way I look at it is the artifacts are actualy in every hold, just slightly different for each hold. The deadric lords pick the hero of the hold and give them the holds version of the artifact, so while we are in Skyrim being the hero and getting the artifacts someone someplace else is also getting them but his looks different. This helps me when seeing how they do not look the same as they did in older games, the ones I acquired in the older game is still someplace in that province. I wouldnt need to use my imagination to come up with that if Bethesda made them look the same but alas they choose to make new models and textures that look nothing like the old ones. *Edit, Bethesda changing the way the artifacts looks makes the deadric artifacts they added not lore friendly. There is no explanation on why the Ebony blade is longer and now has a curved blade. Not lore friendly. So if a mod author makes new models and textures and makes them look the same as the very first ones the mod author would then be making those artifacts lore. Edited February 10, 2014 by jet4571 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icecreamassassin Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 (edited) See I think this is a perfect example of mis-use of "lore-friendly" NOTHING the developer does is "Lore-Friendly" what they do is "Canon" which trumps everything (assuming there is in game story explaination behind it). "Lore-friendly" is stuff that 3rd party people (you and me and other modders) do to enhance the game with stuff that fits in with the game, and if it fits it's lore friendly, if it's too big of a departure it's not, and if it's just way out there, it's game breaking. The Daedric artifacts looking different I can understand a little because Daedric energy is corrupting and evolving, thus their powers and appearance are varried slightly as they go through the ages, but it is clearly told through canon that "X person held the item through Y period of time in Z era then it wound up in N person's hands, or lost and rediscovered" so it just seems odd that they all come shifting over, but given their origin and I suspend my disbelief as to why they are always here. Something like Keening however I cannon abide being in Skyrim. I mean, I haven't done the Keening questline so maybe it's explained well, but all indication from wiki info I glanced over suggested it's pretty glazed over. I mean did the hero drop Keening in red mountain after destroying the heart of lakan? and did the sword just happen to land somewhere in skyrim when red mountain erupted the second time? Plus the fact that the dragonborn can use it without employing Wraithguard and having it never followed up on or addressed in any way is just bad lore writing on the developer's part Edited February 11, 2014 by icecreamassassin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluegenre Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Plus the fact that the dragonborn can use it without employing Wraithguard and having it never followed up on or addressed in any way is just bad lore writing on the developer's part I think i remember someone saying during that quest that you should be dead, and being surprised you weren't. However i still see that as just being lazy writing. It may be cannon,but there is no good reason keening is in skyrim. BTW i was talking about mysticism being removed. I dont see how it can be construed as lore friendly or "canonical" To remove an entire branch of magic, its responsible for controlingand altering the aether. Did everyone just forget how in a few hundred years? Elves live that long easily, did they just decide not to practice anymore? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icecreamassassin Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 yeah it's pretty goofy, and is evident that their writing is about as good as their programming... Glitchy at best :) But we still love you bethesda, glitches and all... Just funny that you have to release a creation kit so your fans can finish your game for you LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icecreamassassin Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 But yeah in the end I think that any change that the developer makes which is a clear departure from the mecahnics of previous games which are tied directly into lore really require them to substantiate why it changed (in story) so to remove armor and weapon repair for example is fine, because it was just a goofy, small mechanical aspect of the game that had no real story merrit, but removing Mysticism without an explaination is just lazy, and hence to put it back in as a school in a mod would be lore friendly (with or without a story explaination) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chanchan05 Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 @icecreamassassin -I think removal of the magic schools was lore friendly in the sense that the schools of magic were simply arbitrary categorization used by the Mages' Guild. Similar how to in the Ancient Times, Astrology was a valid school of science, but now it's just a footnote when studying historical cultures/anthropology. Or how Alchemy eventually dissolved into Pharmacy, Chemistry, etc. It could also be explained as simply how the curriculum of the College of Winterhold teaches magic, where instead of teaching Mysticism separately, they just had other "departments" absorb it's teachings. It's really difficult to define "lore-friendly" sometimes. When you think about it, a TARDIS mod is lore friendly simply because as it has often happened, timey wimey wibbly wobbly stuff could have caused it to fall through a crack in time and space vortex, through the Void and into Tamriel. It won't be the first time it crashed into a different dimension. The sun is technically a crack in Time and Space as well as the stars, as according to lore, it's basically a wormhole connecting Tamriel to Aetherium, left when Magnus left this world. Magicka flows through it into Tamriel, much like how Time Energy flows from the crack in Amy's wall which the Weeping Angels feed on :D But then, a Star Wars mod like light saber wouldn't be lore friendly because there really isn't any way it could get there. Something from Portal is technically lore friendly as well LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts