Lore talk:Crafting Motifs

Original Motifs

I see that my addition of Akaviri and Xivkyn styles were removed under the reason of "only original motifs have the scope to be added to lore" but it can't be just original motifs as Dwemer and Glass are not original. Is this because they are not "lore worthy". If so should we add motifs that are "lore worthy" and skip all others inbetween them? Additionally how would we judge what is to be considered lore worthy? The glass motif lore page already had a link set up for Xivkyn but the Xivkyn page wasn't created. I created the page and thought it should also be added here. Enderkingdev (talk) 23:36, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Per Discord, Dwemer and Glass are not part of the original motif narrative thread, so probably shoudn't be included here. They can exist as separate lore book if they add to the lore however. --Jimeee (talk) 23:39, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

I don't think any of them since the original series really add to the lore. At least, not in a historically-significant sense, which is what is relevant for lorespace. --Enodoc (talk) 23:42, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Some certainly do add to the lore, such as Ra Gada and Minotaur. --Jimeee (talk) 23:48, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

I would say the Akaviri one adds to lore in a way. See in Lore:Tsaesci we say "The Tsaesci are known to fight without shields or armor", but the very existence of the motif shows the Tsaesci use sheilds and armor and even have their own style for such things. Enderkingdev (talk) 23:58, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) As you can see the first 14 motifs were proper "books", with a narrative and descriptions of historical events. Almost all since then have been partworks with little snippets about each piece of armor, which has no use in lore (Soul Shriven is one exception in layout). There are over 30 of those partworks, and more will be added with each new addition to the game. In the past if some of a series was lore worthy we added them all, but this cannot happen here, because they are so useless to lore and so game-specific. Glass and Dwemer were added to lore before this decision was taken, but they won't be missed if they are removed if they are not part of the original motifs. The original discussion can be seen here. That page transcludes this one, so removing the Glass and Dwemer here will remove them there, but I don't see anyone having a problem with that if it is agreed to remove them here. {ec reply} The book as a whole does not benefit lore by being there, but like any note or book not in lorespace it can still be used as a reference on any lore page. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 00:03, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

So the problem here is not that original motifs are the only ones allowed here, but rather only proper books that are deemed Lore worthy are. In that case I suppose Dwemer and Glass should be removed. Perhaps their individual lore space pages should be deleted as well, along with the Akaviri and Xivkyn style lore pages I created. The links leading from each lore page would also have to be changed to stop at Imperial in the lore space so no-one mistakenly tries to add on to the list as I had done (thinking the page was actually missing not that it was intended not to be there). However, something to bring up is the Frostcaster style. This book is written by the same author as the original 10 motif books (and is a "proper" book), and based on its content, seems to be right after the Nord style. Should this be added here? If so should it be in order of events or in motif numeric order? The first would make the list ordered as 1, 2, 3, 4, 46, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 or as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 46. Both cases jump a significant amount of other motifs, or would this not be considered lore worthy and should not be added? Enderkingdev (talk) 20:24, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

You raise a good point about the Frostcaster book. It is indeed loreworthy and is ref'd on a lore page, and it does seem to fit after the Nord racial Motif book. However I think slotting book 46 after book 4 might confuse some users. I can totally see your reasoning for suggesting that though. Personally I'm indifferent. I'm happy with it exiting as its own separate lore book, but I wouldn't object to it being listed between book 4 and 5 - at least in the lore namespace - however note that doing this will break the transclusions on the ON counterpare page. --Jimeee (talk) 21:38, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

(←) It would be numerically ordered, unless it was an exact follow-on from the other which it isn't. It doesn't need to be transcluded to ON from this page if it and others were included, and a note at the top could be used to explain why the other books are not in shown here. There are other series of books that have large gaps between numbers, though they have the excuse that the missing ones don't exist at all. The lore ones shown here still use the plural Motifs, so that needs updating too. Silence is Golden^{Break the Silence} 21:49, 18 October 2017 (UTC)