General talk:Lore Inconsistencies

Internal References?

I was wondering why my reference to a ingame contradiction was removed? the basegame npc Hlethena Vando comments to another NPC on how the redoran live inside ald'ruhn in skarr when at the time, ashlanders own that territory. This is an oversight and ZOS has yet to have removed it.Zebendal (talk) 06:11, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

I removed this for two reasons:

1. From my understanding, this page being in general rather than a game-specific namespace meant that its remit covered only cross-game inconsistencies.
2. I felt that to include internal references in this page would further disclarify its purpose (see post below).

However, if the page's purpose were to be clarified, I would understand arguments for this note's retention. — J. J. Fullerton _﴾talk﴿ 06:32, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Lore inconsistencies and Retcons

Copied from UESP:New Page Requests for background.

User:Zebendal/Sandbox I have created a example of a page I would like to do about the various lore inconsistancies across various elder scrolls games. It will discuss lore inconsistancies and things that were retconned. — Unsigned comment by Zebendal (talk • contribs) at 05:42 on 28 September 2018 (UTC)

I have also worked on this concept. Should be in General space. Overall the best presentation I think would be by release then trying to categorize each kind. Could be launched as a stub whenever. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 05:42, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

I went ahead and did it, feel free to edit to what you feel is better — Unsigned comment by Zebendal (talk • contribs) at 05:55 on 28 September 2018

Copied content ends

(←) I feel that at this current time, the purpose of the page is not clear. By adopting elements of both, perhaps using the game-specific approach but demarcating lists into "Retcons", "Internal Contradictions", "Cross-game Contradictions", and "Misconceptions" in chronological order, then the page could appear more ordered and display more information. However, there is potential that I have misunderstood the page dramatically, and so I would like to request clarification on its purpose and details. — J. J. Fullerton _﴾talk﴿ 06:31, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

The point of the page is to outline inconsistencies, retcons, and misconceptions that have been seen across elder scrolls games. for example, in eso a building exists that shouldn't be named like that as its named after a person from the 3rd era, that is a inconsistency and is a mistake. A retcon the best example would be cyrodil's jungle being retconned intentionally by the devs to being a forest. Misconceptions are things the community often points out that is a inconsistency but actually has a ingame explanation that justifies them and one of them would be anachronic books in eso from the future. If a internal contridictions and a cross-game contridictions table is needed I can make oneZebendal (talk) 06:41, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Alinor

During the development of Summerset, in a livestream (can't recall which one), a dev claimed the original description of Alinor was an exaggeration by whoever wrote it. If someone could track this down, it might make this "inconsistency" more of a retcon. --Rezalon (talk) 10:30, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

the architecture retcon mention was here https://www.twitch.tv/videos/260270907 21:15-23:42 Zebendal (talk) 16:44, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Problems

This page, and its very concept is problematic. Inconsistencies that are not or cannot be addressed are mentioned where applicable. Inconsistencies that are addressed, especially those that are changed within a game (certain ESO and Legends mistakes) have no place being documented anywhere. Those ones are clearly mistakes and were rectified, not retconned or explained away. A large number of these are not mistakes when taken at face value, there is an awful lot of assuming mistakes because people want them to be. This page already resembles the shambles that pages such as Etymology became. Lore Inconsistencies is not an appropriate name either, as even our lore pages can at least acknowledge that two sources that don't match 100% don't actually have to be. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 21:45, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

I agree for the most part. The only thing that's appropriate to bring attention to are obvious retcons like Cyrodiil's jungle, and even that may not be worth a separate page when it can be a note on the lore page. —Dillonn241 (talk) 06:57, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Dawnguard vampires

Could we just chalk down the exclusions of these abilities to gameplay mechanics? Or just because we haven't seen these characteristics in-game does not mean it still does not happen in-lore? Just because we haven't seen these vampires walk through ice or freeze their enemies with their breath does not necessarily mean it's been retconned they no longer do it in-lore. --Rezalon (talk) 00:38, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Umbriel and the Culling

Concerning the revert on the Culling bullet, I think there needs to be a more thorough discussion on what can and can't be added on this page. At any rate, here is my reasoning for why the Culling bullet is not a retcon nor a lore inconsistency:

• In TES IV, there was very little information provided on how Martin's sacrifice made it so the forces of Oblivion could no longer access Mundus, how far this "rule" could be enforced, how many limitations there were, etc.
• In the first Greg Keyes novel, The Infernal City, it is commonly believed by a majority of the populace nothing from Oblivion can access Mundus again because of Martin's sacrifice, but a Psiijic priest, no less, says that "there are always loopholes" around this, pretty much confirming there can still be invasions from Oblivion, or things from Oblivion materialising in the Mundus.
• The Greg Keyes novels came out before TES Legends, meaning that Legends follows the formers' implication on there always being loopholes around the forces of Oblivion not being able to access Mundus. It's not a retroactive change in the lore nor a lore inconsistency as this was addressed in a piece of media released seven years before Legends.
• Skyrim, which was also released after the novels, also features Daedric Princes and other Daedra manifesting on Nirn, with seemingly no restrictions whatsoever.

If the issue is with anything after TES IV featuring things from Oblivion manifesting on Nirn, then we'd have to make note of this every time a piece of TES media set after TES IV features anything manifesting from Oblivion is released, including the novels, Legends, Skyrim, and potentially Blades.

--Rezalon (talk) 07:21, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

You make some good points, I think the note should be moved to TIL as the first time this was "contradicted", then. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 13:22, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm assuming your abbreviation is meant to be TIC, in which case it does not break the rule. The city is contained within a bubble of Oblivion, and the Psijic priests words are there to confirm that the rule is still in place while not being broken by the city's appearance. We don't really have enough information on this rule, but we know you can still summon deadra, and they can make doors that are non-threatening. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 19:47, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Should Patched Errors Count?

I understand and agree with the clause of including inconsistencies even if they are given reasons, but if errors are straight-up patched out I don't think they should remain here. Such instances of this on the page are the Redoran Enforcer, Alduin/Wildfire Dragon, and Rikke bullets under Legends, and the bandit bullet under Skyrim-->Divine Crusader Mindtrait0r (talk) 04:14, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Revealing the Unseen Modern Borders

The map in Revealing the Unseen has what appears to be modern borders outlined, inconsistent with established first era borders. --Agiletek (talk) 07:12, 17 August 2023 (UTC)