Lore talk:Hero/Archive 2

This is an archive of past Lore talk:Hero discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page, except for maintenance such as updating links.

Dawnguard

Shouldn't the description of the events of dawnguard be changed to something more neutral? I mean, the hero could have chosen to fight for the vampires or the dawnguard. 202.89.38.3 03:56, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Indeed. Changed. Hopefully it's acceptable for now.Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 05:44, 13 September 2012 (GMT)

The Hero of Oblivion

"The hero saved Tamriel again by reuniting the Relics of the Divine Crusader, defeating Umaril the Unfeathered"

I think I've just read every article available on this site and nowhere did it seem to me Umaril was a credible threat "to Tamriel". He was immortal and had an army of Aurorans and all he did was desecrate two chapels. Defeating a Daedric Prince and defeating and dscending to become another Daedric Prince just seem to get mentioned in the same terms of signifigance. My two cents on a game that's history now 124.187.27.59 05:08, 28 October 2012 (GMT)

Umaril was a threat to the gods. If you know that he was attacking the church, it is learned that he is slowly making the gods weak, whom have been stated to grow power from their temples. He was a threat to Tamriel because making the gods weak, allows Oblivion to become unrestrained from Mundas. It is Akatosh that separates the plains, even after the events of Oblivion.--Br3admax (talk) 05:35, 28 October 2012 (GMT)

The Hero of Skyrim and the Civil War

At the end of both the Stormcloak and Imperial questlines, Ulfric refers to the player as "Dragonborn". Is that enough proof that the Hero of Skyrim helped bring a decisive end to the war (but it's unclear which side they helped win)?--71.202.138.39 03:33, 5 November 2012 (GMT)

Just to be clear, are you requesting that we include something like the Hero of Skyrim "helped bring about an end to the Stormcloak Rebellion", without specifying which side won? I'd be for that, I guess. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 03:43, 5 November 2012 (GMT)

Yeah, something like that.--71.202.138.39 04:27, 5 November 2012 (GMT)

Actually, looking a little closer at the page, it seems we've only documented the main quests of the vanilla game and official add-ons/plug-ins. As important as the war questline is, it's still just a side quest in Skyrim. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 04:33, 5 November 2012 (GMT)

So even if a sidequest refers to the player as the Hero of the game (such as the Civil War), we can't put it and should assume that someone else did it? I understand where you're coming from, though.--71.202.138.39 04:51, 5 November 2012 (GMT)

Yeah, it's sort of an "opening the flood gates" situation. For now, we're trying to keep these entries as succinct as possible, and that would become impossible if we started including even the most prominent side quests. I'm not the final word, of course; maybe some others think we should take the page in a different direction or make a one-off exception here. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 04:59, 5 November 2012 (GMT)

I understand. Thanks for clearing that up for me.--71.202.138.39 05:03, 5 November 2012 (GMT)

Gender of the Nerevarine

"You are too young to remember the Nerevarine. He defeated Dagoth Ur and saved us all from the blight."

-Neloth

Neloth was also the lord of Tel Naga. He would've known the Nerevarine personally. Just thought this was worth mentioning. Don't know if we want to put any weight on this by itself, but if some other in-game source refers to the Nerevarine in the masculine form, I think we could definitely declare the Nerevarine to have been male. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 04:32, 8 December 2012 (GMT)

I'd support addressing the Nerevarine as a male. Eric Snowmane^{(talk•email)} 04:38, 8 December 2012 (GMT)

It belatedly occurred to me that Bethesda, being the cunning villains that they are, may refer to the Nerevarine as the same gender as the player character. I talked to Neloth with a male character. So if someone with a female character and Dragonborn could go talk to Neloth at the Earth Stone (big green shining light near Raven Rock) and confirm that he says "he", that'd be great. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 05:15, 8 December 2012 (GMT)

Confirmed for me on the forums that Neloth still says "he" when talking to a female Dragonborn. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 02:02, 9 December 2012 (GMT)

I've added the gender. If we start to get reverts from outraged IPs like the last time this was tried, it might be worth protecting this page. —Legoless (talk) 18:23, 9 December 2012 (GMT)

The USKP has taken it upon itself to degenderise the statement by Neloth, this is not official, and has they have no public basis to do this. The official line is still "he", as Bethesda have not publicly announced otherwise. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 15:34, 9 April 2013 (GMT)

It seems odd to me that we are discounting half of The Elder Scrolls fanbase based on one word in one NPCs dialogue. Bethesda seems to have carefully avoided stating the gender of past heroes everywhere else within the games. It seems likely to me that they just missed this one instance. Wouldn't it be prudent to just de-genderize the sentence and dispense with the controversy? Sorry to throw my 2 cents in so late, but I only noticed this conversation after the 3 of you had already decided this. --Xyzzy ^Talk 21:45, 9 April 2013 (GMT)

In all honesty the fanbase has no say in the matter. If Bethesda decided to assign the male gender to the Neravarine then the Neravarine is that gender. One minor in-game statement has more weight than any amount of fan disagreement. In any case I was only pointing out the source of any discrepancy for posterity in my post here. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 21:49, 9 April 2013 (GMT)

(←) Au contraire, mon frer. The fanbase, meaning users and editors of UESP, has the ONLY say in what goes in our articles. Please don't think I am singling out anybody for criticism. I just feel that assigning the Nerevarine a gender in Lore based on this one dialogue tidbit is a mistake. --Xyzzy ^Talk 21:54, 9 April 2013 (GMT)

It's been pointed out before on UESP I think, but "he" has been used for nearly three centuries as a gender-neutral pronoun and, even though it's a dying trend due to legal reasons and to favor gender equalty, is still somewhat used today. -- Elakyn (talk) 12:08, 10 April 2013 (GMT)

I think it's worthwhile to remember that the Nerevarine is considered a reincarnation. It's not unreasonable to doubt any pronouns involved, when the person being referenced could potentially be a woman with a soul that was previously a man's. In any case, it seems unnecessarily provocative to flaunt the "male" tag on this page unless we're prepared to put the words "of unknown gender" into every other hero's entry. (Save Cyrus, obviously.) -Moonshadow101 (talk) 05:00, 14 April 2013 (GMT)

Irrelevant to the actual gender of the Nerevarine, why even mention a gender in the first place? It has been solved just fine for all the other titles, so why not simply keep things even and just list it as 'The hero' and 'this hero', etc, etc, etc? No fuss, no problem. -Kharay (talk) 19:31, 16 April 2013 (GMT)

Moonshadow, that is a very good point. Indoril Nerevar was a man, and if Neloth sees him as Nerevar instead of the Nerevarine, that would be a reason to refer to them as male while still using the title "Nerevarine". If necessary, we can add a note about what Neloth said, but I don't think there's reason to incorporate it fully into the article. That would be a good compromise, I think--documenting it as we document everything on this wiki without causing problems by making it overly obvious (but not hiding it). Vely^►t►e 19:42, 16 April 2013 (GMT)

Rebuttal... Just because Neloth says "he" does not mean the hero was a male. TES game lore never mentions the gender of the Morrowind hero. The real Nerevar was a male, yes, but the hero (Nerevarine) was the reincarnation of him to be any race or any gender. — Unsigned comment by 71.10.31.153 (talk) at 06:52 on 7 May 2013

It is your opinion that Neloth saying he doesn't mean the hero was male. This *IS* TES game lore, and it is mentioning the gender of the Morrowind Hero. You opinion doesn't change that. Jeancey (talk) 06:54, 7 May 2013 (GMT)

Yes, I believe it does change it. Just like many think Sheogorath is a man, but Daedra have no gender. And again, Neloth uses the word "he." Does that really mean he means male? No it doesn't. The Morrowind hero is any race or gender the player wishes them to be. — Unsigned comment by 71.10.31.153 (talk) at 07:01 on 7 May 2013

Except that the Nerevarine DID have a gender, so comparing him to daedra is irrelevant. Neloth said he, very clearly, in reference to the Nerevarine. Trying to ascertain the "meaning" behind those words is folly. We have evidence from the game of the canon gender of the Morrowind hero. We have nothing to refute that evidence. Games are full of examples where the player can choose a path, but the canon story of that game is different. You could kill Neloth in Morrowind if you wanted to, and in fact there was a quest to that effect at one point. The canon version is that you did not kill neloth, as evidence by him appearing in Dragonborn. We must accept what we are given, and right now we must accept that Neloth refers to the Nerevarine as He. There is no getting around that. Jeancey (talk) 07:06, 7 May 2013 (GMT)

Point taken, but isn't that unfair? I mean I thought the TES games are meant to be freedom. So, what would be the point in playing a female character in TES III if Neloth set the hero's gender in stone as a male? Rather disappointing. — Unsigned comment by 71.10.31.153 (talk) at 07:16 on 7 May 2013

There is nothing stopping you from playing a female character. It has no effect on the game itself, and would only come up if you chose to talk everything literally. When it comes down to it, these are all just games. You can chose to have a female character, and you can chose to tell yourself that Neloth misspoke in order to keep continuity for yourself. This page, however, has to deal with what we are given as a whole. It does not, however, prevent anyone from playing the game as they see fit. Jeancey (talk) 07:20, 7 May 2013 (GMT)

My apologies for flaming, and thanks for the help in seeing my errors.

I have accepted the fact of the Morrowind hero being male, again my apologies, however, I'm also interested to know the race of the Nerevarine. Has it ever been mentioned or revealed? I know Indoril Nerevar was a male of the Chimer race, but what about his reincarnation? Could he have been a Dunmer, or another race? Thank you. — Unsigned comment by 71.10.31.153 (talk) at 00:55 on 8 May 2013‎

(←) Nevermind, for I've noticed in the dialogue at game start it stating "of uncertain parents," so that means he could be any of the races, or a mix even. All we know for sure is that the Nerevarine is male. And sorry for posting so much in here. I'll sign up with the forums. Thanks.— Unsigned comment by 24.236.174.41 (talk) at 00:22 on 14 May 2013

Deal with Hermaeus Mora

Should we write that Last Dragonborn made deal with Hermaeus Mora to defeat Miraak? --188.196.120.233 20:01, 12 December 2012 (GMT)

Not really necessary, I don't think. This page is supposed to only provide a short summary. —Legoless (talk) 21:42, 12 December 2012 (GMT)

Apologies if this is unrelated or incorrect, but is it true that Miraak was the "first" Dragonborn? Apod (talk) 02:26, 4 April 2013 (GMT)

Sure. Please go to the forums for discussions like that; the talk page is for conversations about page alterations. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 02:34, 4 April 2013 (GMT)

Sheogorath is COC (again)

We've had to deal with this numerous times, so let's take it from the top and get it done with. Sheogorath is clearly COC. There is absolutely no evidence besides personal opinion that contradicts this. His numerous lines in Skyrim indicate that he clearly became Sheogorath. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 12:58, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

Player choice is not available in Lore. Either we assume all quests are completed, or none. The only exceptions are quests that conflict with other. We do not know which side the Hero took to get to the throne (Mania or Dementia), but the Hero became Sheogorath at the end of both lines. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 13:03, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

It is never confirmed so technically you are basing your theory on speculation. Just because Sheo in Skyrim says a few lines about Oblivion doesn't make him CoC. It just means he has knowledge of the events. If you are going to claim that Sheo is CoC then I'll claim that the Nerevarine was a male Altmer even though its never confirmed as such, just because that is how I wish to determine things. In Oblivion when CoC goes through SI the only thing that happens is a title is given to them, not full Daedric power. Last time I played it I clearly remember Sheo saying "You do not have the power of a Daedric Prince, but with my staff you can be close" never saying "You are now me and will always be me"--121.74.144.226 13:06, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

Sheogorath/Jyggalag addresses you at the end of the questline. "Now, though, you have ended the cycle. You now hold the mantle of madness, and Jyggalag is free to roam the voids of Oblivion once more. I will take my leave, and you will remain here, mortal. Mortal...? King? God? It seems uncertain. This Realm is yours. Perhaps you will grow to your station. Fare thee well, Sheogorath, Prince of Madness." Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 13:13, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

And yet still there is no confirmation. As you stated, Jyggalag says you have the mantle a term meaning the same as title. Or are you saying that someone who inherits the title of King from their father actually becomes the person just from the mantle of such? As is determined through the storyline of SI you gain the title of Madgod, the title Sheogorath becoming such. Unless Bethesda comes out and confirms with 100% then the fate of this argument will always be 50/50 with both sides being the right and wrong sides. The fate of CoC becoming Sheo is a player choice, left for each player to decide upon in both Oblivion and beyond, so to have it on articles with a wording of 100% confirmed you are falling into speculation and putting your own ideals into the lore.--121.74.144.226 13:17, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

That's rather specific memory, especially since that was never said. Check our article. I assume you are thinking of this line:

"If you ask him how you can be a Daedric Prince, he'll tell you: "A fair question. You won't, really. At least I don't think so. But you'll have power. My power. Try not to lose it. It's a pain to replace. But, for all intents and purposes, you'll be Me. A Me to fight the Him. Since I won't be around. It's simple, really. If you don't think about it." Sheo says that he doesn't know if you will truly be Sheogorath, but says that you will technically be him if all goes to plan.

That much more closely supports the current version, and that's just the tip of the iceberg of lines supporting COC being Sheo, and nothing else being the case. Take for example Jyg's last line: "I will take my leave, and you will remain here, mortal. Mortal...? King? God? It seems uncertain. This Realm is yours. Perhaps you will grow to your station. Fare thee well, Sheogorath, Prince of Madness."

While that might imply ambiguity, it just means he truly didn't know what would happen (as nothing like this had ever happened before), with him pointing out that you might became Sheogorath truly. The confirmation that COC became a god came with Skyrim, with him clearly stating he did the things that the COC did. The thing I can't stand about these arguments that they are based off of the notion of 100% certainty of any situation, when that is rarely if ever the case. We can't have that, and Beth won't just come out and say it as it writes them into a wall. Until there is any evidence actually contradicting COC being Sheo, I believe our articles should stand as they are. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 13:20, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

In Skyrim Sheo never said he did all that stuff, he said he was there for it. Being a Daedric Prince he would have had the power to watch it. Again, you are putting your own ideals and speculations into the article. What would you do if Bethesda came out and said "The fate of who Sheo is has been left to each individual player, we want them to decide if Sheo is their old Hero" would you then change the article? Or would you stick with your personal ideals and not bother making things proper, keeping false info decided upon by those who can't see the other side of the argument?--121.74.144.226 13:26, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

Can someone provide a link to Skyrim Sheo's dialogue to this effect? I looked through what I could find on CSList and couldn't find any dialogue that unequivocally states, or even implies, this. --Xyzzy ^Talk 13:27, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

"You know, I was there for that whole sordid affair. Marvelous times! Butterflies, blood, a Fox and severed head... Oh, and the cheese! To die for." Sheo's exact dialogue depicting that he does not say "I was involved" just that he was there.--121.74.144.226 13:31, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

(←) (edit conflict) You become Sheogorath, he address you as such, so do the remaining minions. Nothing says you have to have the power of a Daedric Prince to be one. Daedric Princes do not have the same power, some have more power than others, which also fluctuates. Sheogorath wasn't respected by some of the others until he proved that his domain of madness was more powerful than strength and intelligence in certain situations. You also get two powers, change the weather and teleport back to the throne room straight away. And lastly, Daedric Princes can appear in whatever form they want. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 13:31, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

Again nothing confirms either side of the argument. All I seek is that the page be left a bit more ambiguous rather then confirming an unconfirmed fact. Even if the lore pages having to be written as if done by an anonymous citizen of Tamriel, having them say "It is believed by some that he became Sheo" still makes it seem accurate, just means that the info about such events is hazy to the commoners.--121.74.144.226 13:37, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

I would obviously support the articles change if it was ever said that this wasn't the case. I can find no evidence anything like that has ever been said. You seem to be acting as if I or anyone else here is incapable of changing our articles. This isn't the case. We see no evidence that we are wrong. We see people clinging to the fact that they don't just straight up and say "SHEOGORATH IS THE OLD CHAMPION OF CYRODIIL!!!!", but that's as far as these arguments go as all known sources from in the game back up COC becoming Sheo. Every single piece of dialogue spoken by anyone involved back up him being the old Champion of Cyrodiil. Trying to wiggle around any individual piece of evidence just drives you into another wall of proof for him being Sheogorath.

You see, these arguments are based off of "what ifs", not on proof. What if he meant that he merely watch all that play out? Then who is the New-New Sheogorath? Surely they'd want to mention what happened in between, or the Shivering Isles resident would mention that our Sheogorath was deposed of? Well, surely we're not going to include all of the pure speculation on our articles. So why wouldn't we go with the one series of events that we actually know that happened? CoC became Sheogorath, that is a fact, you can't deny it. We assume all quests that don't contradict each other are completed, so he became Sheogorath. Whatever happened in between that isn't relevant. Maybe CoC did die, but his sucessor inherited his memories. Maybe he just told the new new guy what happened. Who knows. That isn't important as we already know that he became Sheogorath, so our articles are correct. All we know is that the events of Shivering Isles are canonical, and Skyrim's statements on the manner back up this series of events. If word of god later changes this situation, I would support an article change. Until then, they should remain the way they are. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 13:39, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

Edit: Also, there is no evidence that the commoners are ever aware that any of this happened. No one not related to Sheogorath mentions anything relating to the events of Shivering Isles happening. Changing the articles outside of this article to reflect the slight ambiguity of the situation makes sense, you'd have a better argument elsewhere for this change, but it absolutely doesn't make sense here as we know absolutely that he was Sheogorath. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 13:41, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

You say that the arguments against CoC becoming Sheo is based on "What ifs" but then isn't the same true for your arguments about them becoming Sheo? All you have is ambiguous dialogue that neither confirms with 100% accuracy nor denies. Looking through the policies of this wiki, it is stated to avoid editor opinions, which in truth any mention of the fate is such. Since its left to the player to decide, and its players who edit, its an editor opinion of which side to pick. So all mention that confirms such should be removed, leaving it ambiguous to let anyone decide for themselves without having people forcing ideals down their throat. At least until Bethesda replies to my tweet asking for their word on this matter. If they say, as I've been saying, that its up to each individual player then my current argument would throw yours out the window, meaning that the change would have to be applied due to the current wording of the article being editor opinions. You also say above that those arguing against Sheo being CoC are stubborn and stuck on their ways, but you seem the same since you won't even accept to let it flow both ways, to let the reader decide which path was taken as opposed to forcing one or the other onto them.--121.74.144.226 13:47, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

Why would Sheo mention any of those events if Bethesda didn't want you to make the connection to the CoC? —Legoless (talk) 13:48, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

Legoless you are asking us to determine why the mad crazy insane god would do anything that could be seen as crazy. Heck, he says he's doing the fishstick, maybe that means he's one of those forum posters...--121.74.144.226 13:50, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

(←) I just told you that implying ambiguity is alright, except when it comes to saying that the Champion of Cyrodiil became Sheogorath (as in, at one point or another). He absolutely did according to the way we write our lore articles in regard to player action. We assume all quests are done that don't contradict each other. Therefore, he became Sheogorath as far as we're concerned. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 13:59, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

But are we sure that completing the SI main quest results in the CoC becoming Sheo? I found this snippet that clearly says that the SI version of Sheo believes it. --Xyzzy ^Talk 14:02, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

If you say so AKB but it still contradicts your own policies. Technically what you are doing is claiming an editor's opinion, even if you have to write so if no quests contradict others. To some, you included, the quest in Skyrim, with Sheo, doesn't contradict the quests in SI. But then to others it does. So which do you use? Your choice? or one that would open it for both parties? That is the point I'm trying to make. Personally I sit inbetween both sides, for one save I say it is the CoC, for others I say its not.--121.74.144.226 14:07, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

This isn't an editor's opinion, but the consensus that was worked out a while back. If you'd point out which policy I'm contradicting, I'm all ears. We've had many issues with writing our articles relating to heroes for this very reason. We can't bother dancing around the possibility that the hero didn't or did do one quest or another. That's why we don't mention minor quests or side quest lines that aren't relevant or contradict one another (we don't even mention the Civil War here as the result is ambiguous and contradictory). Under this way of writing our articles, the Champion of Cyrodiil became Sheogorath. There isn't any other route that would of been taken, and we don't even say he became "Sheogorath, Daedric Prince of Madness". He assumed the title of Sheogorath, and that's what is included on the article.

I'm actually not sure what you said there besides that. I apologize, but I could not make out your message. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 14:15, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

What I was saying was that the article takes into play that everyone has done the quests, but you say that you can't dance around the possibility that the Hero did the quest or not. But besides that, I can prove that the article claims that CoC absolutely became Sheo, which you just claimed it doesn't. "becoming the new Sheogorath, Prince of Madness" a direct copy and paste from the article. It is why I edited that part to make it sound like its a possibility, that they could have become him or not. But it seems that this wiki is under the 50% who believe the vague dialogue claims Sheo is 100% CoC, rather then being the line between the two sides and seeing it as the glass is half full and half empty.--121.74.144.226 14:20, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

That's the title the game gives him, so it's listed here. I pointed out it didn't even say he a Daedric Prince, even if they shared a similar name and post to one. Editing it to make it sound like a possibility is wrong due to standing consensus. The quest was completed, and CoC absolutely became the Prince of Madness. I said it said he didn't become the "Daedric Prince of Madness" (notice the bold). I'm not sure what you're arguing about besides that at this point. Sheogorath being the CoC by Skyrim's time is irrelevant here. He became Sheogorath in Oblivion. There really isn't anything else to say. Our article is correct in terminology and currently ignores any ambiguity of the situation in the future. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 14:30, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

I'd just like to chime in and point something out here: even though SI proclaims you as Sheogorath, keep in mind you're in the realm of madness. You weren't treated any differently outside the Isles, and all the people having entered the Isles before you had gone mad. And this is what I choose to believe, that the player went in and went mad. So I would mind lore stating it's certain Sheogorath is the Champion of Cyrodiil now. There have been no mentions of Jyggalag anywhere outside the Isles or anything related to the matter either ~ Dwarfmp (talk) 14:47, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

(←) That really is your personal interpretation of events, however. Let's assume that what we saw was what literally happened. If you use that argument, how can we deny that maybe the Eternal Champion died in his cell due to a lack of food and water, and Arena was just a hallucination as he or she died? Let's avoid adding fan theories onto our articles. Also, see On Oblivion for a previous reference to Jyggalag. I believe the devs have commented on that before, with him existing as an extra Daedric God in case they wanted to introduce a new one to the setting. Even then, there are non-insane people in the Isles (Haskill, Pyke, and Dyus) besides the player. The reason you were able to enter without going insane is explained as well, you killed the Gatekeeper.

At this point, this is officially drifting away from a wiki-appropriate subject and is starting to veer more towards swapping fan theories. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 14:57, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

The events of Arena have had an impact on the later games. You can't deny the possibility of Sheogorath playing tricks on you, it's a plausible explanation. If you say the player hasn't become a Daedric Prince, I find it odd he, or even she, turned aesthetically into the old man previously to hold the title, and sounding like him. That's the beauty of this whole situation, there's no certitude as any theory can fit in. In any case, stating it is fact is still speculation as of now ~ Dwarfmp (talk) 15:06, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

AKB, can you provide a link to Skyrim dialogue that supports the article's present wording? Everything I've been able to find doesn't really address it. Without some clear evidence from Skyrim that the CoC did indeed become the Prince of Madness, I would have to agree with 121.74.144.226 that the wording should be less certain. --Xyzzy ^Talk 15:09, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

The dialogue from Shivering Isles supports it, "Perhaps you will grow to your station. Fare thee well, Sheogorath, Prince of Madness." Even if it's just a title, it doesn't make the current wording wrong. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 15:13, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

Good point. The article only says he became "Sheogorath, Prince of Madness", not "Sheogorath, Daedric Prince". In that light, the article's wording seems fine to me. --Xyzzy ^Talk 15:18, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

Dwarf, let's not go off on a tangent about head canon. As far as we are aware based off of the the events that happened within the game, assuming that they happened realistically as we saw them (there are no major implications that this isn't the case), then he is Sheogorath. Therefore, it can't be speculation. Sheogorath's preferred form is also something that's been discussed in detail (OOG, but link here). And there are a various number of reasons for why he would end up looking like that. He agreed with Old Sheo's philosophy for the get-up, he literally was morphed into looking and sounding like that for some reason, or maybe someone replace CoC just happened to look like Old Sheo. It really doesn't matter.

My personal theory is that Bethesda purposely did this in such a way to start complicated lore discussions like this one. It's all just one big laugh on us. Once you think about it, that is exactly what Sheogorath would of wanted. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 15:39, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

+1 for AKB. The vast majority of the community has come to and accepted the conclusion that the COC became the Prince of Madness. Go look at videos on youtube, chatrooms, forums, etc. This is essentially a settled point. Sheogorath was not "there" for all the events he alluded to in Skyrim; only the COC was there. You can add whatever wiggle room you want ("It may be that ...", "His dialogue suggests that ...", etc.), but in my opinion, this is cold, hard TES fact, and this conversation is a little ridiculous. 121.74.144.226: you don't seem to understand that the COC becoming the Prince does not need confirming. It happened in-game, and that's enough by itself, but then was corroborated by the next game. The great weight of the information in the lore only comes from one game source and hasn't been "confirmed" by subsequent games; it doesn't mean we treat it as doubtful. So your argument that it hasn't been confirmed is irrelevant; even if we agreed for the sake of argument that the Skyrim dialogue is ambiguous, it wouldn't change anything on this page. Anyways, the language is fine in its current state. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 17:38, 24 March 2013 (GMT)

Very well, but answer me this: If I get word from Bethesda that its not 100% and it is truly left to each individual players viewing will you change the article to a more ambiguous wording? Or will you stick with your own personal opinions of it and be like a lot of religious people and try force it onto others?--121.74.144.226 01:28, 25 March 2013 (GMT)

We will continue to summarize game events, as they've been presented to us, based on all the accurate and verifiable information available. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 01:57, 25 March 2013 (GMT)

No what you have done is picked one side and gone with that. If you truly looked at all events as they had been presented then you would have things set up as its only a possibility that CoC became Sheo not a definite. Even Sheo says it in SI that he does not know for sure what will happen, but that for all intents and purposes CoC would take his place for the events. That is a similar context to what happens for a substitute teacher, they become the teacher for all intents and purposes but are not truly them.--121.74.144.226 02:22, 25 March 2013 (GMT)

(←) The wording of the article is true as it stands. The debate over whether you become Sheogorath is for the forums. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 02:25, 25 March 2013 (GMT)

The current wording of the article heavily implies that the CoC becomes Sheogorath, not just gains the title and possibly becomes him. That is why I reworded it, to make it less pointed at one path and open to interpretation. But it seems that only those who control this wiki can decide how things are shown to the readers, its your way or the highway right?--121.74.144.226 02:29, 25 March 2013 (GMT)

For your benefit I have included two references that confirm the wording used. It's all documented on the site, but if you don't believe us then check the numerous other wikis out there. This topic started to make sure the wording was correct. Multiple editors have agreed with the references. It has been dragged through the mud to include a theological debate on whether the COC became a daedric prince, that is for the forums. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 02:39, 25 March 2013 (GMT)

This topic is (now) unrelated to the content of the article, and more suited to the forums. Please feel free to continue the discussion there. This topic is now closed.

Protection?

I would say virtually every single edit made to this page gets reverted for one reason or another. As this page is subject to constant edit warring, I would recommend this page for permanent semi-protection. Does anyone else agree with me here? --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 18:51, 7 May 2013 (GMT)

Yeah, the history is littered with badly worded, opinionated, or otherwise undone edits. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 18:59, 7 May 2013 (GMT)

I'd be okay with protecting for 6 months or so, sure. ⇠eshe^talk 19:02, 7 May 2013 (GMT)

Verily, yea. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 19:05, 7 May 2013 (GMT)

While I think this page will ultimately end up protected more than it won't be, I'd be alright with a temporary protection for now. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 19:06, 7 May 2013 (GMT)

You could be right...it just feels odd going straight to permanent protection for a page that's never been protected at all before, that's all. ⇠eshe^talk 19:11, 7 May 2013 (GMT)

(←) I understand. I'll go for a temporary stretch of semi-protection for now. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 19:44, 9 May 2013 (GMT)

Independent Pages

I think it'd be nice if each hero, if enough information is present in each game, had their own page. I think it'd be easier to keep track of their accomplishments in TES lore. --Resonance Gamer (talk) 03:28, 12 June 2013 (GMT)

While I'm usually on the side of making the lore section comprehensive, this is a bit infeasible and would likely lead to controversy. There's a whole mess of issues here we should continue to avoid. That being said, it is only the anonymous heroes who are exclusively covered here. We have entries for Cyrus, the Redguard hero, and the Nerevarine. We also have a Dragonborn page, though it is about Dragonborns in general, not the Last Dragonborn. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 03:40, 21 June 2013 (GMT)

Tiber Septim a Hero?

From what I've seen in the games, Tiber Septim appears to have been a Hero in that he was "far more powerful than most other mortals." And he probably had some connection to the Elder Scrolls; they'd hardly fail to mention that he would become a god. And the founding of the Third Empire is certainly an Event.

Of course, it's possible that just as the Hero of the Oblivion Crisis wasn't Martin, the Hero of this Event may have been someone else. I'll admit this is kind of just rambling to myself about an interesting possibility that's probably wrong. 67.173.209.250 04:40, 7 August 2013 (GMT)

This page is for player characters only. We have never been able to play as Tiber Septim. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 04:41, 7 August 2013 (GMT)

I was just thinking that Hero seems to mean more in the lore than just "player character" though all the PCs have been Heroes. 67.173.209.250 17:32, 10 August 2013 (GMT)

While you're correct, "Hero" is the most lore-friendly term available for player characters. Were we to allow non-playable characters and historical characters we've never encountered in, this article would bloat tremendously, as well as lead to a ton of arguments about who was technically a hero or not. As such, I don't think we should change how this article is. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 17:45, 10 August 2013 (GMT)

Agreed. The real-life term "hero" is pretty subjective. This article is intended for the playable characters from the games, and I don't see any good reason to change it. It might not be a bad idea to make that clear in the lead paragraph of the article. --Xyzzy ^Talk 23:05, 10 August 2013 (GMT)

I like the tongue-in-cheek nature of the page as it is, so I'd hate to break the fourth wall to clarify this point. I think almost everyone who may visit it can quickly understand it is focused on the player characters of the various games, and not on the multitude of other heroes in the games and lore. The page protection already ensures that any momentarily confused anons won't start adding heroes willy-nilly. Never thought I'd use that phrase, but here we are. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 01:03, 11 August 2013 (GMT)

A thought on the gender of the Nerevarine

Thought I'd start a new section for this as the old one is rather old.

Neloth is shown in both games to be very aloof and unaware of his surroundings. It's therefore possible that he never noticed whether the person who came to him asking to be Hortator was male or female. After all, that was his only interaction with the Nerevarine as part of the main quest of Morrowind, and he certainly didn't think over the choice that much. Xolroc (talk) 20:38, 14 September 2013 (GMT)

Thats still speculating. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 20:48, 14 September 2013 (GMT)

Of course. I'm not saying it should be changed, just giving my two cents. Xolroc (talk) 22:27, 14 September 2013 (GMT)

It's just poor wording on Bethesda's part, in any case; they didn't really mean to ascertain the Morrowind PC's gender with an off-hand comment like that. Weroj (talk) 00:50, 19 January 2014 (GMT)

Weroj, I reverted you because this issue pretty much is dead. This topic itself is over four months old, and it's advised not to revive conversations which have been dead for more than three months. And Xolroc said this topic was not started with intent of advocating for a page change, so it shouldn't have been started in the first place, as this is not a forum. I am not trying to censor you; if anything, I agree.

As I implied when I originally brought this up, I am uncomfortable relying solely on one use of a male pronoun in dialogue to definitively state the Nerevarine's gender from a lore perspective. But, as uncomfortable as I am with that, I am even more uncomfortable with simply assuming that Bethesda made a mistake. I think that's inappropriate. For all we know, this was very deliberate. I mean, if they are really so gung-ho about remaining vague about the gender of past heroes, then wouldn't you think the one piece of dialogue in Dragonborn mentioning the Nerevarine would have gotten more review? It just doesn't make sense to me. And, to my knowledge, Bethesda has never offered a correction. As you said, the issue keeps cropping up. I imagine they've been queried about it before, yet no clarification. They could've been testing the fan base's reaction to dropping the myth that there is no "canon" hero. Perhaps they are/were considering doing that in the next game. Or maybe they just wanted to screw with us. Point being, I wouldn't find it all that surprising to learn this was not a mistake, so we shouldn't ignore it. It's relevant.

So I offer a compromise: we note it. Putting something in the Notes section is the usual Solomon's Baby in the lore section. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 03:14, 19 January 2014 (GMT)

All questions over whether or not they "really meant to say "he"" is secondary to the simple fact that "he" doesn't necessarily imply a gender. It's a basic misunderstanding of how English works to say that Neloth was absolutely confirming the gender.

The point is, there's a great deal of doubt, and a one-sentence summary of what a character is shouldn't contain things that only *might* be correct. The Nerevarine page's note is perfectly reasonable, but anyone glancing over this page will come away with the understanding that the Nerevarine is confirmed to be male, which a clearly substantial number of people disagree with. There are multiple valid interpretations of Neloth's dialogue, and a one-sentence summary shouldn't pick one of those interpretations and promote it as fact. That's fundamentally dishonest and compromises the integrity of the Wiki. Moonshadow101 (talk) 07:16, 25 January 2014 (GMT)

It's a basic misunderstanding of English to believe that He does NOT denote male. He is used because we are a fairly sexist, male-driven society. That does NOT mean that the word he can be used to refer to either gender. He means male. That's what it means. It is incredibly sexist to believe that he doesn't imply a gender. That's like saying "Man and Wife" doesn't imply that the marriage is between a man and a woman. It's just plain wrong. Jeancey (talk) 07:28, 25 January 2014 (GMT)

It's absolutely true that the neutral "They" is a valid form of speaking and writing. So is the neutral "he." You can call it evil and patriarchal all you want (And you wouldn't necessarily be wrong,) but it has hundreds of years of actual common usage backing it up. Usage is what English is and Isn't, not idealistic linguistic engineering. If the latter were true, Neloth would have used a Spivak pn or something. Moonshadow101 (talk) 04:38, 9 March 2014 (GMT)

(←) It's worth noting that Bethesda has a history of using gendered terms ("he", "man", etc.) as gender neutral (see SR:Loading Screens, the ones on Soul Trap and on the Vampire Lord). The actual gender-neutral pronoun, "they", is actually quite common and has been used for centuries too (Shakespeare used it a few times), but its usage has been opposed to by prescriptivists, who believe that it is grammatically incorrect to refer to a single person with a plural pronoun.

IMO we should avoid controversy while not ignoring Neloth's statement by putting a note saying something like "Neloth refers to the Nerevarine as male". That way we include the statement but do not necessarily present it as fact. —<({Quill-Tail>> 09:25, 25 January 2014 (GMT)

The problem I see here is perspective. Yes Bethesda would use "he" for an unknown person. But Neloth did know the Nerevarine, he would never use "he" for a known female person. But I agree that we shouldn't put too much weight onto a single occurrence of something that might just be an oversight. --Alfwyn (talk) 11:46, 25 January 2014 (GMT)

A note is a fine idea, but where? This page would be an odd place for it, and there's no Lore:Nerevarine page. Morrowind:Nerevarine already has a note, but this page doesn't even link there. As a side note, the phrase "Neloth did know the Nerevarine" is a bit ambitious, given that MW Neloth's dialog consists primarily of "Go away!" DB Neloth is considerably more personable.Moonshadow101 (talk) 04:47, 9 March 2014 (GMT)

I'm personally of the opinion that it was a simple developer oversight that Neloth said "He", but I concur that, from a Lore perspective, we can't ignore it. The idea of a note explaining this is a pretty good compromise, and I think this article is probably the best place for it. --Xyzzy ^Talk 07:15, 9 March 2014 (GMT)

Actually Michael Kirkbride confirmed exactly this on Reddit.213.138.81.235 12:04, 12 February 2015 (GMT)

Michael Kirkbride was not a part of the development team for Skyrim to the best of my memory, therefore this "confirmation" of that not being canon cannot be used. He claimed in a later comment that the developer who implemented it admitted it was an error, although I would like to see an official confirmation instead of from the mouth of someone who spoke to the guy. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 17:20, 12 February 2015 (GMT)

The Elder Scrolls Online

The MMORPG contains new heroes called the Soulless Ones. Canonically Soulless One is not a single person but many as it was stated in the trailer of the game "salvation does not come from a single hero it comes from many". KahnJohn27 (talk) 09:16, 16 September 2013 (GMT)

I can confirm that the hero of ESO will be called the Soulless One. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 18:10, 16 September 2013 (GMT)

When will someone create a mention of the Soulless One/s on this page? --Resonance Gamer (talk) 00:20, 1 March 2014 (GMT)

It's done now. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 00:19, 22 March 2014 (GMT)

(←) Shouldn't the entry be plural? Insignificant Revisions^{Threats•Evidence} 16:13, 13 June 2014 (GMT)

I dunno. The main quest seems to be written from a solo perspective, but there are a whole lotta immortals running around. —Legoless (talk) 17:09, 13 June 2014 (GMT)

I don't really know, it's just that on other lore pages, I've seen one or two references to "Soulless Ones". Insignificant Revisions^{Threats•Evidence} 17:11, 13 June 2014 (GMT)

On the other hand, all the lorebooks that are filled in with then players name, like Lore:Chronicles of the Five Companions mention only one hero who escapes from Coldharbor. --AN|L (talk) 17:14, 13 June 2014 (GMT)

I guess all the heroes are infinite in number when you consider the character variations and timebreak nonsense. A little bit like the Nerevarine, perhaps all the ESO toons have the potential to become the hero? In Shadowkey, multiplayer was explained away as visiting an alternate universe (shadow realm). Like Shadowkey, I think we should leave the ESO entry singular. Nevertheless it's clear that the player isn't the only one who's an escaped Soul Shriven, and lots of in-game events imply groups of adventurers (public dungeons, Craglorn, etc). Let's try to keep it vague on the lore articles, unless it's specifically from the main quest, which is mostly a singleplayer gauntlet anyway. Thousands of player characters can just be put down to Shezarrine mumbo jumbo if we have to go there. —Legoless (talk) 17:42, 13 June 2014 (GMT)

Pilgrim

The Lore:Crusader's Relics article is littered with references to "the pilgrim", and even links the first mention to this article. Should this title be added to the list of alternate titles for the Hero of Oblivion? --Xyzzy ^Talk 03:21, 9 October 2013 (GMT)

The Hero is referred to as "a pilgrim". It's not an alternative title, it's just being generic. —Legoless (talk) 15:11, 9 March 2014 (GMT)

Bendu Olo

Would it be safe to say that the player in Oblivion is the default male Imperial named Bendu Olo? --Resonance Gamer (talk) 06:35, 28 January 2014 (GMT)

Given that we list Talin as the name of the Eternal Champion, it wouldn't exactly be unprecedented, so I am tentatively in support of a note listing that name (which was gleaned from the CS, IIRC), though it's likely to be controversial to do so, and it may cause confusion with the king of Anvil. -damon  ^xoxo 06:46, 28 January 2014 (GMT)

Yeah, Bendu Olo is an actual person in the lore already. Shouldn't use that. Generally, in the lore section, the heroes are anonymous (my preference, when it's feasible). Otherwise, it's the name best known to history - in Oblivion's case, the Champion of Cyrodiil. And if you have to tell a story where the hero is substantially involved, like here, it makes the most sense to list the names as they come. Hero of Kvatch, Savior of Bruma, etc. Anyways, speculation about him/her is for the forums. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 06:59, 28 January 2014 (GMT)

Images and/or Gallery

Would it be appropriate to have images of each hero (either in a gallery or alongside each respective description) that has a set default look (Redguard, Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim)? --Rezalon (talk) 22:40, 22 February 2015 (GMT)

Aside from Cyrus, I don't think so. —Legoless (talk) 22:51, 22 February 2015 (GMT)

Eternal Champion page?

We have a page for Lore:Talin which is used for speculation, and a page for Lore:Warhaft which is used for information known about the first possible Talin, but why don't we have a page for the other possible Talin, the EC himself? There are several pieces of information that aren't on the Wiki, and the stuff that is is sometimes hard to find. I think there should be a page dedicated to what is known about the EC, which can found in the Arena manual, Daggerfall Chronicles, and Arena creation screen, so that information about him is in one place and easy to find It doesn't even have to be a full page, but can be added under Lore:People_E. --Rezalon (talk) 23:37, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

I'd support this, since we have pages for Lore:Nerevarine and Lore:Cyrus. —Legoless (talk) 23:41, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

I have created a page in my Sandbox, if you wanna look through it. Before I actually create the page, please give me the go-ahead, just so I don't cause anyone any annoyances. --Rezalon (talk) 05:09, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind, but I've taken the liberty of editing the sandbox to fix a couple formatting issues and expand on the game events a little. Looks ready for launch to me! —Legoless (talk) 23:51, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Cheers. --Rezalon (talk) 00:16, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Legends hero/es

Assuming Legends will copy HearthStone and have several heroes to "play" as, who each represent a class to base a deck around, will the separate heroes be listed on this page? My personal opinion would be to have entry called "the Heroes of Legends" and then list the heroes, each linking to their respective page (if they are already heroes in lore, again similar to HearthStone) --Rezalon (talk) 04:25, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

We should wait until there is some official information on Legends before discussing this matter here. If you would like to speculate before that, please head over to the forums. -- SarthesArai ^Talk 16:56, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Lack of statement about the "omnipotent hero" problem

I came to this article trying to find some official statement about the in-game possibility for the hero to become master of every single guild at the same time (for later games with no factional reputation) and own every single daedric artifact of his/her timeframe, besides other feats. I think this article should mention such statement, or, if they don't exist, mention UESP's view on this question. 90.32.102.45 21:32, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

The UESP doesn't have a specific view on this situation. The UESP does have the stance that all closed quests are completed (i.e. in Skyrim the Mages Guild, Companions, and Thieves Guild questlines are completed), but open-ended quests/questlines are only taken to the point of divergence (e.g. Grelod is killed, but nothing further is fact along the Dark Brotherhood questline). However, the UESP acknowledges the fact that these are games, and as such there are certain limitations that the games creators have to contend with, such as Princes using an NPC and therefore needing a race in order to make an appearance, or having one character become leader of four different and sometimes opposing guilds, whilst at the same time completing other non-faction quests which are in opposition to a guild, but yet has no repercussions despite it being widely known that you are the one who did it. The character can become a master in multiple methods of warfare, as well as mastering multiple technical skills in less time than it took the masters in the game to master just one skill. Let us not forget the daedric quests, where making a bargain with one Prince is usually fatal for a mortal, but our character makes up to 15 such bargains and comes out on top each time (as well as the multiple trips to Oblivion that again are usually too much for mortals to handle). There are articles that touch on this, such as Shezarrine, but other than obscure lore there is nothing to be said as most can accept that it is just a game limitation (and therefore the UESP simply ignores the improbability and uses non-specific language when writing articles). Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 23:15, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Vestige

Question - shouldn't the hero be Vestige instead? He's called that during the main quests, multiple times. Timeoin (talk) 01:52, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

I agree, changed it. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 06:30, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

That was easy, lol. So much easier than wikia lol. Timeoin (talk) 20:43, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

I disagree strongly, actually. The Elder Scrolls refer to the hero as the "soulless one". "The Vestige" is a name given to them by Emperor Varen, the same guy who calls himself "The Prophet". It's not a unique name/title, and Vestige can already mean several other things. We've therefore been using "Soulless One" exclusively on the wiki for the past 3 years, so I wouldn't be so quick to come to a consensus to change it. —Legoless (talk) 22:02, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

I don't agree with your reasoning. The Elder Scrolls referring to you as "x" has never been a standard before, so I don't see why it's useful now. Additionally, "Vestige" is definitely used more in-game than "Soulless One", from my experience. We also definitely have not been using "Soulless One" exclusively for three years, a simple search reveals this is not the case for either one. "Vestige" not being a unique title is also a really bad point, when you look at some of the other names of the list "The Agent", "The Apprentice", "The Nerevarine" (plenty of people used that title), "The Champion of Cyrodiil" (we are explicitly told you aren't the first one!). All I can really say is you've point out there is no consensus on which one is preferable, not that the "Soulless One" is the preferred choice.

With that said, I still prefer Vestige, as I found it was used much more commonly than "Soulless One", which I don't remember hearing once. Additionally, I think it's also better because it simply sounds better. "The Vestige" just looks so much better than "The Soulless One" to me. Unless you can prove definitively that Soulless One is the preferred option in universe, I think we should switch to using Vestige.— Unsigned comment by Alpha Kenny Buddy (talk • contribs)

This is a difficult one because there are good points on both sides. I think what it really comes down to is what name/title would the hero be known as from a historical point of view. These are lore pages after all. You are known as "The Hero of Kvatch" for 90% of Oblivion but, historically speaking, "Champion of Cyrodiil" is what they probably would've been known as.

Over the last couple of years, I have used "Vestige" in any lore pages I write because its was clearly the only consistent in-game name that was given to you, and its what most people will recognize. I checked and certainly couldn't find any consensus to use one over the other. "Soulless One" was the term used by the devs before release (even in one in a Zenimax help page), but its definitely dropped off. It doesn't appear in any lorebooks or dialogue (except when first meeting Varen: "That is the name I have given you. You are but a trace of your former self. A soulless one".

The only saving grace for "Soulless One" is that the Elder Scrolls apparently foretold of them: "There's an ancient prophecy in the Elder Scrolls that says that the Soulless One will thwart Molag Bal's plan" - Wynne McLaughlin. From a historical point of view, Soulless One holds a bit more weight over Vestige (which is a term known only to the Five Companions), but it still a poorly supported term that the devs don't even bother using themselves anymore.

I prefer Vestige, mainly because its the more recognizable of the two. Ultimately, both terms might not be appropriate in the future, as by the end of the game you are known as "Meridia's Champion" and the "Savior of Tamriel". --Jimeee (talk) 08:48, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) "Soulless one" is used to refer to the hero about five times. Four of those are as a description rather than a title; "It is as the Scrolls foretold. The soulless one will become the brightest of five stars, and they shall guide us to the coming dawn.", "The soulless one thinks I can be defeated. Not so, fool.", "That is the name I have given you. You are but a trace of your former self. A soulless one. An empty vessel that longs to be filled. \n\nIt is as the Scrolls foretold, but not exactly as I imagined.", "A goddess never suffers without purpose. The gem can destroy the Fangs of Chaos. Blessed Almalexia warned me that no mortal could wield the gem without also being destroyed by her rage. She told me to wait for the soulless, deathless one. You." The only other one in the data, which does appear as a title, I don't recognise, and can't place: "Oh, and I suppose your existence makes sense, Soulless One? You're nonsense on legs. Trust me on this. Trust the Scroll. This is fate unrolling before us." Conversely, Vestige appears as a title referring to the hero dozens of times, but only by the Five Companions and Cadwell, and Varen eschews you of that title during his Orsinium epilogue, replacing it with Meridia's Champion, Hero of Coldharbour, and Savior of Tamriel. In terms of the Main Quest, I think Meridia's Champion is the most important (and least generic) title that could be used. In terms of documentation, there's nothing in the game that supports Soulless One as a title. In terms of historical relevance, Vestige is a word that's used for too many other things, and no longer applies to the hero after the main quest is over. --Enodoc (talk) 09:12, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

AKB, the search for Vestige you linked to proves that it is the lesser-used of the two on the wiki, and I've been actively changing any instance of it I've come across for 3 years now. Most of its uses are either old (we used "Vestige" at release) or unaware of our preference. It's also obviously not incorrect to refer to the hero as the Vestige, so it does no real harm to leave them as-is.

Enodoc raises a good point, in that Varen ultimately eschews the title of Vestige. I think Meridia's Champion and Soulless One are both better contenders, despite being more uncommon. However, I still think the name given by the Elder Scrolls (descriptive or not) should be given preference, considering how closely heroes are tied to prophecy. "Champion of Cyrodiil" actually sets precedent for the use of less common (but ultimately more correct) names - after all, "Hero of Kvatch" is the most common name used for that hero, but is similarly eschewed at the end of the Main Quest. —Legoless (talk) 21:39, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

The developers themselves call them Vestige, on multiple occasions. (Example: here) Timeoin (talk) 22:26, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

(←) This is one of those frequent arguments where people don't really know what they are arguing for. Both names are equally valid when referring to the hero of ESO, but the name used in the header is the name that the hero is or will be known by in the history books. The "Vestige" will not be the defining name of the hero, as it is not a title whatever way it looks. It is a descriptor, meaning "empty vessel", which the hero cannot be called after they reclaim their soul (the Prophet says something along these lines during his first talks with you). Varen gives three new titles when you loose the right to be called Vestige, which are "Meridia's Champion", "Hero of Coldharbour", and "Savior of Tamriel". Even though these titles are heard only a few times, possibly only twice, they are far more correct than Vestige, and even Soulless One for that matter, though its saving grace is the fact that the prophecy uses that title. To compare with the others, Last Dragonborn is heard less frequently than just Dragonborn, or even Dovahkiin. The CoC is barely used at all, yet is the "proper" title for that hero, even though the titles Hero of Kvatch, Savior of Bruma, and Divine Crusader still apply and all could be considered correct. Vestige is an "also known by" name/title, but it is not the one that will define the hero when the history books are written. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 01:01, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

This conversation definitely seems to show "Soulless One" is barely supported right now. No matter what Soulless One is the absolute worst choice, it doesn't apply to this hero by the end of the quest and is barely used in official sources beyond that. I would prefer "Meridia's Champion", "Hero of Coldharbour", and "Savior of Tamriel" or "Vestige", with my absolute preferred choice being "Meridia's Champion". Soulless One absolutely has to go, though. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 07:22, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

I personally like Meridia's Champion, however, that's kind of a spoiler for those that haven't finished the main storyline yet. Having said that - the game has been out for a VERY long time now. Why haven't you finished the storyline yet? Timeoin (talk) 09:30, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm fine with Meridia's Champion too, if people are opposed to Soulless One. However, I really think that the fact that it's used in the hero's prophecy is being underappreciated. We literally know what this individual is named in the Elder Scrolls - why settle for anything else? It also isn't the first time we've "given" a hero a proper title: "The Agent", "The Apprentice", and the "Hero of Dawnstar" are fictitious names, and "Master Tunnel Rat" is never capitalised ("Ah..., the master tunnel rat. If you think to pry this prize from my hands you are sorely mistaken."). What's the difference here?

I agree with Silencer's assessment above: it's not that these proposed names are incorrect, but we have to choose one and I say we choose the name used in the prophecy. After all, that's what heroes are: creatures of prophecy. —Legoless (talk) 13:38, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Per above, I say we move to Meridia's Champion, unless anyone else wants to add in. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 01:58, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

@Lego: As I said before, I agree with the weight given to "Soulless One" per the prophecy. It was big pre-release but usage seems to have dropped off completely and I'm not even convinced the devs are supporting it anymore. You hear the titles "Dragonborn" and "Nereverine", but the same can't be said about ESO. I prefer Meridia's Champion. Which is also the term that should be used on other lore pages, if appropriate. --Jimeee (talk) 09:51, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

I think I'll add my thoughts on this. So Varen calls the hero Vestige, not particularly as a title, but more so because that is what the hero is (at least as I see it). I tend to equate that to how daedra call people mortal, would that make them The Mortal? No. I also don't think Meridia's Champion is very good because daedric titles have a tendency to change often. For instance Miraak was Hermaeus Mora's champion, then the Last Dragonborn killed him and took his place as champion. Additionally, in Skyrim the Boethiah's Calling quest involved killing the old Champion to become the new one. So Meridia's Champion in a historic sense isn't very specific (assuming Meridia names multiple champions over time as some other princes do). However, Soulless One is specific to the hero of The Elder Scrolls Online and is what they were identified as by the Elder Scrolls. So in a historic sense The Soulless One would be the better identifier of the hero in my opinion. Enderkingdev (talk) 00:57, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Silly question - but where exactly is this prophecy that seems to call it Soulless One? The only in-game lore book I can find linking to it is On Soul Shriven, which refers to them as Vestige. Timeoin (talk) 02:56, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

That term of vestige in that book refers to the creature (see lore page ). In short a vestige is a mortal whose soul is replaced with daedric energy. Haskill is also a Vestige. This is why Varen calls the player vestige, because they are a soul shriven which is a type of vestige. There is this "It is as the Scrolls foretold. The soulless one will become the brightest of five stars, and they shall guide us to the coming dawn." I'm pretty sure it is Varen that says this at the end of the main quest, but i'm not entirely sure if it was him or at that time. (Side note, but aren't those books not in-game?) Enderkingdev (talk) 05:14, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

(←) thanks. I believe that would, indeed, be near the end of the questline. And it effectively negates the argument for it over vestige, since it by same source as Vestige. As to the Soul shriven thing - I based it off WhatLinksHere. If its wrong - that should probably be corrected. Timeoin (talk) 05:28, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Chronicles of the five companions refer to Vestige multiple times. Om several of the books. Timeoin (talk) 07:13, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

"Soulless one" comes from the Prophet's dialogue. Vestige is indeed what the player is called over the course of the main quest, but it's also a bad name per the above. —Legoless (talk) 17:44, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

I'd just like to point out, in response to Ender's point about the uniqueness of the Meridia title, that at least 5 of the hero names on the page are not "unique" to that person. The Agent and Apprentice are obvious, the Hero of Dawnstar and Champion of Cyrodiil are non-unique identifiers, and the Forgotten Hero is even more generic. What these are though, are names with unique connotations within the games, meaning that when we talk of the CoC there is only one person that we are talking about. I still don't know which I favour, but I'm leaning towards Soulless One (its a title not a descriptor like Vestige), Meridia's Champion, or Hero of Coldharbour (as a compromise between the bland Savior of Tamriel and MC). Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 17:55, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Good point Silencer. 2 months on and I think we should wrap this up. I think it's fair to say most people who have commented would either prefer "Meridia's Champion" or find it an acceptable compromise. If there is nothing else to add I'll update the page. --Jimeee (talk) 18:33, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

I am opposed to Meridia's Champion for my reasoning before. Sure other hero titles such as The Agent or The Apprentice are not unique, but in those cases they don't have an alternative (If there is perhaps they should be discussed). As for the Champion of Cyrodiil, do we know of any other hero that uses that title? With a daedric title that changes frequently (I think even the Last Dragonborn earns the title of Meridia's Champion by doing her quest in Skyrim, technically speaking) it would be difficult to match it to one person historically speaking. Soulless One is an identifier that is given by the prophecy of the scrolls. If people are really opposed to it I would recommend The Hero of Coldharbour, which is unique and one of the final titles that the hero earns (Savior of Tamriel also but I read it in place of Soulless one in some articles and it just seems off). Enderkingdev (talk) 22:21, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Go with Vestige, most people know it and it serves its purpose. - Serithi (cba logging in) — Unsigned comment by 71.231.208.129 (talk) at 19:38 on 29 October 2017 (UTC)

I am also opposed to "Meridia's Champion" both because of the spoiler situation (despite it being a minor inconvenience, specially in a wiki) and also because her involvement is not a truly defining factor to the character, not only has she been involved in only a fraction of the storyline, her actual involvement is quite limited. Arguments for the use of "Soulless One" over "Vestige" have already been laid so I will not revisit them other to say that I agree with Soulless One being used over Vestige, not by uniqueness but more for the context in which each is used to refer to the player in special. A counter example I can think of is the protagonist of 'Oblivion', why do we not call them "the Madgod" instead of the "Champion of Cyrodiil"? Since not only is that title issued chronogically after, it is more "unique" than CoC. Bryn (talk) 20:08, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

I definitely prefer "The Soulless One" or "Hero of Coldharbour" over "Meridia's Champion". Y'all have finally managed to win me over from supporting Vestige. Either of those two would be more recognizable for a player coming here who hasn't finished the main quest, and as Bryn pointed out, Meridia's role in that is not actually that big, so Meridia's Champion is not really a defining title for that character. Hell, making something up like "Defeater of the Planemeld" would be better than MC. --FioFioFio (talk) 20:23, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

(←) Resurrecting this because this seems like it died off without consensus. "Soulless One" seems like a really bad title, as it doesn't have any basis in the game. There is no evidence for the Vestige ever being referred to as "Soulless One" as a title, its only used 4 times as a descriptor. Using it as a title on multiple wiki pages is essentially us making up a title for them because it sounded cool as opposed to having ANY in game basis. We have basically the entirety of the earnable titles in ESO to chose from if we want, those are all more canonical than Soulless One.

Also, 'using the title the Scrolls use' is just an incorrect argument, as the Scrolls DONT use that title. They use it as a description. If we're using that as evidence, then Dragon Born is an accurate alternate name for the Nerevarine. Jacksol (talk) 01:30, 22 January 2020 (GMT)

Agree with using Vestige due to the fact that Tharn uses it multiple times, Soulless one doesn't apply after the events of the main quest due to the souls being released after the defeat of Molag bal Imperialbattlespire (talk) 19:43, 27 January 2020 (GMT)

I think Vestige is an appropriate title, but I also understand the messiness of using the term. I believe Hero of Coldharbour should suffice: It is clearly supported by in-game text, it isn't ambiguous with any other heroes or words, and it isn't 'bland' as some of the others described the other titles. --Lost in Hyrule (talk) 21:00, 27 January 2020 (GMT)

This discussion seems to have become quite complicated and while I'd hate to add onto that I do have a couple points to bring up about each name:

• Vestige: This one is the most simple, straightforward, and commonly used name. Primary reason for us not using it is because Lore:Vestige (creature) and Lore:Vestige (soul) also use the same term and it can get confusing to use this name too.
• Soulless One: This one isn't used as often but it does have the added benefit of not conflicting with the term "Vestige" like the other name. I think a very important point to bring up is that the title Soulless One has been around since Arena as an exclamation used by Dunmer. I know some may doubt that it refers to the same person but I very much think it does, as ZOS often uses Arena lore (these exclamations particularly) and sought a way to link them together as a form of retroactive continuity, and the Ebonheart Pact/ESO: Morrowind storylines explain why the Soulless One would be a hero to the Dunmer people
• Meridia's Champion: This one has a couple issues. Firstly, Laloriaran Dynar is also called Meridia's Champion, similar to the many Champions of Cyrodiil who held the title before/after the Hero of Kvatch. Evidently I should note that Darien Gautier is not her champion but her vessel and knight, and she's looking for a replacement. Secondly, after completing the main quest and speaking to Tharayya, you say "We've crossed paths before. She's the enemy of our enemies, but not our friend." It would seem that the name doesn't go both ways (equivalent of Hermaeus Mora calling the Dragonborn their champion) and if Meridia ends up being an antagonist in a future ESO story this name wouldn't age well.
• Hero of Coldharbour: This name just sounds bland to me personally, the name of any hero with "Hero" in the title sounds off

I should note that, when you talk to Meridia in Summerset she calls you "Champion of Coldharbour", which sounds better than "Hero of Coldharbour. Ideally I'd call them "Soulless One" or "Champion of Coldharbour" if Vestige can't be used as the primary name. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 00:36, 13 February 2020 (GMT)

The issue with 'Soulless One' though isn't that it's 'not used as often', it's that it's never once used as a title for the Vestige. I find it really hard to believe 'Soulless One' was chosen as a title as a reference to Arena when it's literally never used as a title in ESO, in or out of game.Jacksol (talk) 01:45, 20 February 2020 (GMT)

We've definitely put this one through the wringer! In the interest of compromise and resolution, I propose we pick between Hero of Coldharbour and Champion of Coldharbour. I think everybody that expressed opinions above seemed to find these titles acceptable. Soulless One and Vestige both seem to be discarded based on some strong points from two different camps. HoC and CoC seem to avoid every complaint except how interesting you personally find them. I think this will be a happy-ish compromise. Any opposition?

I personally support Hero of Coldharbour, purely for a unique acronym! --Lost in Hyrule (talk) 03:44, 29 February 2020 (GMT)

Neither of those are used enough, in my opinion. If consensus is to change it, we might as well go with Vestige, since that's the name that keeps popping up. Sai Sahan in Season of the Dragon consistently refers to the player as Vestige despite that story taking place after reclaiming the player's soul (although certain sources are now throwing even the linear timeline into doubt). Presumably Lyris will use it as well during Dark Heart of Skyrim, which I think will be a real test for what this hero's long-term name will be. The problem is that we will need to create a redirect at Lore:Vestige_(hero) and ensure it is properly linked to over the disambig. —Legoless (talk) 18:03, 29 February 2020 (GMT)

(←) It does make sense that only a few people playing the game will recognize "Hero of Coldharbour" to be the ESO hero at a glance, where nearly all should recognize 'Vestige'. If that is the case, then the redirect/disambiguation scheme is the primary thing to resolve. I'll wait for further input, but I would support this choice, as well. --Lost in Hyrule (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2020 (GMT)

This has gone on too long and I think every possible point has been made. Reading the above discussion I cant make out what the community preference is - so for the sake of getting a consensus I'll make a list of the above names and ask the community to add their vote. I'll add the votes of people who had a clear preference from 22 January, including Hyrule and Lego's vote. Everyone has my permission to edit this post to add your vote:

• Soulless One (old current name) — Legoless
• Vestige (new current name) — Legoless, Imperialbattlespire, Lost in Hyrule, Rim, Talyyn
• Hero of Coldharbour — Jacksol
• Champion of Coldharbour —
• Meridia's Champion —
• Savior of Tamriel —

--Jimeee (talk) 16:12, 3 March 2020 (GMT)

It's sat for a bit, is generally supported (though the causes for dissent are noted), and is now reinforced by the returning members of the Five Companions using the term. We shall go ahead with "The Vestige" and will try to work out an ideal redirect scheme. --Lost in Hyrule (talk) 19:53, 10 March 2020 (GMT)

(←) Not to revisit this discussion, but just a note that Soulless One is indeed capitalised in-game per Sister Terran Arminus' dialogue. I've made the change to Lore:The Vestige and Lore:Planemeld, which seem to be the only articles that still use the term. —⁠Legoless (talk) 13:53, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Please update with new DLC information from Greymoor onward.

"Hero" of the Fall of the Dark Brotherhood

Despite Kallen saying that there were no heroes of the FotDB story, would an entry for Uther Nere's agent be an appropriate addition? Again, despite not being called a hero, this page is used to list the player-characters of the series, and Uthere Nere's agent is considered a player-character, are they not? --Rezalon (talk) 01:30, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

The Agent is most likely the Forgotten Hero. While Kellen does not explicitly state it, he begins the story right after being prompted for a story about the Hero, and the TESL website seems to imply that the Fall of the Dark Brotherhood is apart of the 'Forgotten Hero Saga'. I would argue that in lieu of any evidence to the contrary, it should be assumed that the Agent is the Hero. Fullerton ﴾_talk﴿ 01:53, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

To support my revert on the Legends:Characters‎ page:

Nagh: "What became of your "Forgotten Hero?"

Kellen: "I have only a dark tale for a night such as this. One with no heroes at all. It began when a mysterious merchant named Uther Nere sought to make the one you speak of his agent."

--Ilaro (talk) 19:04, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Move from Lore to General?

Pretty much it. To further indicate that the article refers only to Player Characters instead of every "hero" in Tamriel history. As far as I understand we can't just say it in Lore namespace.

As a side note, can we be sure that "prophecies" and "Elder Scrolls" part from the preface is relevant to player characters in every game? For me it is a bit much of a generalization. As an example, Talym Rend doesn't look that epic. Phoenix Neko (talk) 16:03, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

The main criteria for an entry in Lore:People is "people who have played important parts in noteworthy historical events and who have had substantial effects on the world of TES". These characters are historically significant figures. There are references in both dialogue and texts in the relevant and later games that refer to these people. Someone who has not played or isn't aware of the older games will want to know who this person is that is being talked about. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 18:29, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

The Apprentice gender

Just to prevent an edit war, I'd like to explain my reasoning for referring to The Apprentice as male.

In Battlespire's opening cutscene, no less, we have a narration from a storyteller recalling the events of what takes place in Battlespire (similar to TES: Legends). Throughout the cutscene, The Apprentice is constantly referred to as male, as male pronouns are used (his, he, etc.). It doesn't matter whether or not you can play as either male or female in the game, you can also play as a male or female in Arena and Morrowind, but dialogue in Arena's manuals refer to the Eternal Champion as male, and Neloth in the Dragonboprn DLC refers to the Nerevarine as male. I see no reason why we cannot simply refer to as the Apprentice as a male since they are referred to as such by in-game sources. --Rezalon (talk) 02:45, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

That's an understandable reason and I get where you're coming from, but I don't think it's the only factor in stating what the Apprentice's gender would be. The Nerevarine argument is controversial, since Kirkbride said "That line was a mistake a designer made in haste. Consider it a glitch.", and while he didn't work on Dragonborn he did mostly create the Nerevarine and I'd take his word. As for the Apprentice, they're arguably the only Hero with an actual known name besides Cyrus. If you play as male, the friend you rescue is Vatasha Trenelle, but if you play as female, the friend you rescue is instead Josian Kaid. That pretty much implies one or both of them is considered the Apprentice, since Bethesda could've just kept the rescued character the same name, but they decided to make it explicitly gender-dependent. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 04:02, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Like you said, Kirkbride didn't work on Dragonborn, therefore whatever he says about the Dragonborn DLC should be taken with a grain of salt at the least, and his word shouldn't be taken at the most. The designer who wrote the line would take precedent over what Kirkbride says about the matter, but that's a completely different argument. At any rate, my point being, in-game dialogue would take precedent unless stated otherwise, and the intro cutscene lends more evidence to the Apprentice being male than there is evidence to them being female. --Rezalon (talk) 04:25, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

In cases where there is uncertainty, I think it makes far more sense to keep the gender of an individual ambiguous in the text. We definitely shouldn’t—as you have—state with absolute certainty that the Apprentice is male. A few lines of dialogue should not take precedence if they contradict loads of other information. If anything, there should be a note explaining the situation, with gender neutral pronouns being used in the main bio. —Aran Anumarile Autaracu Alatasel (talk) 06:36, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Wait, that doesn't mesh with how the page is currently set up. The Nerevarine is described as canonically male because of one line in Skyrim, shouldn't it be the same here? Battlespire describes the hero as male, in game. That's a valid source. If we're to be consistent, we have to use male pronouns in the Battlespire hero's section. 108.246.6.145 02:25, 7 January 2020 (GMT)

The opening narration is ambiguous enough that the narrator could be referring to Josian Kaid, whether they went in first or second. Additionally, the narration doesn't seem to imply primary knowledge of the story. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 18:40, 13 January 2020 (GMT)

(←) Since it's been brought up even if it's not the primary subject of the post, it's worth saying and rehashing. The named hero of Arena is certainly male, even if it was only once, the Nerevarine was referred to in-game as a male. I know everyone has a fascination with riding Kirbride's genitals, but he wasn't part of the development of Dragonborn and his word is worth nothing. For the cutscene, the actual piece of game material, I am willing to accept gendering the article. Controversial or not, it's not the UESP's job to decide what lore should be posted, it's the UESP's job to document the lore as we get it.

Bethesda allowing the player the option of choice doesn't mean that there can't be a "canonical" choice or gender. Look at other games, Dragon Age: Inquisition, as an example since I'm playing it for the first time. I can choose to upload my own version of game events to it to preserve the narrative I chose to make as a player, but they still provide a static default world state for players who can't or just don't want to import the events. Yes, I have choice in the matter, but for consistent narration and story documentation online or for other players, there is a "canon" that ultimate happened. Probably not the greatest example ever since we're talking the over-arching state of the world compared to a few lines of dialogue here or there, I'll admit.

I still believe that Bethesda's words -- be that directly in a game or from a developer actively working on the project in question (not MK in this case!) -- as they are written take absolute priority. We can make clear in gamespace that the player has the choice all we want, but the argument is there that there is a "canon" element to the hero and it's not our job to pick out what we want. If a game said a character had a specific element about them, whatever it may be, then for the purposes of the Lore namespace, it is canon. -damon  ^{talk ♥ contribs} 07:16, 14 January 2020 (GMT)

Nice, let's just ignore the words of one of the most important devs behind the Nerevarine. I agree, his word as someone who didn't work on Dragonborn is worth nothing. But his word as someone who did work on Morrowind is worth noting, if you excuse me this pun. We do use OOG sources, well, this is one of those. I propose noting in the article that Neloth refers to the Nerevarine as to male, but nonetheless give a link to MK's statement on this. Still, it's worth asking the current devs or Todd Howard about the canonical genders of the heroes. Phoenix Neko (talk) 13:07, 14 January 2020 (GMT)

There are appropriate times and scenarios where you can take a current or past developer's comments as an OOG source, but I really struggle to see this as one of those cases. Just because a particular person made an aspect of the lore doesn't mean they are the end-all source about the character forever. And, in this particular case, we're trying to use a line from a guy who wasn't at all part of the development process saying "it was an error, it was a glitch". We have no way of knowing whether or not any discussion about the ramifications of using a gendered pronoun for reference to the Nerevarine ever took place, we have no idea if MK was ever phoned, shot an email, walked into the office to discuss it... All we know is that he is officially not credited in any capacity for anything related to the game and was out of the loop for the development cycle. That makes it very hard to accept that he is an authority on what is a "mistake [...] made in haste". This was not some unofficial lore and story-telling he made in his free time to flesh the Neverevarine that we are trying to cite, this is a statement on actual design decisions made by then-current members of Bethesda Game Studios. When it comes to design decisions, there is no if, and, or but about it. The correct decision for the UESP should always be to prioritize what is in-game and what may or may not be said by people who actively worked on the project in question or who may be involved in a future project with lore that will supersede the older existing information, not prioritize one single sentence taken from a former developer who has not at any point received a credit (AFAIK) for anything related to Skyrim over the word of the game itself and/or any people from the project who may at any point have something to say. -damon  ^{talk ♥ contribs} 18:23, 14 January 2020 (GMT)

The Apprentice and their profession

Recently, I discovered that the term 'Shadow Legion' was not a title for a legion of Imperial Battlemages. In this study, I discovered and supported that the Battlespire accomplished two main objectives:

1. It was a war college for battlemages, training them in the talents and tactics to serve the Empire.
2. It gave a test to individuals considered to join the Imperial Guard, which seems to be exchangeable with the Emperor's personal guard.

Based on the excerpts from the Battlespire Athenaeum (found on the wiki), the Player's Guide, and the text from NPCs and books in the game, I believe both the hero and Josian/Vatasha are here for the Imperial Guard test. This would mean that they are not necessarily battlemages, attending the establishment for the battlemage schooling.

Now, the term "Apprentice" may not be the most fitting, but I think it still conveys the point that they are currently unproven for 'full employment', if you will. However, I believe that when these characters are referred to as 'apprentice battlemage(s)', it should instead be shortened to just 'apprentice(s)'. I wanted to hear other thoughts on the matter before making the changes. --Lost in Hyrule (talk) 21:44, 28 February 2020 (GMT)

Giving Heroes their own lore pages.

Proventus and I were talking about this on the discord , I do think we should have independent lore pages for certain heroes. That way over time this page doesn't bloat up. As well as allowing us to give us more details about them. The Vestige has a lot of stuff attributed to them, other heroes do have a good amount of it that can be added in. I did create a sandbox for the Vestige. Should we do this or should we abandon the idea? (TheVampKnight (talk) 00:10, 28 December 2020 (UTC))

yeah sure why not tes wiki has been doing this for years anyway The Rim of the Sky (talk) 03:32, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

I agree with this completely.Zebendal (talk) 03:41, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

I think it is a good idea, so go ahead.--Talyyn (talk) 07:20, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

The main issue is that there just isn't much information about the heroes specifically in most instances. Thus, these pages just turn into a summary of the events of the game, which in turn is already present on pages like Oblivion Crisis. Some of the heroes, like the vestige, have enough information to warrant a separate page, but we shouldn't create separate pages for each and every hero just because. We should make sure we only do it when we have the specific information to warrant it, like Cyrus, or the Vestige. Jeancey (talk) 19:24, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

UOL Source for Time Period

Please see the discussion on Lore talk:Stormhold regarding the recent UOL addition. —⁠Legoless (talk) 14:50, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Nerevarine's Gender

(Moved from section title) We should not be calling the Nerverine a him, as its a big diservice for all those that play Female Nerverines, It should be gender neutral like all the others.

The issue the big issue I have with this, is because you can pick any race and you have access to both genders. Now its true that its a recarantion of a him, and maybe they see him as a male, because of the recarnation. But the Gender still is unknowable. Its like saying your play through doesn't count because your Neverine is a she. That is why I think that needs to be changed and its flat out wrong to say its a him without clarifying it.TheVampKnight (talk) 01:52, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_neutrality_in_languages_with_gendered_third-person_pronouns#Generic_he , that is all. Zebendal (talk) 01:55, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

"You are too young to remember the Nerevarine. He defeated Dagoth Ur and saved us all from the blight."—Neloth

There are other sources that refer to the Nerevarine as male/use male pronouns for him, but this one is the holy grail and the basis of the usage on our pages. Neloth is a first hand account who has personally met the Nerevarine in the events of tes 3: morrowind. So the argument for him using it in a gender neutral sense has no basis as Neloth isn’t referring to an unknown stranger. Furthermore, regardless of this we don’t biologically inspect characters in order to determine the gendered wording we use for them on articles. The Nerevarine is given pronouns on his page for the same reason Tiber Septim is, sources refer to him as male. The Nerevarine is also not an unprecedented case when it comes to player characters, the eternal champion Talin is also given this treatment based on the source material we have on him. The job of the wiki isn’t to account for individual characterization of the players, it’s simply to as thoroughly as possible document the information, which in this case includes a known gender of the Nerevarine.-Dcking20 (talk) 02:14, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I think the best compromise here would be to refer to Nerevarine with gender-neutral pronouns while adding a note that Neloth refers to the Nerevarine as male (similar to the note currently on Neloth's page). --Oriwa ^Talk 02:18, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

I 100% think the best solution is to put it into a Note, but it shouldn't be in the main heroe's description.TheVampKnight (talk) 02:28, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

The reason we are asking for a “compromise” in this instance has nothing to do with conflicting or interpretations though. The note would simply be used in place of the main body to attempt to give less weight to the Neloth source because people are passionate about ambiguity of player characters. We can’t neuter our documentation efforts because of passion. See the above Champion of Cyrodiil discussions for proof of this. Many users would have had us make no acknowledgement that the Champion of Cyrodiil had become the new mad god because of player character passions, despite the fact that this is verifiably true. In short, we can’t settle for the comfortable falsehoods, we have to also document the controversial realities.-Dcking20 (talk) 02:33, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Player Ambiguity is different from the Sheogorath thing, A former dev who has friends within Bethesda said he was told, that it was a mistake, it was not intended for them to give gender reference for that hero and Bethesda has been known to make their heroes ambiguitious in the canon. Sheogorath is without a doubt 100% fact your champion of Cyrodiil, the Hero became Sheogorath, and that is Bethesda official position on it basically. Bethesda makes it quite clear, main storyline and dlc storylines are canon and are considered stuff that is done by the heroes. So yeah one thing is a mistake while the other is intended and was done for the end game for Oblivion. Now I still think we should document it, but do it in a way that makes the hero still seem ambiguous. Which is why I think it should be put in a note as many others have suggested, as that way we still have it documented. It would be the best compromise. TheVampKnight (talk) 05:16, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

(←) The gender reference is sourced and fine to keep on the article. This topic has already been discussed to death on this page and consensus was solid each time to retain the information. —⁠Legoless (talk) 14:20, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Well its a huge issue with a lot of people otherwise, it wouldn't be talked to death and being kept being brought up, I see a serious problem with it myself the way it is now. There is just going to be issues with it, keeping it like it is and that is just a fact, even if its a second hand source, What Mk did say should be taken into consideration and that Uol should be used here. It was not meant for them to give a gender reference and someone goofed up Mk has a lot of friends within Bethesda to actually find out this stuff. I do think it should be noted because of that fact. All it has to be is made into a note, like many of the editors have suggested and wanted to do. Otherwise it doesn't fix the problem and makes everyone unhappy. We can even add to the note, that even Female Neverenines are called a he as, Zeb or someone on another talk up above has said that is what happens in TES 3. This would satisfly those that hate the He reference because they play Female Nevernines while at the same time keeping the reference. I'm fine with keeping the reference so long its its made clear that Female Neverines are also called a He and also are called by male pronouns.TheVampKnight (talk) 17:33, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

For me, this is a simple matter. To cite Azura, the Morrowind intro, and Neloth is to have three normal citations. To cite MichÆl Kikrbride is to add a UOL citation and ignore the other citations. One of these is worse practice than the other. I see that it has been suggested that the information is moved to a note. There is no reason to do this; the information is valid and relegating it to a note implies that Kirkbride's comment should take primacy over our other sources. In short, this is simply a matter of citations. — J. J. Fullerton _﴾talk﴿ 19:48, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't think Kirkbride's comments should have any weight regarding the validity of Neloth's dialogue, but I was a bit cautious of relying too heavily on just one line when the hero's gender has traditionally been ambiguous. However, given the other sources that Fullerton brought up, I think it's safe to refer to the Nerevarine as male. I still believe that some sort of footnote to clarify matters would be beneficial; otherwise, it's bound to be changed again. --Oriwa ^Talk 19:00, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm familiar with the Morrowind intro and I've seen the Neloth quote, but what's the Azura citation? I don't think I've seen that one. — Wolfborn↝^(Howl) 01:41, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

[These are the words of the prophecy called "Seven Visions of Seven Trials of the Incarnate." I wrote them down as she spoke them to me.]

seven trials

What he puts his hand to, that shall be done.

What is left undone, that shall be done.

first trial

On a certain day to uncertain parents

Incarnate moon and star reborn.

second trial

Neither blight nor age can harm him.

The Curse-of-Flesh before him flies.

third trial

In caverns dark Azura's eye sees

And makes to shine the moon and star.

fourth trial

A stranger's voice unites the Houses.

Three Halls call him Hortator.

fifth trial

A stranger's hand unites the Velothi.

Four Tribes call him Nerevarine.

sixth trial

He honors blood of the tribe unmourned.

He eats their sin, and is reborn.

seventh trial

His mercy frees the cursed false gods,

Binds the broken, redeems the mad.

one destiny

He speaks the law for Veloth's people.

He speaks for their land, and names them great.

The aforementioned “azura source”Dcking20 (talk) 00:05, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I'm familiar with this one. Not sure why this is being referred to as an "Azura cite", though; this is part of the Nerevarine Prophecies, which were Ashlander writings. That's neither here nor there for the purposes of this discussion, though. — Wolfborn↝^(Howl) 05:22, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

(←) I'd like to point out, these Ashlander writings are probably irrelevant to this discussion, as they were writing about Nerevar reborn, and thus would have used Nerevar's pronouns to reference the reborn Aspect. This doesn't necessarily mean that the reborn person would be male, just that Nerevar was. Same with the opening to Morrowind, that's just the prophecy, and shouldn't be taken as a reference to the gender of the Hero in any way. Jeancey (talk) 19:03, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

I was about to say, the prophecy seems to be referring to the Nerevarine as literally Nerevar reborn, hence the pronouns. They think Nerevar is going to come back, so they're referring to the future hero as if they were Real Nerevar. -MolagBallet (talk) 20:16, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

The two non Neloth sources can be viewed as supplemental sources. Or they can be ignored in favor of the more objective Neloth source. Either way the basis of the pronoun usage for the Nerevarine has always been the Neloth source and that is what is currently sited on this page.Dcking20 (talk) 20:35, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

I mean, I think Neloth is the only source we need to look at. And he uses the pronoun "he". Whether that is a mistake is not up to us, and unless there is a definitive statement from Bethesda that it was a mistake and it should be gender neutral (in which case, we would probably add a note to the page explaining the situation), or an in-universe, in game source in, say, TES6 stating the gender as female (in which case, with two contradictory canon sources, we'd likely put a note, but use neutral pronouns), we have no reason to change what is listed on the page. Philosophy of choice, evidence of other games heroes, lack of collaborating sources... all this is Original Research and has no place on the wiki. Neloth indicates male, nothing indicates otherwise, thus we treat the canon Nerevarine as male. End of story lol. Jeancey (talk) 22:44, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

In fairness, I should also point out that the opening of Morrowind does, in fact, directly refer to the Nerevarine as male. Following the Zurin Arctus quote ("Each event is preceded by prophecy. But without the hero, there is no event."), the following screen appears:

In the waning years of the Third Era of Tamriel, a prisoner, born on a certain day to uncertain parents, was sent under guard, without explanation, to Morrowind, ignorant of the role he was to play in that nation's history...

This is not part of the Nerevarine Prophecies; this is a direct reference to the prisoner being sent to Morrowind. For whatever reason, despite the fact that the player is free to choose the prisoner's gender, the developers chose not word this introduction in a gender-neutral way. This gives us two clear references that the developers have defined the Nerevarine as male, freedom of choice notwithstanding, leaving us stuck with it whether we like it or not.

Edited to add: Despite this, I think that through careful choice of language and wording we can still manage to keep things mostly gender-neutral, for example by avoiding the use of a pronoun in favour of using the noun itself, or by rewording or rephrasing a sentence to avoid the need for a pronoun. — Wolfborn↝^(Howl) 01:10, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

I seem to have misunderstood the nature of the prophecy, for which I apologise to everybody whom I've thereby misled. However, the Morrowind intro and Neloth are both complete and acceptable sources for "he", and there's no reason to contort to avoid using it. Wolfborn is of course correct in that the pronouns can be largely eschewed in body text for "Nerevarine" or other such reference. However, there's no reason to discount the perfectly valid sources we have, and no reason not to use "he" when the description of the Nerevarine calls for it. — J. J. Fullerton _﴾talk﴿ 06:01, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Add Source

Please add the dialogue on Blades:Destane as a source for the Warrior section for Rivercrest being present in Cyrodiil. Thank you to whoever does. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 19:39, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Change Champion of Cyrodiil into Hero of Kvatch

Hero of Kvatch is still used post Oblivion, and COC is a title shared with other people.

Examples: Skyrim, ESO, and Blades —Zebendal (talk) 06:13, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

It does seem to be the preferred official title. This will be a difficult namespace-wide change to implement though, considering how many instances we have of "the Champion" described in prose. —⁠Legoless (talk) 11:25, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Yeah I’m more partial to CoC myself but it seems very clear that the title that is being used in official capacity is HoK and thus the one we should use. Dcking20 (talk) 14:36, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. The first title someone gets is often the one that sticks in history. --Enodoc (talk) 19:05, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

I missed this discussion, but for additional consensus I agree with HoK. (Lego this is all your fault :p) --Jimeee (talk) 10:11, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

To add onto this, most well-known name > final title. It would be weird to call the Vestige the "Champion of Meridia" just cuz Varen calls us that once, even if it is more formal/honorable. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 18:58, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

(←) As I mentioned above, this change should not have been carried out without ensuring that instances of "the Champion" were also updated. As a result, we now have dozens of inconsistent references to "Hero of Kvatch/the Champion" littered throughout lorespace prose. Examples: [1] [2] [3]. This needs to be cleaned up. —⁠Legoless (talk) 13:22, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Alright, I think I got all of them. Thanks for bringing this up. Mindtrait0r (talk) 15:12, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Gender, once again

Hopefully to prevent edit warring, I'd like to summarize my thoughts on the recent edits made. I have seen no evidence backing the Vestige being male, nor for the Hero of Kvatch. I cannot find the quote mentioned in the edit summary anywhere else but a Reddit post. As for the Agent, it does appear that Warp in the West states that they were male, so I'm fine with keeping that. Mindtrait0r (talk) 15:00, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

So this goes back to an email a fan sent to Bethesda. The reply that the IP is quoting was (apparently) someone named "Jake" at Bethesda Softworks Support. "I can confirm to you, that the Hero of Kvatch has been mantled as Sheogorath. He could or could not develop the powers of a Daedric God, but he is without a doubt; Sheogorath." Even if the email is real, its a weak source, as not even from a dev. More details here: https://elderscrolls.fandom.com/f/p/2370262444015617908. --Jimeee (talk) 16:41, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Weak source, not the same kinda situation as the nerevarine which has a legit, in universe source. I agree with the reverting of ips edits Dcking20 (talk) 00:08, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Forgotten Hero picture

What's the source on the Forgotten Hero being pictured in that loading screen? Mindtrait0r (talk) 15:11, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

It’s art for the basegame story that has a figure in the Emperors armor wielding Goldbrand. This figure is the Forgotten Hero as they both Dawn the emperor armor and wield goldbrand throughout the course of the story. Dcking20 (talk) 16:41, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Prev: Archive 1

Up: Lore talk:Hero

Next: None