By oblivion butchering lore, ill name a few right off the top of my head.
Cyrodill was supposed to be a jungle
The main city was supposed to be canol like like vivec and flourence
The amulet of kings was only supposed to be worn by dragonborns but the mystic dawn fello is wearing the amulet on his npc inside cryodill, before he went into oblivion
How all the emporers were dragonborn when the bloodline had been broken soooooo many times that quite a few of the emporers were not related what so ever to currwnt bloodlines or existing ones
Manni being basically a lowly conujurer that disceived many
The orc who was half vampire, how dors an undead creature successfully mate with a live creature?


Those are just a few

You are aware Mankar camreon was dragonborn? he even mentions it in his commentaries.

Also being a Vampire has never been stated to stop the reproductive system. Both lycans, and Vampires, can mate, there was never any lore stateing that they were sterile.

but even though all the lore breaks, thanks to oblivions quests design I had quite a great time in the game.

That one actually make sense.

The Amulet of Kings existed well before Alessia. The Remanada calls it by its elven name, Chim-El Adabal. From Shezarr and the Eight we know that Alessia took over an existing religious and governmental structure. From Last King of the Ayleids we know that the Ayleid fled to Valenwood and we know from the refugees that Mankar might have come from there.

Combine that with the talk from before Oblivions release about "another line of Kings" and its easy to surmise that that Mankar was an Ayleid.



This was bad story telling. To keep the story simple the developers used the religious [censored] withouth the suggestion that it could be just that.


And that also works.

Also the Mannimarco situation is easily explinable in that hes a god and
A. you killed his avatar but not him
B. that was a seperate Mannmiarco from one of the alternate timelines that remained mortal

the fact that you see the eclipse of Mannmiarco's god/sphere/planet/plane shows that he is a god of some sort.

Yeah, but what does that leave us with? What actually happened?

Its not lore butchering, but it is bad storytelling.

Does everything need to be explied though?

I mean, not actually being told what the eye of Magnus really is, or what the Psijjics did to it, is one of the reasons I liked the College of Winterhold storyline so much.

Also, there are a group of necromancers in Hob's fall cave who beseesh Manimarcoo, who they dont name by name, to darken a soul gem so they can restore the order of the black worm, so Manmmarco's god planet thing is still up there, doing its thing.

I just reread the 4 books and I didnt see him claim to be a dragonborn. Only 2 spots even talk about dragonborns and thats one where the author calls him him Dragon and King. The second only talks about 6000 years of hidden bloodlines that came to Arena which we got a game explaining that situation.

I understand and I believe myself that the amulet of kings are won by kings and have actually nothing to do with being dragonborn.
MK wrote it with dragonborns in mind in wearing it but was changed in oblivion that theres a possibility of kings wearing it and not dragonborn. The mythic dawn guy can be explained since he was a king to the mythic dawn cult. Im fine with it, but people say its retconning to fit the storyline. Or could be seen that way as since there wasnt any books or transcripts that pointed that way to explain the possibility of kings wearing it and every transcript stating only dragonborns can wear it. Retconning or bad story telling, just depends if changing original view on the subject to fit story as retconning.

That can be true with Manni, its been awhile since I played and I remember being secerly sdisappointed with events that didnt match up to lore and stories.

http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Oblivion:Mythic_Dawn_Commentaries
Mankar Cameron offered himself to a beam of light, which taught him to speak in another language, and after three nights he could speak fire.

Does that sound like anyhting to you?
1. When you kill a dragon, or get knowledge from the Greybeards, you get surrounded by a beam of light
2. Dragon's speak in a diffrent language
3. After THREE nights he could speek fire, what comes in threes? Shout words, specifically Yol, Tor, Shul or fire breath

Not to mention he wrose the Amulet of Kings, which is something only Dragonborn can do.

Thats a bit circular when you're trying to show he is the Dragonborn.

I do have a question. Why is the author if its mankor talking about himself as if its another person? Hes grown hoarse of speaking the gospel of mankors wisdow and throughout the book it implys that mankor and the author are 2 different people?
To speak fire u only need one word, ulfric himself only knows one word and is able to shout. When we kill a dragon we only get one soul to unlock one word, so the comparison between absorbing dragon souls and 3 is very thin ice. Also by going by the mood and the extremity of fanaticalism the author has in mankors words and wisdom can be interpreted that him speaking fire is not a literal sense but a symbolic sense in he finally acheived understanding and his words spread like fire or that hos words were like fire, his words so dangerous but true that they could burn or scorched peoples understanding.

Since the author does refer to him as a king and Martin was a king, but the coc was not, AND the amulet was hidden and not worn during the time periods of no empire like alessia,, remenz, and septims, it was not used in between those many years inbetween, im going with that the amulet was a tool in grand scheme of dragonborns but didnt actually require a dragonborn to actually use or wear. u just had to be a king.

Edit-mankar did actuly write them, but daybreak and such dosent hold much water to me as a literal sense in being dragonborn. More of a fanatical sense that he finally grasped the wisdom of dagon and his words had power to them in the sense of the wisdom. His words like fire could burn away doubt but also like fire burn the opposition figurility speaking.

How the hell is it retconning when nearly every piece of information about the AoK (except for the fact that it exists, I guess?) comes from Oblivion itself?

Sometime this fanbase is exhausting.

I dont necessaryly believe its retconning, more like bad story telling. I listed a few of the thongs peoe list constantly as the lore breaking stuff. I agree with alot of what I posted is lore breaking but not all of it. Quite a few of its bad storytelling or bad story structure.

Like how EVERY ruler of tamriel from allessia empire, remens empire, and tibers empire were all dragonborn because they all used the amulet. Was it the position that made them all change into dragonborn but that dosent mess well with skyrims dragonborn and the actual emporers who started the empires. How could they be dragonborn before they were emporers and how are we dragonborn if we arent a ruler? Thats why I believe that the amulet of kings requirement to use and fuse ur soul to that giant soulstone is not to be an actual dragonborn but to be a ruler over tamriel. Ingame dialogue and books in oblivion ALL point to the amulet and rulers as dragonborn and dragonborn tools, whereas its MK writings outside of game that trys to fill in the holes by saying it may not actually be the way the game states, but people who dont use the forums or internet only get one heavy sided information on it.

But tbh does it actually matter if the rulers and mankar were able to use the amulet because they were everysingle one of them dragonborn or simply because they were all kings, it dosent actually matter because the amulets broken and the fires are not needed anymore so its basically speculation that dosent really have a plint anymore. I just see it as bad story structure because ingame we are given one side and outaide of game on the internet we are given another side to make 2&2 together.

And again, I enjoyed oblivion, morrowind, and skyrim was fun for one playthru. Game mechanics I might argue over but lore imo broken or not I dont really have to much of a problem with. Was disappointed with Manni being so easy mode when hes supposed to be a God and was very confused seeing mankar wearing the amulet, but eh theres enough straws ingame and on the internet for me to come up with my own conclusion behind the stuff.

Besides the "core and central" storylines i.e oblivion crisis and dragons returning, there is no true canon in tes or fallout when it comes to actual choices, what choices you made are never referenced or mentioned in the next game, its left ambiguous ergo nothing was canonized and choices were still proper choices, these games are not like the kotor series which pretty much screwed everyone over by making only light sided choices fixed and canon, though that might have been due to lucasarts, not bioware as in their latest franchises, dragon age and mass effect, choices carry over and so a player's "personal canon" continues and is not retconned.

Point is, the many choices you can make in fallout are not retconned or canonized, they are just not mentioned at all in the next game and this is good because it allows players to have their interpretation and personal canon. Tes, while is does not retcon or canonize your choices either, has too much of a linear path for my liking, in fallout you have different endings and you could be truly evil, even when working for good guys. In Tes, you character's personality depends on the faction quests you are currently doing and you have limited dialogue so unlike Fallout, if you are doing a good faction questline, your dialogue is limited to more or less good choices in that and then if you work for the dark brotherhood, your personality completely changes and again there is limited dialogue. I wish they had a karma system and more dialogue options to reflect your alignment and multiple endings. This is where fallout trumps TES.

Agreed on everything. *goes back to play New Vegas*

LOL. I find the OP post so innocently funny. I almost had a Saints Row 3 flashback.

I dont believe its possible to create games like Morrowind and Skyrim without having an initial deep passion for games and gaming. Morrowind in particular is the holy grail of gaming.

Only if you choose wisely.