Lore talk:Artifacts/Archive 1

This is an archive of past Lore talk:Artifacts discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page, except for maintenance such as updating links.

Staff of Chaos

This article lacks this artifact : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artifacts_of_The_Elder_Scrolls#Staff_of_Chaos Many texts talk about this in TES, for example The real Barenziah. Even if it could spoils the main quest of Arena, I think it would be a good idea to write an article on this artifact. — Unsigned comment by 213.56.174.155 (talk) at 16:55 on 10 November 2006‎ (GMT)

Volendrung

Okay, there seems to be some disagreement here. I am right now looking at the Morrowind Construction Set, and according to this, Volendrung is unenchanted in Morrowind. I'm not sure if there's some difference between the PC and the Xbox on this one, so that's why I'm not changing it back yet. But it is definitely not enchanted on the PC, GOTY edition, and I recall that from in-game as well. Can somebody shed more light on this? --TheRealLurlock ^Talk 00:21, 16 November 2006 (EST)

As for as I know it is unenchanted on the PC version with the expansions install. --Ratwar 00:55, 16 November 2006 (EST)

That's pretty much what I thought - we just need somebody to confirm this on the Xbox. I suspect that the person who claimed otherwise was running a mod or something, though, becauses it'd be very unusual for the PC and Xbox to be different on this sort of thing. --TheRealLurlock ^Talk 10:42, 16 November 2006 (EST)

Volendrung is unenchanted in XBox too.--Hoggwild5 12:05, 16 November 2006 (EST)

Okay then. Reverted. --TheRealLurlock ^Talk 12:10, 16 November 2006 (EST)

Spear of Bitter Mercy

Where is it? Or is it not considered an artifact, in which case somebody would need to change Sheogorath's page.--~~~~Nevermind. Read the heading.

It's in Battlespire, so I think it should be included. After all, Scourge is also only in Battlespire and Morrowind and it's on the page. -Thunderforge 01:40, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Moon-and-Star

isn't moon and star an artifact to?it was blessedd by azura and only nerevar could wear it so it should be an artifact. right?

It says it only lists those in multiple games, plus it is a personal artifact of Nerevar only, as only he (and reincarnations) can wear it so it would seem out of place. — Unsigned comment by Kiutu (talk • contribs) on 7 December 2009

As it is a lore article, perhaps the games should not be mentioned and the artifacts should be chosen according to historical significance.132.162.76.105 18:15, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Fork of Horripilation

Shouldn't the Fork of Horripilation be here? It's in Morrowind and the Shivering Isles...

It isn't an actual in-game artifact; it's a quest item, and it is treated as such. It will not affect the artifact counter, and tt has no atomicity (and no usability); in both Morrowind and SI, the artifact only persists for the duration of the respective quest. --Saruuk 18:18, 22 May 2008 (EDT)

Just an update on this, seeing as it's been brought up. In lore terms, it's an artifact. It's associated with a Daedric Prince and has appeared more than once. Its usefulness in-game is irrelevant. --Legoless 22:15, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Staff Of Worms

What about mannimarcos staff and other artifacts?

Dude the Necromancers Amulet and the Bloodworm Helm are his artifacts --Prince of Madness 04:08, 12 July 2008 (EDT)

The True Enemy is the Enemy within not the Enemy without.

It is correct though, that the Staff of Worms is the third artifact of Mannimarco. I don't know if it should be added here, since the staff has only appeared in Oblivion; where it is listed here.--LordDagon 11:01, 12 July 2008 (EDT)

Sanguine rose

does the sanguine rose whilt during oblivion 4 elder scrolls gameplay? the article is unclear. — Unsigned comment by Auguil (talk • contribs) on 17 August 2008

No, except that the rose loses charge like any other magical item. –Rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 10:46, 17 August 2008 (EDT)

Skeleton Key

On the last line, daedric is spelled incorrectly. Is this intentional, or should it be edited?-Puddle ^{Talk+Contribs.} 14:27, 6 December 2008 (EST)

The entire sentence was a new, misplaced sentence which has now been deleted. --Nephele^Talk 15:52, 6 December 2008 (EST)

Mods Q

does ANYONE know if there is a mod placing ALL artifacts in oblivion? if anyone knows pls tell me --Prince of Madness 06:24, 24 December 2008 (EST)

Yes it's called Artifacts Of Tamriel 300 [1] Volthawk 20:59, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Mehrunes' Razor

"History does not record any bearers of Mehrunes' Razor." From reading this book, it seems like Neloth had it at one point: http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Morrowind:Realizations_of_Acrobacy Shouldn't that information be edited or removed? Legoless 19:01, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Someone included the effect 'Daedric Banishing' for Mehrunes Razor into the article but this explains nothing as it is an TES4-CS internal script effect only. Translated to lore and looking inside the script the effect is more of a save vs. luck effect (limited to 10% max ingame-implementation). UESP has no 'Daedric Banishing' knowledge either (no wonder - it's only engine specific). So could someone write something like save vs. luck inside? 84.162.171.15 13:35, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Fixed this myself by linking 'Daedric Banishing'. 84.162.226.51 14:40, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

(←) I'm bringing this up again. The description of most of these artifacts come from Arena and Daggerfall. While it would be fine to quote these, I think we might need to change some of the information which is clearly false. Master Neloth, Varner Hleras and the Ayleids all had possession of the Razor. Legoless 14:17, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I must have missed this first time around. You're right - it's clearly false information. I'd be tempted to simply delete that line because otherwise we end up with almost every artifact mentioning the Nerevarine and the Champion of Cyrodiil. rpeh •T•C•E• 14:19, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Or we could just exclude the heroes? Maybe have a small list of important people who've owned the artifact. Sanguine's Rose an Martin, Bow of Shadows and Dram. Actually, looking at the page the Bow of Shadows isn't on it. I know it only appeared as an item in Morrowind, but since it was technically in Redguard doesn't in count as an artifact? Legoless 15:06, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. Sounds like a good plan. rpeh •T•C•E• 16:13, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I've edited the Razor as an example. If anyone has an improvements or suggestions, voice them now. If not I'll go ahead and do the rest of the page, including adding the Bow of Shadows. Legoless 18:41, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

History does not record any bearers, and yet we do... Though I enjoy the concept that the UESP is an multidimensional website, able to violate the laws of physics we should probably re-write the whole lot of these so it isn't just a quote from Tamrielic Lore. There is no reason to only use the knowledge of the last dwarf as our only source for this information, since we have run into these artifacts time and time again. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 20:14, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

So our own description of each artifact? That sounds interesting. I think I might undo my edit for the moment and move the whole lot to a sandbox. Legoless 20:37, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

If you want to do it on your own, that's cool, but this sounds like it might make a decent little project. It looks like this page uses (almost) entirely Daggerfall info plus Tamrielic Lore: certainly you couldn't mention Auriel's Bow without mentioning Ash Yams if you've played Morrowind. The section on Azura's Soul is horribly wrong on so many levels. It's possible some artifacts are missing from the list, too, although I never really agreed with the redefinition of "artifact" that took place a couple of years ago so I won't argue that point. rpeh •T•C•E• 20:48, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

(←) Others are welcome to help, but I'm sure once the basic facts are covered the rest of the small tweaks can be done here, ash yam-related or not. Here's a link to the sandbox so that we don't muck up the public version. Legoless 20:55, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

If everyone is welcome to edit that sandbox, please could you add the {{Editing Allowed}} template, possibly with params to show who is allowed to edit? I always feel naughty editing a user page where I don't have specific permission. rpeh •T•C•E• 21:31, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Like so? Legoless 21:40, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

(←) I've been slowly plodding along with this project, but I've come to realise that a single page for all of the artifacts is both limiting and a bit ridiculous when a certain level of detail is aimed for. I think it would be much better if each artifact had its own page, similar to a few Arena items (Lore:Hammer of Gharen and Lore:Jewel of Fire being two examples, the former I created myself). Unless anyone has any objections to this, I'll begin to split off each artifact. Once I'm finished, I'd recommend turning this page into either a simple list, perhaps removing it from Appendices. --Legoless 17:10, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit: See Lore:Azura's Star as an example of what I have in mind. --Legoless 17:45, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Azura's Star

For those not only used to Oblivion, some might note that Azura's Star also has an unlimited capacity and can be used on any living thing (creature or person - I think you could catch Sotha Sil's soul in Morrowind only with Azura's Star and nothing else). 84.162.179.142 11:33, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Azura's star is not a black soul gem, in Oblivion or otherwise. Almalexia and Vivec count as creatures in Morrowind, not NPCs, so their souls can be trapped just like any other. I believe Oblivion is the first TES game where "human" souls can be captured. Any soul can be trapped in any soul gem, but matching the power of the soul with the capacity of the soul gem is how you maximise the potential of your gem/creature. You cannot trap Sotha Sil's soul, as he is already dead when you reach him in Tribunal. -Itachi 11:52, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

It was Almalexia's soul not Sotha Sil's and Azura's Star in Morrowind can only capture creatures, that's right. But don't tell me a human is a creature - that's only ingame-implementation and not lore (Almalexia was made an ingame-creature not for Azura's Star but because of the problems of her body appearance and animations making her NPC). And this is part of the lore section. Bethesda created lore different from implementation like Dwemer Centurions having souls and Almalexia being a creature. So lore books are different from implementation due to making gameplay more interesting or just engine limits. But lore should always be primary source and not dictated by the engine.

In any case Azura's Star is limitless in power and not restricted to grand souls. It was only Oblivion's engine who made Azura's Star definitely a normal grand soul gem with infinite use. Also the term creature in older books might not be precise: Mehrunes Razor should only work on creatures, yet it works on creatures and NPCs. Not surprising if some sources say men/mer are creatures of nirn (like humans are the creatures of earth).

Now we have Morrowind using the Star unlimited on a person (ingame-creature), Oblivion only on creatures and limited in capacity, while lore says unlimited on the term 'creature'. Someone should clear that. I think Azura's Star without the ability to harvest even the greatest souls is quite useless and mundane in a world where grand soul gems are found in masses. 84.162.203.117 13:14, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

In Morrowind and Tribunal, there were souls that even grand soul gems would not use to their maximum - Almalexia's soul is 1500, and grand soul gems are capped at 600. What is important to note here is that none of the Tribunal can truely be considered NPCs in-game, or "human" otherwise. They are demi-gods, changed beyond much mortal recognition, so the classification of creature what fits them best. In oblivion souls are simply classed whereas in Morrowind they had a numerical value, allowing variation within a particular class. In this sense, Azura's Star is only changed in Oblivion due to its handling of souls - this is not a lore but a technical issue. And Azura's star is not limited, since there are no souls in Oblivion which cannot be trapped by it.

Also, where did I say humans were creatures? Black soul gems trap human, elf and baest (argonian and khajiit, as they were classed in Morrowind). I used the term human for expedience. -Itachi 13:23, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I know Oblivion only caps Azura's Star technically (I just wondered why the lore article here doesn't mention its limitless capacity in contrast to normal and black soul gems).

And to consider demi-gods and higher than mortal beings as creatures and NPCs (a character of a tamriel race) as a totally other class only catched by black soul gems would make mortal race members (NPCs) somehow superior to demi-gods and maybe even daedric princes (as lorkhans heart was the corruption) - a somewhat twisted logic.

When I think again about it I could argue to your favor that soul gems could only harvest daedric-like souls and black soul gems could harvest only aedric-like souls. This would give it a little bit sense, since most of the higher creatures you see in the games are of daedric origin and Almalexia and Vivec were corrupted by daedric power, while the races of tamriel could be of pure aedric origin. But this is only speculation. I just used it to somehow get a logic why NPC souls should be in any way more difficult to catch than NPCs that got immortal or daedric. 84.162.246.231 14:02, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

There are no sentiments attached to the use of "creature" in TES. Creatures are no lower than the sentient races of Tamriel, and since daedra are creatures in a pretty obvious way it could be argued that if anything, creatures as a category are considered higher than humans. Regardless of this, the classification in-game is, as you say, purely technical - which means that it shouldn't be mentioned on a lore aricle. Seperating soul gems into two classes was likely a way to incorporate the new quests and storylines in Oblivion without allowing the player to soul trap just any NPC. Whether the distinction between daedra and aedra has anything to do with this is just speculation, so it doesn't belong on the article until we have proof of some sort. -Itachi 14:12, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

What do you mean "daedra are creatures in a pretty obvious way" ? Not all Daedric races are creatures, in Morrowind Golden Saints and Winged Twilights were creatures because you can't trap NPC's souls (and they can't be put in leveled lists meaning it would affect game balancing), but in Shivering Isles Golden Saints and Dark Seducers are NPCs and least as civilized as Humans/Mer/Argonians/Khajiits.--TheAlbinoOrc 01:29, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Gray Cowl of Nocturnal

Does the Gray Cowl of Nocturnal count as an artifact? Because it's implemented in Oblivion and certainly unique and even beyond mortal creation. It's linked to Nocturnal, although having the ability to rewrite the elder scrolls by itself (to make you invisible to history like in the game) and the fact that the elder scrolls are counted beyond aedric and daedric origin and not written by any gods, nocturnal couldn't have created such a thing if the elder scrolls itself hadn't created such an artifact.

In any case it should be unique enough and listed as a lore artifact (maybe of unknown origin). Sources can be seen here and here. 84.162.247.17 16:30, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

As it says at the start of the page, only artifacts that have appeared in more than one game are candidates to be listed, and from my knowledge on TES game, I think that the GCoN has only appeared once, in Oblivion. --S'drassa ^•T2M 16:32, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Should have read more carefully ... But what's the reason for this? And more important - where's the section about lore artifacts appearing only in one game? 84.162.195.185 18:19, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

If an artifact appears only in one game, it's listed on that game's page. There's no point duplicating information into the Lore namespace in such cases. If an artifact were to subsequently appear in other games, then yes it would get a mention on this page. rpeh •T•C•E• 19:20, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Umbra

Well, seeing as Umbra now has a really good amount of history and backstory with the release of The Infernal City, does anyone else think Umbra should get its own Lore page?--Corevette789

Yep, I think so too. ;) Since the sword is present in Morrowind and Oblivion and has an interesting background story described in The Infernal City, I think it has enough information to warrant a lore page. ^Talk Wolok gro-Barok _{Contributions} 22:15, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, Lore:Umbra redirects to this page so I can't start on it, at least not today where I'm not in a suitable working enviornment (Internet Explorer)--Corevette789

"Lore:Umbra redirects to this page so I can't start on it"... Am I missing something? Is there a reason you can't just edit the redirect on IE? --GK^talk2me 22:21, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

I mean by that everything is changed around. I could start a little bit on it and add a stub for now...I am coming and going frequently so I won't get much done--^Corevette₇₈₉ 22:23, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Chillrend

Chillrend appear in Oblivion and Skyrim, can it be mentioned in this page?

I would assume so. Go for it! -Thunderforge 01:54, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Done. – Robin Hood↝talk 05:33, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Lack of in-game descriptions aside, it's a one-handed blue or blueish Glass weapon in both, so at least it's more consistent than some of the Daedric artifacts are. Aliana 14:53, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Keening

Should a section on keening be added? it is, after all, an artifact which appears in two games. 202.89.38.46 04:42, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

I assume so, just like Chillrend and Scourge which both appear in two games. -75.179.136.54 20:14, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

I added it. Could use some description though. I know of its use in Morrowind, but I think someone with Skyrim knowledge should probably write the full description. --TheRealLurlock ^Talk 03:20, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Transclusion

I've transcluded most of the completed artifact pages here. This involves removing the tables, which I think are too game-specific anyway. I'm not sure if we need to transclude the entirety of the text, but it looks fine for now, so (unless someone's willing to go through and tweak the <noinclude> tags) I say we leave it. --Legoless 17:25, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm in favor of keeping the tables because, although game specific, they provide a concise statement of their functionality in each game, which is especially useful because it doesn't always match up with the lore description. -Thunderforge 21:46, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

An alternative could be to add a line listing the sources with links to each article. For instance: "The Sanguine Rose appeared in Daggerfall, Oblivion, and Skyrim." Each of the links goes to the game-specific article for the artifact. -Thunderforge (talk) 19:57, 3 September 2012 (EDT)

The individual artifact pages link to gamespace in the "See Also" section. The effects of the artifact are usually incorporated into the text to appear lore-friendly, so I don't think the tables are necessary.
--Legoless (talk) 18:54, 4 September 2012 (EDT)

Savior's Hide

In Battlespire Savior's Hide was obtainable but was called "Mithril Cuirass of the Savior's Hide" should this be added to the "Also known as" section? Or is it leveled according to the players level?

Addition to Keening

"As a part of the tools of Kagrenac, the dagger Keening was forged by the ancient Dwemer Lord Kagrenac, to tap into the Heart of Lorkhan and take its power. Legend holds that it was the dagger who forced him to use it and stab the Heart. Another legend sais that a small amount of Lorkhan was still in the Heart and was sucked into the dagger and wakening the god, thus transporting the whole soul into the dagger, corrupting it and enslaving the Dwemer. One of the known things is that it was made from an crystal that was created by the Dwemer Lord, by using the dangerous magicks that the Dwemer were experimenting with. It's a blue crystal, said to turn red when Masser and Secunda align on the opposite sides of Nirn. This may confirm that Lorkhan may still be in the dagger and that the latter legend may be true. Battlereports say that at the Battle of Septima (3E 290), the Tcaesci were using magic simmilar as that to the Dwemer, but propelling their magic through these crystals to emmit the desired effect, it be light, or death. The wielder should keep in mind, that it is very dangerous to use, and shouldn't be used at all."

I've removed this from the page. It seems to contain a lot of speculation and details which I've never heard of before. If someone can provide a reference, this might be worth re-adding, but Keening will need its own article eventually anyway. —Legoless 17:55, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Azura's Star 2

Should I remove the part about Martin destroying Azura's star? Any daedric artifact can be used to open the gate after all.--86.135.2.211 15:24, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

See the full lore article for references to back up the statement. The statement is indeed speculation, but it's based on Oblivion Mobile (in which the Star is always the item used) and the quest in Oblivion pointing you towards Azura, even though it's possible to use other artifacts. From this, it's obvious that Azura's Star is the "intended" artifact, even though there's nothing concrete to support it. —Legoless 16:00, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

List Format

If no one opposes it, I'm going to be converting this page into a list format similar to Lore:Places. —Legoless (talk) 23:36, 16 February 2013 (GMT)

I've created the individual list pages, but I'm unsure what to do with this article as a hub page. —Legoless (talk) 18:11, 10 March 2013 (GMT)

I would assume something similar to the faction and place hub pages, a general overview of what makes something an artifact. Jeancey (talk) 18:13, 10 March 2013 (GMT)

There's not all that much to write about artifacts in general, but I'll try to draft something up. —Legoless (talk) 18:17, 10 March 2013 (GMT)

Why not make the format more like Lore:Bestiary and its subpages (e.g. Lore:Bestiary A, albeit without being divided up into multiple pages)? I think this would make it look a lot prettier and less like a big wall of text, as it is in its current form. I especially like how it talks about the lore in general, but then includes a "Found In" section that points to the game-specific articles. -Thunderforge (talk) 00:13, 14 May 2013 (GMT)

Actually, it already is separated like that. The main page just hasn't been updated yet. Jeancey (talk) 00:25, 14 May 2013 (GMT)

Prev: None

Up: Lore talk:Artifacts

Next: None