Hey, I was thinking.

The three main class categories in the Elderscrolls games represent, sort of, social classes, which mimic the major social classes of ancient societies.

The mage class is the upper class, which, in ancient times was usually the priestly class, or some ruler who had the blood of a God in his veins. They also, especially the priests, usually guarded or pretended to guard some ancient knowledge that they refused to share.

Likewise, there are pockets of powerful mages throughout Tamriel, like the Telvanni and the Psijic Order, who possess secret knowledge they refuse to share. And, in general, the mages represent the scholarly class in Tamriel.

The warrior class is, of course, the warrior class. They are honored and pretty well-off, but NOT nobles. They worship their own, more barbaric Gods and live in less lavish abodes, generally all in the same, big abode. Like Cloud Ruler Temple in Oblivion, or any ancient Roman legion fort. And of course, the noble who fights alongside the warriors, and leads them into battle is the most honored and respected in any ancient society, just like the battle mage is the most powerful class in Arena, and in future games, if done right.

Then, the thief class is the lower class. The factions these characters join are generally the underground factions.

Kind of makes sense.

Not really
Too many of the classes don't fit neatly
Nightblades are hardly upper-class scholars and Savants aren't lower-class scum

no, I don't see it like that.

Even if that were the case, it's hardly an Elder Scrolls thing. Fighter/Mage/Thief has been the staple for a looong time.

Knights seem to be more noble and respected than mages to me.

you mean the wizard with heavy armor, long blade with minor thievery skills too xD

Okay, maybe not everyone... My main characters always came out like that; Lorthius, the towering altmer, robes over heavy armor, longsword at waistside. Ridiculously over-sized bang spells and crushing touch spells. Gives me warm feelings thinking about the coolness

well they are generally of noble birth or noble by deeds, so since TES kind of mirrors a feudal society the aristocracy will always be respected


I kind of agree with the OP in that the members of the ruling class are often mage-types, but the amount of hybrid classes makes it a difficult theory to apply to the ES universe.

I was speaking in general.

Especially if you play Arena, you notice that they seem to have three major class categories: Mage, thief, and warrior. And I was talking more about the roles of the NPC's rather than the descriptions of the classes in the creation menu.

When you actually get out in the game world, you see a lot more mages living in luxury than rogues and scouts, and vice versa. It's not set in stone, but I think it's a general rule of thumb.

As for knights, you're probably talking about the knightly orders in Daggerfall. Which were, from what i've seen, a mix of combat, magic, and stealth depending on the order, and most had a few skills from each.

In medieval scoiety, yes, knights were nobles and the majority of the fighters were mercenaries and peasants, so medieval times don't fit as well with my theory as the classical age, when there was an actual warrior class, which existed in between the poor and the nobles.

I think, although there are some medieval elements, because it's a fantasy game, most of the culture and religion and politics of Tamriel comes straight from ancient times.
The Pagan kingdoms, each with their own patron diety.

Tiber Septim, the king who became God. Sort of like King Tiber, of the Etruscans, who became God. Or Augustus, who united the Roman republic under one ruler and then became God.

The nudity in the religous temples, also a thing from the classical age.

Yadda, yadda, yadda, I could go on for a while, actually.

What does a king being deified after death have to do with a theory that mages are Tamriel's upper-class?
Augustus was deified but he was a politician, not a priest. Rome is actually an example of religious power being taken out of the hands of priests since the senior posts in the Republics religious hierarchy were filled by elected politicians.

It was Tiber Septim who became Emperor, not Zurin Arctus, and he seems to have been primarilly a warlord.
In Cyrodil at least the rulers seem to be a hereditary nobility. In Vvardenfell the Great Houses have leaders from each of the specialisations. Since in TES any character who isn't a fighter or mage gets lumped in the stealth speciality it is very diverse. Monks, pilgrims, traders, savants, even nobles themselves (in MW at least) are all stealth classes.

With that last post, I was really just trying to prove that the Elder Scrolls world is modeled more off of the classical age than the feudal age. It's not that i don't agree with what you said there.

I kind-sorta agree with what you said, but this isn't the place to debate Roman and Classical politics, although it is something I love to debate.

I think you miss the point of why i was comparing Tiber Septim to King Tiber and Augustus. The truth is that, while in real life,these leaders had no magic powers. They were often potrayed as divine especially towards the barbarian subjects. And, in my view, divinity and blue-bloodedness is equated with magicka.



I know, the rule becomes less set in stone the later you get in the series. But the main reason each house had a different specialization was so that any type of character could get a chance to be involved in house politics. It was more a gameplay decision than a lore decision.

And the people who hold the most power in Vvardenfell (the temple and the almsivi) are very magical.

But play some of the older games if you get a chance, especially Arena, and look at just the three major classes: mage, thief and warrior, as opposed to their sub-classes.

I'd say use the Daggerfall social classes plus two, and you could edit your reputations with each at the character creation.

Merchants
Peasants
Scholars
Nobility
Underworld

and add Soldiers and Clergy to those. Professional soldiers and Clergymen are set apart enough that I think they warrant their own classes. So if you're playing a noble knight, you increase your rep with Nobility and Soldiers, and lower it with the Underworld and maybe Scholars.

In Daggerfall, my Argonian thief hated the Nobles and Scholars, so he had a large boost with the Underworld.

I guess when you put it that way, my theory on classes seems kind of simplistic.

I guess most mages could fall under the scholar class, which would be sort of in the middle. From the noble NPC's I've met, they seem to be a mix of mages and warrior. Except for the count of Anvil... but consider that fact. It was a "surprise" that the grey fox turned out to be a count because you're not used to seeing thief classes in the upper echelons of society.

Good point though.

My theory only holds firm for Arena and is a rule of thumb for future games.

Well, I think characters in the game would be a part of one social class, but they could be popular among a few. The king who is a great general would be firstly a noble, but be popular with Soldiers and Peasants if the people love his victories. If Guild politics can be related to a wider span of guilds to include the merchants of all kinds, I think that would give the game a strong interplay and grounding with the towns.

You have a point on a very general basis, as has been stated. It's only when you start breaking down into the specialized classes that your theory breaks down. But if you stick with mage as priesthood, warrior as nobles, and thieves as lower class, then it does kinda fit. Sorta lol. Anyway done rambling

You do have a general point, however. The mages have always been secluded and very snooty and live rather extravagant lives. Fighters are middle class and usually lead more normal, mundane lives. Thieves generally do what they do out of necessity, which means they are usually poor, however, as one works up the command structure, the ones on top can sometimes be very wealthy.