Lore talk:Hero

The UESPWiki – Your source for The Elder Scrolls since 1995
Jump to: navigation, search
Archives
Archive 1: Apr 2007 - Feb 2012
Archive 2: Aug 2012 - Mar 2023

Promotional Images[edit]

I figured it was custom here to not use promotional images, but it seems not to be so. Well, my argument against them is that there isn't anything confirming that these are canon depictions. I once looked through every official Bethesda trailer and piece of merchandise containing the promotional Dragonborn I could find and in none of them did it say that he was the LDB. If we are using these images, we may as well change all of the pronouns to he and all of the race mentions to Nord, as this is the race that appears in the trailers. Same goes with HoK being an Imperial and Nerevarine being a Dunmer. Statements from Bethesda specifically about giving player agency to the Heroes and their appearances, names, genders, races, etc. directly contradict the notion that these promotional renders are meant to represent their respective games' heroes. Mindtrait0r (talk) 19:57, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

OK that's 100% meant to be the LDB lol make no mistake about it, but I'm not a fan of using promotional renders on the main Hero page. I do support them on the individual articles for each hero, put into the gallery section, but on the main hero page I prefer the more vague images of them meant to make the heroes look ambiguous. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 20:25, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
If we are using these images, no matter where they are included, the LDB, Nerevarine, and HoK now have confirmed genders and races. There's no way around this and should say enough in and of itself to remove these renders. Mindtrait0r (talk) 13:03, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
I don't see any argument for using the prior images over the current ones that really make sense. Arguments that we can infer that the HOK is explicitly Sheogorath based on comments suggesting it is a possibility, and card art with the same name as a quest from Skyrim, but cannot use trailers that were explicitly describing these heroes and depicting them performing some of their most legendary feats/showing their solely unique powers is a bit difficult to square with each other. No attempt to establish anything beyond the usage of these images has been made. In fact, steps were taken to avoid any establishment of canon appearances, names, genders, races, etc. by explicitly mentioning the source of the images. This allows us to make use of higher quality images of the heroes and leaves it up to readers whether or not they accept those depictions.
I wouldn't mind switching over to more vague images intended to be representative of the heroes and moving these images to individual articles like Rim of the Sky said. For example we could use Alduin's wall depiction of the Last Dragonborn. But I don't think the previous images should be used in that case (with the exception of Nerevar's ring). --AKB Talk Cont Mail 16:50, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Transcribing most of these points from a discussion on the Discord.
In the case of the Last Dragonborn being misconstrued with the Dragonborn shown in the trailer (may refer to him as Trailerborn), at least there is a barebones connection tying them together. They are both Dragonborn. However, in the case of the Oblivion Imperial, he is designed in a vague way that does not evoke any explicit connection to the Hero of Kvatch. He looks like a basic guard. The root of the problem, too, lies in what I just said. Imperial. When looking at this image, I see an Imperial. I immediately notice the race and associate it with the image, and, therefore, the Hero in question.
Race and gender cannot be separated from these images and Heroes if we include them. I vehemently disagree that readers will make that distinction and find it completely antithetical to the purpose of the wiki to include these images, miscontruing promotional trailer renders with the heroes of their respective games. Is anyone claiming that the ESO Nord featured prominently in trailers is The Vestige? The heart of the problem lies there. This assumption that these characters are equivalent is not only original research and unfounded, but also blatantly harmful to the established lore and statements by Bethesda.
Looking at this statement, it is quite clear in proving that these trailer renders are not representative of the Heroes this page incorrectly conflates them with. When asked about whether or not we would ever learn the names of the games' protagonists, Douglass Goodall said This is a needlessly complicated way to avoid "playing favorites" and cheapening the player's experiences. Not related to race or appearance, but name, which could be taken as being a non sequitur to my argument. However, he follows this up with: For all I know, it wasn't my Breton Sorcerer or Khajiiti Assassin that re-assembled the Staff of Chaos and defeated Jagar Tharn, but your... Well... Whatever you played. This is blatant confirmation that races for the Heroes are not confirmed. These trailer appearances have confirmed races and are therefore not the same.
Compiling the evidence, it is contradictory to established policy, misleading to readers (even with an expansion of the current note saying they are non-canon - at that point why include them over the previous canon images? - I digress), and backwards to the purpose of UESP. Mindtrait0r (talk) 16:57, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Without giving my opinion on the usage of promotional materials being used for player depictions yet as I’m still mulling that over. Mindtraitor, these depictions absolutely, unequivocally represent the player characters from their respective games. This is most explicit for the Ldb above all else but is equally true for Nerevarine and HoK. A very blatant depiction of the Last Dragonborn for example that comes from in game canon works and not marketing material is this card from legends that depicts the events of Skyrim where the ldb uses said shout to call Odahviing. I chose to use the more obscured legends image that also depicts an event from Skyrim in the world eaters eyrie as I knew a more explicit depiction would cause more controversy. But in truth, that’s all anything related with hero related information comes down to, controversy. We dance around things like the Eternal Champion being a male named Talin in licensed materials, the Nerevarine being referred to with male pronouns, and the HoK unequivocally becoming Sheogorath because of the hot topic of player character freedoms. This is just the latest case of that issue, but it feels worthwhile to note that decisions made when it comes to player characters usually spills over more into personal preferences rather than any sort of official policy of the wiki. We don’t have a policy against using marketing depictions in lore space and do it in many instances, and the only reason it’s called into question in this instance is because of what these marketing materials are depicting, player characters. Dcking20 (talk) 17:18, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

() As I called attention to in my above reply, these cards most certainly do not unequivocally represent the player characters from their respective games. The Oblivion trailer character looks like a basic guard and the Morrowind Dunmer is just that, some random Dunmer. My stance on the LDB being Trailerborn is the same, though less obvious at a glance. I'll reiterate from the Discord here in that the Trailerborn's purpose is to introduce the powers of those who are Dragonborn, as the lore surrounding them was invented for Skyrim. Notice in the narration that Esbern mentions the prophecies tell of a Dragonborn. Trailerborn is never called the Last Dragonborn in any merchandise, dev statements, or promotional material that I have found. He may not even be a canon character, merely acting as an icon/avatar to represent what it means to be Dragonborn, which is delving into Original Research to fully purpose but is useful for my claim that this is just a representation of Skyrim used for marketing, exactly what the trailer needed. The dev statements I brought up that have yet to be refuted are confirmation of this; trailer characters cannot be canon depictions of the Heroes if company policy is to avoid exactly that.

All of that said, I am neutral on the Call Dragon card. There are differences, such as the red dragon not having the blue that Odahviing does, but the name of the card implies that this is indeed Odahviing. I think the inference that this is depicting the LDB is within the realm of reasonable, but I make no move to change the image myself as I could understand someone wanting the other, more concrete one. Abstain. Mindtrait0r (talk) 17:37, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

There is no question these promo depictions represent the HoK/LDB. It should be obvious that the Dragonborn depicted in the Skyrim trailer is the player. The question is whether we want promotional depictions in lorespace. Personally I'm fine with it. I think they're a better representation than a photo of Fourth Era Sheogorath, or artwork of the LDB's gauntlets. —⁠Legoless (talk) 17:57, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
It is a little frustrating that I have given evidence that these depictions aren't canon depictions of these characters but have been told multiple times that they are obviously the same without any of my evidence being refuted. I understand that the fact that a Dragonborn being plastered all over Skyrim's promotional material where you play as a Dragonborn paints a certain picture, but the Bethesda statement just would not work if these characters were meant to be taken as representative of their respective games' heroes. If someone could find an instance where these characters are called by their given Prisoner names (Last Dragonborn, Hero of Kvatch, Nerevarine, Champion of Cyrodiil, or even just TES # Protaganist), that would clear any doubt up and I would happily swallow my words. But the seemingly deliberate avoidance of these titles and the statements made by Bethesda to avoid canonizing race do not give me the 'obviously the same' view that y'all have. Mindtrait0r (talk) 18:18, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
To piggyback off of what Legoless last said, the Nerevarines depiction is also quite explicit, it’s used in the same kind of context as the other pcs other than the cinematic action style trailer which Tes 3 didn’t have. Bgs has honored the depiction though as can be seen in our General:Twitter Archive, with two of the commissioned art pieces for tes 3 anniversary featuring the same general style of Dunmer, with spiked black hair and bonemold armor, even going as far as to depict them with Trueflame in the 20th anniversary piece. Also mindtraitor, your frustration aside I haven’t seen any convincing evidence that these depictions don’t represent exactly what they so clearly appear to. Dcking20 (talk) 18:23, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Unfortunately something that explicit would require us to break into Bethesda HQ and steal their exact notes from the development of the trailers. Personally, if we were to plan such a heist, I would have some other questions in mind to answer first!
I don't think that forcing the standard for acceptance to be them explicitly showing a picture of the hero with text or narration that says "This is the Last Dragonborn" is reasonable. The phrase "The Last Dragonborn" is used all of four times in Skyrim in reference to the hero of the game as far as I can tell. The hero of Skyrim is primarily referred to as either "Dovahkiin" or "Dragonborn" in the game and supporting media. Notably, the trailer in question uses both of these names while zooming in on the hero (a common video technique to indicate that this is the person they are referring to in question), who then demonstrates their ability to use Dragon Shouts and consume the souls of dragons, abilities unique to the Dragonborn in this time of the setting. The Oblivion trailer similarly states that the fate of the world rests in the hand of one individual, before cutting to and zooming in on the hero in question. --AKB Talk Cont Mail 18:57, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
I disagree that these cinematic choices are grounds enough for labeling these appearances (and therefore races and genders; there is no way around this) as canon. But it is seeming more and more like I am just being outvoted, which, while this whole thing is still incredibly unsatisfying and still antithetical to everything the wiki is about, I must admit is probably the end. Mindtrait0r (talk) 19:03, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
When it comes to what these characters portray, it is clear that they're meant to be the Heroes. If you can't find proof, you just need to dig a little deeper; the dragonborn in the trailer is confirmed as the Last Dragonborn through merch such as the Pop! Dovahkiin description directly calling him that, or the Dragonborn Shoulder Plate Necklace being based off the LDB's armor from the trailers.
The wiki displaying these pictures doesn't automatically deem "these photos are the canon depiction". That's not at all what's trying to be done here. These promotional pictures have always been meant as default stand-ins for what the Heroes look like. Its just one of their many possible depictions, and they can look like anything, these pictures just give us something to go off versus nothing. I just want to make that clear: that these depictions are one of many valid depictions, they are not the only depictions, and putting them on the wiki does not mean we are deeming the latter statement to be true. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 19:31, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
There's also the Dragonborn Helmet from Team Fortress 2. It is accepted in popular culture as fact that the Dragonborn in iron armor represents Skyrim's player character. Whether or not the depiction is "canon" is a different question. —⁠Legoless (talk) 23:30, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

() I don't understand. This isn't exactly unofficial lore, how could depictions be noncanon? And thank you Rim, that's exactly what I've been looking for. Mindtrait0r (talk) 01:44, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

No worries!
As for "canon" status, I think it fits into the same category as radiant NPCs. If we have a picture of Krev the Skinner showing it as a Nord male, its perfectly valid and would be accurate. If also had a picture of Krev as a Khajiit female, it would also be equally valid, as Krev has an equal chance of being either. These are true legitimate depictions of Krev, but they are not the only depictions. Same case as the heroes; any depiction of them is valid, but that doesn't mean that's the only appearance they can have, so these promo pics aren't hard canon "this is how the hero should look". At least, that's my understanding of it, Legoless can probably elaborate. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 04:18, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
But in Krev's case, we see the multiple appearances. We only see these characters as one thing. How can we extrapolate, then, that they must be some kind of loose, representative-but-not-exact avatars? Why even include the images if they're practically saying "This is one look that this character could have"? That seems super unhelpful and goes back to what I've been insisting, that these changes will only go to confuse people. Mindtrait0r (talk) 13:26, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
I would counter this by saying that the gauntlets depicted on the World-Eater's Eyrie card is also only one potential depiction of what the Last Dragonborn could look like. My player character may have worn different gloves during that quest, while still being an equally valid depiction. This line of thinking is actually why this page had no imagery up until recently. —⁠Legoless (talk) 13:31, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
The wiki has consistently defended the Nerevarine's gender being male per Neloth's pronoun usage in Skyrim, even in spite of Michael Kirkbride's unofficial comment that it was a typo. What if my Nerevarine was female? This tells me that the wiki accepts canonized appearances over player agency. Mindtrait0r (talk) 13:42, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
What we include about a player character in lorespace depends on editor consensus. It seems like most people here are in agreement with the images used on this page. If we can't achieve a consensus on their inclusion, I'm fine with removing some or all of the imagery from the page instead. Personally I can't see why we should favour World-Eater's Eyrie over official artwork such as the TESV game trailer or the Young Dragonborn card. —⁠Legoless (talk) 14:26, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

() I maintain that if images are to remain, genders/races reflected within them are to be taken as official. I agree with Legoless that pictures should be taken off if they aren't going to be reverted to the pre-trailer state, though it would admittedly be weird if Cyrus and Talym Rend, for instance, did not have pictures, despite their names and appearances being incontrovertible. — Unsigned comment by Mindtrait0r (talkcontribs) at 16:08 on 15 May 2023

"I maintain that if images are to remain, genders/races reflected within them are to be taken as official." Once again, I do not believe one thing equals the other, putting these images on here doesn't imply that. Personally, I do not want promo renders on the page as main images but I do support them as being put into galleries. The Rim of the Sky (talk) 17:44, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
I hearken back to my previous statement, "But in Krev's case, we see the multiple appearances. We only see these characters as one thing. How can we extrapolate, then, that they must be some kind of loose, representative-but-not-exact avatars? Why even include the images if they're practically saying "This is one look that this character could have"? That seems super unhelpful and goes back to what I've been insisting, that these changes will only go to confuse people." If the argument is that the trailer came before the games, and that the games having customizable appearance overrides the previous trailer appearance, then surely the Funko Pop that came after the game's release takes precedence. Mindtrait0r (talk) 19:10, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Ordering[edit]

As this is a lore article, would it not make more sense for the list of heroes to occur in chronological order of when they first appear as opposed to the release order of their respective games? --Rezalon (talk) 23:02, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't think it's a big deal either way, I could accept any of the three natural organizations, alphabetical, lore chronology, and release chronology. I lean toward release chronology though since you have some Heroes who span several years: the Eternal Champion, the Agent, the Forgotten Hero, and the Sheathed Blades, and some Heroes whose timeline is unclear: Talym Rend, the Hero of Dawnstar, and the Master Tunnel Rat. Mindtrait0r (talk) 02:25, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Artistic Depictions[edit]

Making this separate from the prior discussion since that one was about depictions specifically from promotion and the arguments for and against were related to the nature of their material being trailers, covers, etc. With the recent transclusions pushing for individual articles for the Heroes (something I am 100% in support of) I think it is good to bring up, yet again, what it means for a Hero do be depicted artistically. Except in these new cases, it isn't about promotion. For the Hero of Kvatch in particular, we have the Bethesda Twitter Archive posting official artwork made for the 25th Anniversary of TES which put a face, body, and general race (Man) to the HoK. I no longer have the argument of "This isn't actually depicting the Hero" since the alt-text for the images namedrop HoK.

In previous discussion, even though it was generally agreed that the trailer depictions were of the Heroes, it was never - in my opinion - explained why the gender and general race of these characters weren't being taken as canon. With these very official pieces, seemingly made or comissioned by Bethesda themselves for the anniversary, depicting the HoK a specific way, I believe we should adjust his lorepage's infobox accordingly. Furthermore, I believe the same standard should be applied to the Nerevarine and LDB, who also have artwork of them, though in their case there isn't any alt-text - something the trailers lacked too, but general consensus from before indicates that isn't a requirement. Mindtrait0r (talk) 02:25, 8 February 2024 (UTC)