this is really something about Mysticism being removed as a skill in Skyrim, and the lore changing to suit that.

Now, necromancy in TES is undoubtedly something that arises from Mysticism - you can reanimate a dead body. It doesn't really fall into alteration, which is where it would probably end up in Skyrim (as alteration is affected by laws of nature and changes the truth for everyone, and it is simply not naturally possible to reanimate a dead body. It should fall under illusion - but that is bound under the laws of nature)

Conjuration, meanwhile, is summoning something that exists somewhere else, so to conjure up a zombie you still have to have the zombie created.

So my question is this. In TES, does Mysticism still exist after 4E. Do we ignore the way that the Lore changes and the excuses that Bethesda make to clear them up. (Like for example, that Levitation is no longer practiced after the Levitation Act was passed when it clearly is - The Infernal City) Does the Lore split into the TES universe limited by game mechanics and the TES universe that don't take those limitations into consideration?

Undoubtedly? I doubt it. I've always thought Necromancy to be part of the school of Restoration.

Also, I've said it before and I'll say it again, the lore is not hurt at all by the absence of Mysticism in Skyrim. There's always been discussion in Tamriel about what school of magicka does what. They were initially invented by Galerion and I believe there were more schools than there are now back when he made the changes. Read things like http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Response_to_Bero%27s_Speech and other articles which show that there's always debate about whether or not some schools deserve their own category.

They don't need to make an excuse for the lore, it has been there since Morrowind.

You don't know your lore well enough then.



You can be sure, from the latter example, that Mannimarco used some kind of telekinesis spell on the dead bodies.

Oh this thread isn't advocating it remaining part of the game - otherwise it would be in the Skyrim forum.

Well, to be fair, Bero is an idiot who doesn't know what he is talking about.

It was triggered as part of this thread: http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1215043-necromancy-vs-conjuration/page__st__20

Do Bethesda now have to change the definition of alteration so that necromancy falls under it?

Where in the lore does it say that?

Necromancy is most closely linked with restoration.

http://uesp.net/wiki/Lore:The_Black_Arts_On_Trial and implied http://uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Souls,_Black_and_White




Where in the lore does it say that?

Is that not proof that Mysticism is NOT part of Necromancy? It implies that Mysticism was not already part of the debate.


You can be sure that he used Reanimate from his Staff of Worms (which is a Conjuration spell.)


Neither of those state Necromancy is part of Mysticism. In the first, Mysticism is being used as an example of how ones soul might be "corrupted" much like the claims on Necromancy. The second merely warns Mysticism students who capture souls not to delve too deeply.

In general, Necromancy has never been given enough attention or information to really make a statement on it. I think there's plenty of room for doubt as to which school Necromantic spells belong to, if not entirely their own.


Bero does seem to be an idiot, but it proves the point that what schools of magicka deserve their own category is being debated and that it's perfectly reasonable that one area might claim that Mysticism is not a real school of magicka and instead each spell has its roots in Illusion or Alteration. I think that offers a perfectly lore-friendly explanation as to why there's no Mysticism.

In the quotes I quoted, which are direct from the UESP, on the page entitled Lore: Necromancy and Lore: Mysticism (skill)

Necromancy is OBVIOUSLY NOT most closely linked with restoration.

Read that. http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Corpse_Preparation_v_III

Some necromancers remove the organs of a corpse, others revive a skeleton. For some, they wrap the body in cloth to prevent decay. The subject of the necromancy is very clearly dead and reanimated, not revived from the dead, and certainly not healed, as restoration magic would achieve.


Not really, as the debate was to do with the continuation of necromancy. The argument would have been that it was a practice and development of mysticism or some such thing. The chapel healers would bring in the school of restoration if their craft was threatened.
The statement doesn't even make sense. In the debate to outlaw Necromancy, Necromancers attempted to involve mysticism in order to protect mysticism - Strawman much!

Reanimate in conjuration = Gameplay mechanic. Not being able to use a spear = gameplay mechanic. Absorption in Restoration = Gameplay mechanic (as orginally, it was part of mysticism, and it is unlikely that a mysticism master would be unable to cast absorb spells without thinking "Whaaat?"

Throughout the in-game books it refers to necromancy as part of the practice of mysticism magic:

"Saying, 'Your wicked mysticism is no way to wield your power,
Bringing horror to the spirit world, your studies must cease.'"

I don't think so. I don't think we actually have a single necromancy spell in TES yet. (apart from reanimate) The spell would be some derivative of telekinesis - you would initially just be able to play with whatever the creature was like a puppet, then bring back their soul from wherever it went to, bind it back into their body and give the strings of the puppet back to the soul. It's not conjuration - as with conjuration you are really just teleporting something from somewhere else to you. You are creating your very own creature.

I guess my real question is, if the player is no longer able to cast a fireball because of gameplay restrictions, does fire magic still exist in TES? Or do we bend to the gameplay.

Necromancy doesn't fall into Mysticism or Restoration - it uses parts of both, but is ultimately its http://www.imperial-library.info/content/morrowind-preparation-corpse. It's akin to arguing whether cooking is part of Chemistry.

Anyways, this is all moot. The schools as we know them are arbitrary constructs, devised by a dude a thousand years ago and, as you've noted, limited by gameplay. Removing the school of mysticism doesn't completely wipe all spells that went into it from existence - they've just been moved. This actually makes lore sense, since Skyrim is very anti-mer and Mysticism is as much a merish religion/philosophy as it is a school of magic.

Obviously spears still exist, therefor why wouldn't fire magic?

Your question doesn't apply to the situation though. All of (or most of?) the Mysticism spells will still be in Skyrim, they have just been placed into Illusion or Alteration. The spells didn't vanish, the category did.

Yeah I know. It got triggered by a concept I was thinking about as part of the discussion in the thread I linked.

Most of - Levitation CANNOT be in the game, from a level design pov, according to the developers. .


Which parts of restoration?

Presumably the parts that deal with an understanding of anatomy and the manipulation thereof. Staving off decay and mortification via magical means, healing pre- and post-mortem wounds and diseases. Boosting its stats, if needed. I'm not arguing that Necromancy is part of the Restoration school, mind you, because its not. Like I said, the schools are not a be-all, end-all classification (see: Thaumaturgy).

Frankly I'm still not entirely sure why. I can't see what getting rid of Mysticism will do aside from giving us even less character options. It was kind of fun to make a magekiller type of warrior who had Mysticism as a skill to defend himself against spellcasters. Do we have any official reason as to its disappearance? Or is it just Beth being silly?

I swear, by TES VII there will be two magic schools: Offense and Defense. Like in some flash game.