Steed. Not a bad birthsign in Morrowind due to the stupendously slow walking speeds.

oooh, I've got The Tower (October). Unless it's the Serpent. Some days it sure feels like I got the Serpent's curse. <_<

The Warrior... and I almost never play as a Warrior like character.

BATW

Quoted for truth.

And it seems like there is an awful amount of spam in this thread. Just sayin'.

I'm The Lord.

What does BATW mean? :confused:

Boring and Therefore Wrong*. A dynamic principle of truth in ol' Tamriel. Apologies for being obtuse.

-MK

* Kinda like this Facebook-smellin' thread.

Aw I am The Lord.... the lord fails! But Lady ftw...

"Boring" is entirely subjective.

So... there have been casualties in the past? :huh:
The threatening aspect is never explained exactly; you'd guess people would write about it if the Serpent was devouring other birthsigns. Or mention the now-lost birthsigns. Since they don't, I'll stick with the boring theory...

Heh, I'm the Tower. Don't think I ever used that birthsign in any TES-game. Cool, though.

You never asked.

edit: And think about it: how much (metaphysical and literal) sense would it make for a birth sign to get eaten??? NO signs would be up there at this point.

I is Tower

I never asked what? O_o
What "threatening" means in this case? I know that, I don't need to ask. I know that none of the sources go into detail about the subject. And heck, I even know that you're http://www.gamesas.com/bgsforums/index.php?showtopic=1046640&st=0&p=15190719&#entry15190719, so why are you trying to contradict me?

Your edit also shows that you agree with me, so I'm genuinely confused here.

If you knew it, you wouldn't have made that statement. And if I agreed with you, would I have made the above posts? Wouldn't make too much sense.

The way I'm understanding, your statements convoluted the "threatening" into a mere juxtapositioning next to another constellation, which cheapens the whole "threatening" aspect of TES astrology. Maybe it would help to know that the Serpent threatened the Lord constellation during the events of TES Redguard? Methinks events in the firmament influence those on Nirn.

Also don't forget that the Guardian constellations are just that: guardians. What do you think they're guarding from?

For what it's worth. It's not merely a juxtaposition.





The constellations actually move and change position, they are actually fighting. So when there is a slugfest going on in the sky, every day of the year, considering it merely to be a juxtaposition is boring and therefore wrong.

Of course it's still all Ra'ga interpretation, they're superstitious and easily exited by the splendour of the world. B)

Sigh... you guys freak me out. All I said was that the Serpent wasn't actually attacking the birthsigns by "eating" their stars or something like that, and then you come and tell me that the constellations of stars have an impact on Nirn.

I mean, my statement was an answer to the question of how unstars can threaten stars. And they can't; not in the literal sense. That's why I asked for casualties, because if an there actually have been cases of that, then of course I'd be wrong. But so far, that doesn't seem to be the case.
All your statements concerning what happens when the Serpent threatens another birthsigns are alright, I don't argue against them; it's just that there's no direct connection to my statement, which is basically that constellations can't be (or at least haven't been yet) destroyed by the Serpent.

The fact that you say that they can't literally threaten the constellations shows you still don't understand. A metaphysical threatening IS a literal threatening. Once you get that, you'll understand a lil' more about TES.

"At least haven't been yet" is more correct, if I'm understanding firmament logic correctly.

The Shadow, you know what thats fine, thats fine I don't have a problem with that.... DAMNIT (Punches wall)

Even though I usually play light warrior types, I don't use stealth alot....

Same, and my avatar is of the ritual.

Bit creepy.

No, a metaphysical threatening is NOT a literal threatening, because by "literal" I meant "what we understand as threat", i.e. in this case the possibility of destruction of stars. That was easy to see from the rest of my post, and it's also exactly what "literal" means. If you want, you can put in "actually visible at the nightsky" or simply "NOT metaphysical".

Now, reasons why I believe you secretely agree with me:
- someone asks what "attacking" means (probably meant "threatening" because there hasn't been any "attacking" as of yet) and you answer with a picture of the Serpent next to the Lord; this is exactly what I said in my first post here.
- you say it makes no sense for birthsigns to get eaten, because by now they'd all been gone; while I actually disagree with the latter (after all, there are the guardians!), the former is just a rephrased version of my "of course, it won't threaten the birthsign in any serious way" (where "serious way" means, like I said a couple of times now, "it won't actually attack the birthsign in a non-metaphysical way").
- in the same sentence you make a clear distinction between "metaphysical" and "literal" harm done to the birthsigns.

I think you simply took what I said the wrong way, and thought I said that there actually isn't any threat at all, neither metaphysical nor literal. Which is not what I meant, hence I tried to explain that to you. I also softened my statement, saying that it is based on the fact that there hasn't been a (non-metaphysical) attack yet.

My personal opinion is, by the way, that a non-metaphysical attack would be pretty lame, so I hope something like that isn't planned or meant when they're talking about threatening.

You just did a good job displaying you don't understand what I've said, especially in my relevant posts.

I'll actually apologize for this one, for I didn't clarify. I said that in the context that the Serpent always eats a sign he threatens, a context you appeared to express in one of your earlier posts. Something you're still (at least acting like you're) not understanding: in a land of myth and magic, myths and magic are real. If a constellation is MYTHICALLY threatened, then that's just as bad (if not worse) than being physically threatened.

Well, let's take a look at the two relevant posts you actually made.


First an answer to a question that says if I knew the answer to the question I wouldn't have made some statement. Translates to total gibberish, but maybe you feel like explaining.
Then, a reply to my remark that you are actually agreeing with me when you say that it makes no sense that the Serpent is eating the other birthsigns. No, you're not correcting that, or telling me I'm wrong, you're using meta-discussion instead and say that it wouldn't make sense for you to agree with me when you're trying to disagree with me. It's funny, but in effect, it's gibberish.


And here you're finally explaining yourself a bit, and write down what you think I've said, so that I can tell you "no, you got that wrong, that's not what I said". Which I'm trying to do from that point on (see my other posts).


To this I have replied already. You make everything dependent on that one word, "literal", which you translate into "real" in your mind. However, again: no, you got that wrong, that's not what I said.
I said "the unstars can't threaten the stars in the literal sense".
Now, the literal sense of "threatening" is something like "possibly doing harm to them". Not only to their magical aspects or anything, but to the star itself. You know, instead of unstars and stars, we could use people. If you are the star, and your haircut is the metaphysical aspect of that star, and I am the unstar, and I'm holding a blunt scissor in my hand. Exactly the same case: I can't threaten YOU (=star), because that scissor is blunt and I can't possibly harm you with it; but I can threaten your HAIRCUT (=metaphysical stuff).
Not, however, that this picture is not quite correct, because the metaphysical aspects we were talking about were connected to the birthsigns, i.e. the constellations of stars, not only single stars. However, what I was saying about unstars and stars - it didn't have a thing to do with the constellations. It was simply the assumption that unstars can't destroy stars when they get close to them, because there hasn't been a report on anything like that, and in lore we can only believe things we have sources for.

You wouldn't have made http://www.gamesas.com/bgsforums/index.php?act=findpost&pid=15186288 if you understood "threatening" like I'm explaining it is what I was saying. And you didn't do a clear enough job of stating that you meant individual unstars specifically instead of the Serpent itself.

My last attempt to make you understand what I was saying regarding "threatening:" if you destroy my HAIR (=metaphysical stuff) in the TES Universe with ANY set of scissors, you destroy ME (=star). Destroying my metaphysical aspect destroys ALL of my aspect, physical and metaphysical.

To be perfectly honest, if you would have made your unstar clarification in your first post, you would have avoided all of this.