The Elder Scrolls VI

I'm pretty sure that's heretical? Or a crime against humanity?

its ok future elder scrolls will have dubstep

But is he working on Starfield? Like, is this just him not being tapped for TESVI right now, or he will not be involved with it at any point in the future, or is he just parting ways with Bethesda entirely?

Aww so I can't make joke about first getting rid of the writer and now the composer?

Ah, just read his tweet. All it is is that Bethesda hasn't reached out to him yet, and they haven't announced a composer for TESVI yet, either. So it's just still up in the air, basically.

Any canonical interactions between the Dwemer and Dragons? I know there's Vulthuryol, but.....

Surely dragons and dwarves must have existed at some point at the same time right?

The dragons were long before the dwarfs

So no fafnirs and no smaugs. Daaaaaamnnnnnnnnn

It's basically law that dwarves and dragons have to meet and be at war with each other.

Thats dwarfs and elves

Not necessarily. Dragons and dwarves have an even more fundamental conflict: dwarves as procurers of physical wealth, and Dragons as thieves and hoarders of it.

Huh. I think they disabled Vampire attacks on cities for the Switch edition of the game. Kinda gives a dragonborn very little impetus to join up.

Recently I came across a series of videos discussing how realistic/practical fictional cities/castles are when it comes to defense. He's done several videos covering Elder Scrolls cities.

Give us a quick summary? Thanks!

thank you

Edited by blkwhtrbbt on Jan 14th 2019 at 9:38:22 AM

Let's see... They're breakdowns of specific cities and/or castles, usually about 20 to 30 minute videos dedicated to one castle/city. He goes over all the defenses, discusses location and how it helps and hurts from a defensive perspective, gives lots of comparisons to real castles, talks about gatehouses, towers and how effective they would be in repelling an army, lots of stuff along those lines.

Edited by WillKeaton on Jan 14th 2019 at 8:34:27 AM

It's Shadiversity. He breaks down a ton of fantasy stuff. He talks about what weapons you'd use to fight specific monsters (including dragons) and also what kind of weapons fantasy races would use the most from an effectiveness standpoint. And of course Castles. He loves castles. He's got a collaboration vid with Metatron comparing Japanese and European castles and it's well worth a watch.

I was introduced to him with his female armor video, and he gave very compelling arguments and opinions about the subject. He seems quite level-headed and fair in his judgments. I suggest giving him a watch.

Definitely. Only thing I'll argue with in his female armor vid is the depiction of a set of armor with distinct breasts. Maybe you can give that thing to some Teutonic level badass who doesn't care, but your rank and file knights aren't going to wear that. The distinct breasts add pressure rings at their edges that'll dig right into the warrior when she takes a hit. Setting the single wide bulge toward the top of the breastplate would work way better, since the single bulge melds seamlessly into the rest of the armor and doesn't add a pressure ridge.

ETA: I was even going to post this on the vid itself but the top comment there beat me to the punch.

Edited by Journeyman on Jan 15th 2019 at 11:45:38 AM

And don't forget that having two distinct breast bulges means that the space between them is a line heading straight to the throat. So instead of deflecting strikes away, it will channel them in the worst direction.

Yes, that was also bandied about. The Teutonic Knights wore winged helmets to show they were badasses who didn't care. Distinct breast armor would be along the same lines, right with a deadly weakness built in.

That's not nearly the same thing.

A wing attachment on a helm might be a bit unwieldy. A breasts-plate would actually help the attacker against the defender.

Now, theoretically, you could have normal armor (which actually is supposed to have a bit of a "pot belly" to deflect direct blows to the torso) and hang like, sandbags or something out front.

Well he did mention in the comments (although it seems to have been lost in the many comments that have come out since then) that what little disadvantage it would give would be cancelled by the overall quality of the armor. A solid plate armor won't be pierce by a sword strike even if it slides in the middle, and fighters would aim for joints in the armor rather than center mass. So the guy with the halberd wouldn't try to aim for the chest, but would try to slice between the arms...

Plus since only noblewomen could even afford full plate of that quality, it would be uncommon enough that the armor would sacrifice convenience for the sake of aesthetics, if only to make it more visually appealing in ceremonial settings. After all, huge battles weren't even that common in the medieval age, with most of the conflicts being sieges and counter-sieges.

Yeah but most of the time knights didn't go at each other with swords. They went at each other with hammers poleaxes and lances. Them titties would make a big ol target for a hammer. A normal cuirass might deflect it. A breasts-plate though....

And im not understanding the need for sexual appeal in combat armor. We are talking about mercenaries and adventurers, not military themed strippers right?

We're talking nobles. Have you seen the video? Male armor has very prominent crotch bulges to make sure that everyone sees how manly the wearer is. This crotch plate serves no practical purpose, and sure, it's in a less vulnerable area, but nobles are vapid by nature and will want to show off their features.

As far as hammers and lances go, the breast part of the armor is no less solid than a normal breastplate. If you get a direct hit from a lance that manages to pierce it, it's unlikely you were in a position to stop it no matter what the armor you're wearing is. I mean, no military strategist is going to waste his heavy cavalry in a head-on charge against other heavy cavarly. That's a good way to lose half of your cavalry for no good gain. Ideally, your cavalry is hitting from the flanks or from behind.

Any Total War player can tell you, have your cavalry charge a weak portion of their army, even if it is the front (though it usually is the rear or flanks), so long as it doesn't have spears. Cavalry excel at breaking a line, and that breaks morale. Usually, you want to shoot some artillery at them to soften them up, or maybe have your infantry take them head on as a distraction to coax them out of formations, but then send in your horsies to run them over on their weakest side that doesn't involve trampling your own men.