Most people who claim "lore [censored]" forget this little description seem to forget this little, the Volkhiar clan lives isolated on a island far from mainland Skyrim and have little to no contact, besides from gathering thralls(Until Dawnguard of course), also Serana describes her father as " Very paranoid" as he added un-necessary extra security measures to the castle. The "cruelty" part, is how they treat there thralls, as objects and force them to serve as a never ending supply of blood, in constant pain. Yeah they glossed over there ice abilities, but its not as severe as people think.
59 posts
• Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
The Volkihar clan keeps true to the lore then most people th
» Wed Nov 21, 2012 6:14 am
Most people who claim "lore [censored]" forget this little description seem to forget this little, the Volkhiar clan lives isolated on a island far from mainland Skyrim and have little to no contact, besides from gathering thralls(Until Dawnguard of course), also Serana describes her father as " Very paranoid" as he added un-necessary extra security measures to the castle. The "cruelty" part, is how they treat there thralls, as objects and force them to serve as a never ending supply of blood, in constant pain. Yeah they glossed over there ice abilities, but its not as severe as people think.
-
A Dardzz - Posts: 3370
- Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 6:26 pm
» Wed Nov 21, 2012 3:02 am
As you said, the ice breaker part was glossed over, but everything else seems dandy except their location.
-
Melanie - Posts: 3448
- Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 4:54 pm
» Tue Nov 20, 2012 7:18 pm
You again? And yet another thread?
As you said, the ice breaker part was glossed over, but everything else seems dandy except their location.
As you said, the ice breaker part was glossed over, but everything else seems dandy except their location.
-
!beef - Posts: 3497
- Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 4:41 pm
» Wed Nov 21, 2012 1:45 am
You again? And yet another thread?
As you said, the ice breaker part was glossed over, but everything else seems dandy except their location.
As you said, the ice breaker part was glossed over, but everything else seems dandy except their location.
-
Michelle davies - Posts: 3509
- Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 3:59 am
» Wed Nov 21, 2012 2:02 am
And they gave them the same feeding mechanic as the Cyrodiilic vampires for some stupid reason.
I'll defend Bethesda till my last Breath!!!
-
Madeleine Rose Walsh - Posts: 3425
- Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 2:07 am
» Wed Nov 21, 2012 2:41 am
Yes! At least they fixed the Volkihar appearance by making them fugly as hell. Some lore is still intact, but the gameplay makes no damn sense.
Have fun with that, really devoted fan.
Have fun with that, really devoted fan.
-
Ashley Tamen - Posts: 3477
- Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 6:17 am
» Tue Nov 20, 2012 10:58 pm
The thought that keep coming to me, when I read through these types of lore discussions, is that we're going off of in-game books.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm thinking that most of what's up on the "lore sites" was cued off of these books. People cite them all the time. "It was written in this account, therefore it is so." You see, Bethesda does such a good job with the details in their games. Granted not every detail, but more than enough to draw the earnest player into their fantasy. Mimic'ing reality is something they do very well...just look at their landscapes. So, why wouldn't they mimic reality with these in-game books we tend to call "canon".
Myths and legends exist today because they were passed down from one generation to the next before there were records, and even survived through generations who were illiterate. Like a game of telephone, each generation forgets details or alters the telling just a little to make it more exciting or interesting for the next generation. Multiply that by one hundred or so generations and you get Fairy Tales. Stories, tales, anecdotes, modern comedy routines, songs, even the best fiction out there has some shred of truth woven into its tapestry.
So why can't the same be true about these in-game books? It's entirely possible that this bit about the Volkihar was embellished, along with much of the rest of the story. It's possible that the truth was told generations before it was recorded, and that truth was subtly changed over those generations until finally it was recorded in that book. Were led to believe that the author himself was a Vampire, but how do we know that for sure? That particular character and circumstance never occurred within a TES game, that I know of at least.
For me, I'll maintain a healthy speculation about any written form of information I find in game. As far as I'm concerned it's not "canon" unless it occurred within an Elder Scrolls game. And that even goes for the written history and timeline, unless of course it came directly from the mouth of a writer/creator of the franchise.
...but even then, all things are subject to change.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm thinking that most of what's up on the "lore sites" was cued off of these books. People cite them all the time. "It was written in this account, therefore it is so." You see, Bethesda does such a good job with the details in their games. Granted not every detail, but more than enough to draw the earnest player into their fantasy. Mimic'ing reality is something they do very well...just look at their landscapes. So, why wouldn't they mimic reality with these in-game books we tend to call "canon".
Myths and legends exist today because they were passed down from one generation to the next before there were records, and even survived through generations who were illiterate. Like a game of telephone, each generation forgets details or alters the telling just a little to make it more exciting or interesting for the next generation. Multiply that by one hundred or so generations and you get Fairy Tales. Stories, tales, anecdotes, modern comedy routines, songs, even the best fiction out there has some shred of truth woven into its tapestry.
So why can't the same be true about these in-game books? It's entirely possible that this bit about the Volkihar was embellished, along with much of the rest of the story. It's possible that the truth was told generations before it was recorded, and that truth was subtly changed over those generations until finally it was recorded in that book. Were led to believe that the author himself was a Vampire, but how do we know that for sure? That particular character and circumstance never occurred within a TES game, that I know of at least.
For me, I'll maintain a healthy speculation about any written form of information I find in game. As far as I'm concerned it's not "canon" unless it occurred within an Elder Scrolls game. And that even goes for the written history and timeline, unless of course it came directly from the mouth of a writer/creator of the franchise.
...but even then, all things are subject to change.
-
GPMG - Posts: 3507
- Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 10:55 am
» Wed Nov 21, 2012 2:21 am
"the http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Volkihar_Clan, paranoid and cruel,
That's a good little bit of insight! I'm ashamed that I've overlooked it
. Thanks for your input!-
Adam Porter - Posts: 3532
- Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 10:47 am
» Wed Nov 21, 2012 6:32 am
The thought that keep coming to me, when I read through these types of lore discussions, is that we're going off of in-game books.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm thinking that most of what's up on the "lore sites" was cued off of these books. People cite them all the time. "It was written in this account, therefore it is so." You see, Bethesda does such a good job with the details in their games. Granted not every detail, but more than enough to draw the earnest player into their fantasy. Mimic'ing reality is something they do very well...just look at their landscapes. So, why wouldn't they mimic reality with these in-game books we tend to call "canon".
Myths and legends exist today because they were passed down from one generation to the next before there were records, and even survived through generations who were illiterate. Like a game of telephone, each generation forgets details or alters the telling just a little to make it more exciting or interesting for the next generation. Multiply that by one hundred or so generations and you get Fairy Tales. Stories, tales, anecdotes, modern comedy routines, songs, even the best fiction out there has some shred of truth woven into its tapestry.
So why can't the same be true about these in-game books? It's entirely possible that this bit about the Volkihar was embellished, along with much of the rest of the story. It's possible that the truth was told generations before it was recorded, and that truth was subtly changed over those generations until finally it was recorded in that book. Were led to believe that the author himself was a Vampire, but how do we know that for sure? That particular character and circumstance never occurred within a TES game, that I know of at least.
For me, I'll maintain a healthy speculation about any written form of information I find in game. As far as I'm concerned it's not "canon" unless it occurred within an Elder Scrolls game. And that even goes for the written history and timeline, unless of course it came directly from the mouth of a writer/creator of the franchise.
...but even then, all things are subject to change.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm thinking that most of what's up on the "lore sites" was cued off of these books. People cite them all the time. "It was written in this account, therefore it is so." You see, Bethesda does such a good job with the details in their games. Granted not every detail, but more than enough to draw the earnest player into their fantasy. Mimic'ing reality is something they do very well...just look at their landscapes. So, why wouldn't they mimic reality with these in-game books we tend to call "canon".
Myths and legends exist today because they were passed down from one generation to the next before there were records, and even survived through generations who were illiterate. Like a game of telephone, each generation forgets details or alters the telling just a little to make it more exciting or interesting for the next generation. Multiply that by one hundred or so generations and you get Fairy Tales. Stories, tales, anecdotes, modern comedy routines, songs, even the best fiction out there has some shred of truth woven into its tapestry.
So why can't the same be true about these in-game books? It's entirely possible that this bit about the Volkihar was embellished, along with much of the rest of the story. It's possible that the truth was told generations before it was recorded, and that truth was subtly changed over those generations until finally it was recorded in that book. Were led to believe that the author himself was a Vampire, but how do we know that for sure? That particular character and circumstance never occurred within a TES game, that I know of at least.
For me, I'll maintain a healthy speculation about any written form of information I find in game. As far as I'm concerned it's not "canon" unless it occurred within an Elder Scrolls game. And that even goes for the written history and timeline, unless of course it came directly from the mouth of a writer/creator of the franchise.
...but even then, all things are subject to change.
I feel the same way, people tend to take these things as being 100% truth. I look at it as the author exagerating or not understanding what happened and giving it a "super natural" reason. Is it possible that a famer saw someone fall into a frozen lake and had that turn into a vampire pulling someone through the ice?
-
Reven Lord - Posts: 3452
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:56 pm
» Wed Nov 21, 2012 4:31 am
The thought that keep coming to me, when I read through these types of lore discussions, is that we're going off of in-game books.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm thinking that most of what's up on the "lore sites" was cued off of these books. People cite them all the time. "It was written in this account, therefore it is so." You see, Bethesda does such a good job with the details in their games. Granted not every detail, but more than enough to draw the earnest player into their fantasy. Mimic'ing reality is something they do very well...just look at their landscapes. So, why wouldn't they mimic reality with these in-game books we tend to call "canon".
Myths and legends exist today because they were passed down from one generation to the next before there were records, and even survived through generations who were illiterate. Like a game of telephone, each generation forgets details or alters the telling just a little to make it more exciting or interesting for the next generation. Multiply that by one hundred or so generations and you get Fairy Tales. Stories, tales, anecdotes, modern comedy routines, songs, even the best fiction out there has some shred of truth woven into its tapestry.
So why can't the same be true about these in-game books? It's entirely possible that this bit about the Volkihar was embellished, along with much of the rest of the story. It's possible that the truth was told generations before it was recorded, and that truth was subtly changed over those generations until finally it was recorded in that book. Were led to believe that the author himself was a Vampire, but how do we know that for sure? That particular character and circumstance never occurred within a TES game, that I know of at least.
For me, I'll maintain a healthy speculation about any written form of information I find in game. As far as I'm concerned it's not "canon" unless it occurred within an Elder Scrolls game. And that even goes for the written history and timeline, unless of course it came directly from the mouth of a writer/creator of the franchise.
...but even then, all things are subject to change.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm thinking that most of what's up on the "lore sites" was cued off of these books. People cite them all the time. "It was written in this account, therefore it is so." You see, Bethesda does such a good job with the details in their games. Granted not every detail, but more than enough to draw the earnest player into their fantasy. Mimic'ing reality is something they do very well...just look at their landscapes. So, why wouldn't they mimic reality with these in-game books we tend to call "canon".
Myths and legends exist today because they were passed down from one generation to the next before there were records, and even survived through generations who were illiterate. Like a game of telephone, each generation forgets details or alters the telling just a little to make it more exciting or interesting for the next generation. Multiply that by one hundred or so generations and you get Fairy Tales. Stories, tales, anecdotes, modern comedy routines, songs, even the best fiction out there has some shred of truth woven into its tapestry.
So why can't the same be true about these in-game books? It's entirely possible that this bit about the Volkihar was embellished, along with much of the rest of the story. It's possible that the truth was told generations before it was recorded, and that truth was subtly changed over those generations until finally it was recorded in that book. Were led to believe that the author himself was a Vampire, but how do we know that for sure? That particular character and circumstance never occurred within a TES game, that I know of at least.
For me, I'll maintain a healthy speculation about any written form of information I find in game. As far as I'm concerned it's not "canon" unless it occurred within an Elder Scrolls game. And that even goes for the written history and timeline, unless of course it came directly from the mouth of a writer/creator of the franchise.
...but even then, all things are subject to change.
From what I read on wiki the man that was hunting vampires is able to be found and killed in a side quest after he had become a vampire. This is in the skyrim game.
-
Mélida Brunet - Posts: 3440
- Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 2:45 am
» Wed Nov 21, 2012 2:14 am
The thought that keep coming to me, when I read through these types of lore discussions, is that we're going off of in-game books.
It also sets up a situation where the player gets to evaluate everything they encounter and decide what they believe for themselves - which I have to say I love. I think this is more realistic and satisfying than being fed a bunch of truths and never having to think about what is or isn't true again.
-
Silvia Gil - Posts: 3433
- Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:31 pm
» Tue Nov 20, 2012 7:38 pm
I feel the same way, people tend to take these things as being 100% truth. I look at it as the author exagerating or not understanding what happened and giving it a "super natural" reason. Is it possible that a famer saw someone fall into a frozen lake and had that turn into a vampire pulling someone through the ice?
Actually that lore come from the in-game booke Immortal Blood, where the vampire hunter Movarth Piquine, says that he got grabbed through the Ice without it breaking at all.
About lore, i love learning it, but dont go around saying NO! IT CANT BCUZ IT DONT FIT THE LORE! I just love learning about this series. I actually read the whole subject someone posted, Know your TeS or something like that. I learned alot about the akaviri i didnt know before. Id love to see them in-game.
-
Jodie Bardgett - Posts: 3491
- Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 9:38 pm
» Tue Nov 20, 2012 9:25 pm
I agree, you should never take anything you read in game at face value. I think TES have always used the 'unreliable narrator' standpoint when dealing with most in-game books. There are even lore related books in the games that deliberately contradict each other because the (fictional) authors of those books had differing opinions about the same subject. If it wasn't this way, we'd have to think of the books as having been written by Gods who knew everything, which isn't very realistic and doesn't enable the series to evolve. It also sets up a situation where the player gets to evaluate everything they encounter and decide what they believe for themselves - which I have to say I love. I think this is more realistic and satisfying than being fed a bunch of truths and never having to think about what is or isn't true again.
+1 This.
-
Sarah Evason - Posts: 3507
- Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2006 10:47 pm
» Wed Nov 21, 2012 1:51 am
The book "Immortal Blood" which describes the Volkihar Vampires and others contains factual information. Unless your argument is the weak "Some information in the book is true and the rest is not" then it can be assumed that the Vampires presented in Skyrim are a RETCON or not the Volkihar at all.
-
Haley Cooper - Posts: 3490
- Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:30 am
» Wed Nov 21, 2012 6:22 am
The book "Immortal Blood" which describes the Volkihar Vampires and others contains factual information. Unless your argument is the weak "Some information in the book is true and the rest is not" then it can be assumed that the Vampires presented in Skyrim are a RETCON or not the Volkihar at all.
-
Andrew Perry - Posts: 3505
- Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 5:40 am
» Tue Nov 20, 2012 11:22 pm
The one and only mention in Dawnguard of Volikhar is the name of the castle.
Dialogue indicates that the vampires living there are not the original owners.
I dont think its safe to assume they are Volikhar.
To me, it seems more likely they are what they say they are, truebloods, and have usurped the castle from their weaker Volikhar kin.
Dialogue indicates that the vampires living there are not the original owners.
I dont think its safe to assume they are Volikhar.
To me, it seems more likely they are what they say they are, truebloods, and have usurped the castle from their weaker Volikhar kin.
-
He got the - Posts: 3399
- Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 12:19 pm
» Tue Nov 20, 2012 8:39 pm
I prefer http://uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Volkihar , which keeps the Lore better.
However this thread helped me somehow accept the Volkihar from Dawnguard..
However this thread helped me somehow accept the Volkihar from Dawnguard..
-
Stacy Hope - Posts: 3391
- Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:23 am
» Wed Nov 21, 2012 7:43 am
I can understand some discrepancies between what we read in books and what we see in game. But the fact that we meet a character from Immortal Blood seems to point to the fact that that it has some validity. I just wish they would have atleast gotten part of the frozen lake thing right, like perhaps their main lair is beneath a lake out east instead of out in the northwestern part of the skyrim coast.
-
Grace Francis - Posts: 3431
- Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 2:51 pm
» Wed Nov 21, 2012 1:48 am
I prefer http://uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Volkihar , which keeps the Lore better.
However this thread helped me somehow accept the Volkihar from Dawnguard..
However this thread helped me somehow accept the Volkihar from Dawnguard..
-
maria Dwyer - Posts: 3422
- Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:24 am
» Tue Nov 20, 2012 6:30 pm
Yeah, I like some traits the "Volkihar" have. I am still a big fan of http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Cyrodiil_Vampyrum_Order guys, though.
-
Janette Segura - Posts: 3512
- Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 12:36 am
» Wed Nov 21, 2012 12:28 am
The one and only mention in Dawnguard of Volikhar is the name of the castle.
Dialogue indicates that the vampires living there are not the original owners.
I dont think its safe to assume they are Volikhar.
To me, it seems more likely they are what they say they are, truebloods, and have usurped the castle from their weaker Volikhar kin.
Dialogue indicates that the vampires living there are not the original owners.
I dont think its safe to assume they are Volikhar.
To me, it seems more likely they are what they say they are, truebloods, and have usurped the castle from their weaker Volikhar kin.
-
Noely Ulloa - Posts: 3596
- Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 1:33 am
» Wed Nov 21, 2012 3:04 am
The one and only mention in Dawnguard of Volikhar is the name of the castle.
Dialogue indicates that the vampires living there are not the original owners.
I dont think its safe to assume they are Volikhar.
To me, it seems more likely they are what they say they are, truebloods, and have usurped the castle from their weaker Volikhar kin.
Dialogue indicates that the vampires living there are not the original owners.
I dont think its safe to assume they are Volikhar.
To me, it seems more likely they are what they say they are, truebloods, and have usurped the castle from their weaker Volikhar kin.
...only I want to believe that the original Volkihar deserted it. I would love it if they were just dormant in the ice all this time.
Perhaps one day a curious excavator looking for more Dwemer ruins will stumble across one of their holds....
and they all wake up! BOO! 
The book "Immortal Blood" which describes the Volkihar Vampires and others contains factual information. [ 
You're delusional.] Unless your argument is the weak "Some information in the book is true and the rest is not" then it can be assumed that the Vampires presented in Skyrim are a RETCON or not the Volkihar at all.
You're delusional.] Unless your argument is the weak "Some information in the book is true and the rest is not" then it can be assumed that the Vampires presented in Skyrim are a RETCON or not the Volkihar at all.-
Matt Terry - Posts: 3453
- Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 10:58 am
» Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:51 am
Can always blame a dragon breaking.
-
Darian Ennels - Posts: 3406
- Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 2:00 pm
» Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:02 am
It is easy to gather that by "original owners" they reference some non vampire related court that was wiped out. Remember the ruined statue of Mara? If the Volkihar were the original owners, there would never have been a statue of Mara. The game pretty clearly sets the Dawnguard Vampires as the Volkihar. You gotta accept it.
oooo, that's a good point about the original owners. Maybe she was referring to themselves, before they "changed"! Harkon does talk about him being a King over a massive realm, being powerful and wealthy beyond belief, and that the only thing he couldn't beat was mortality...hence his deal with Molag Bal.
Sorry, but it doesn't clearly set them as the Volkihar. It clearly sets them apart from the Volkihar, if we accept what Immortal Blood says as 'accurate'. You gotta accept it.
-
M!KkI - Posts: 3401
- Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 7:50 am
» Wed Nov 21, 2012 4:30 am
Sorry, but it doesn't clearly set them as the Volkihar. It clearly sets them apart from the Volkihar, if we accept what Immortal Blood says as 'accurate'. You gotta accept it.
-
SEXY QUEEN - Posts: 3417
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 7:54 pm
59 posts
• Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3