854 réponses à ce sujet

[Inquisitor Arc]

I'm wondering. Does anyone here think the Qunari homeland could be overrun with Darkspawn? Considering how there were ogres in the blights before the Qunari even landed in Thedas. Par Vollen has lost contact with their homeland, and has sent ships that never returned.

Modifié par Tiger Ace 32, 02 décembre 2012 - 07:24 .

[Heimdall]

Nizaris1 wrote..
Anyway, the core story (or backstory) is what driven the readers (players) to continue reading (playing).

What?! I'm not sure you even understand what you mean by core story, let alone what backstory means.

For example, in Star Wars, fans want to know what happen to the Jedi, what is behind the Sith, what is behind everything. Even Gorge Lucas started at Episode 4 where nobody have any idea what Star Wars is about, fans are waiting for episode 5, because they want to know what is what and who is who...Gorge Lucas show it all in part 5. Showing Yoda, telling about Jedi, Force and whatsoever...then reveal that Vader is Luke father...dun dun dun dun (give a suspense)...then Episode 6 give the conclusion.

I think I now understand why you're so confused.  Star Wars is meant to be one story.  Dragon Age is many stories.   They are designed fudamenally differently and neither is "bad" for it.

LotR is basically about an evil dude with his ring, that the core story,

Not. At. All.

But DA is anti-climatic...in DA:O we play as the Warden who going though all the miserable thing to kill the Archdemon and ending the Blight, some of us have Old God baby....but DA2 is totally different thing leaving all the questions unanswered...why is that? even the core story about the Black City being left out in vanilla and being put in DLC. That is why i say DA have lost it sense...We already being fed with Grey Warden, Darspawn, Archdemon, Broodmothers, and whatsoever then suddenly they all gone...? funnily DA3 will be related with DA2 leaving DA:O out of the question.

. Listen, the sooner you accept this the sooner you'll actually understand this series.  DA:O and DA2 are two separate stories with different themes.  All of the examples you've cooked up are of single stories with separate entires.  Dragon Age is not such a story and it has never been.  You are bullheadedly trying to see it as something it never was and criticizing it for not being that way.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 02 décembre 2012 - 07:29 .

[Heimdall]

Nizaris1 wrote...

What is that...? What is the core story, what DA is all about? About a country...? Surely no....for me DA is an epic but many claim it is not the case...even you...

Your inability to see anything not about Darkspawn and shameless Orc clones as epic is your problem.  One I do not share.

[Icesong]

Nizaris1 wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

Nizaris1 wrote...
So, bye-bye DA...you lost one customer...

There's a lot of presumptions in your posts regarding what can and cannot be. Mostly what you're talking about is a backstory, which DA does have. If you truly believe that the series should be about one thing and one thing only, and we are not focusing on that enough (despite not truly knowing what DA3 will be about)... then fair enough! Hopefully you'll see something in DA3 to interest you when we reveal more of it, but if not then it's great you enjoyed the one game.

Funny that you just quote the last part lols

Anyway, the core story (or backstory) is what driven the readers (players) to continue reading (playing).

For example, in Star Wars, fans want to know what happen to the Jedi, what is behind the Sith, what is behind everything. Even Gorge Lucas started at Episode 4 where nobody have any idea what Star Wars is about, fans are waiting for episode 5, because they want to know what is what and who is who...Gorge Lucas show it all in part 5. Showing Yoda, telling about Jedi, Force and whatsoever...then reveal that Vader is Luke father...dun dun dun dun (give a suspense)...then Episode 6 give the conclusion.

And then what happened? The Expanded Universe, and that story became the first step into a larger world. We got the Thrawn campaign, the First Great Schism, the Stark Hyperspace War, the Second Galactic Civil War, the Great Galactic War, the Mandalorian Wars and the Jedi Civil War. And so much more than that.

LotR is basically about an evil dude with his ring, that the core story, the last part showing a small guy carrying the ring with his friend...that the base story. We are waiting for part two because we want to know what happen to that small guy.  We already get the idea that the ring is evil and evil is awakened, we want to know what happen next...

And then we came to know of the First and Second Ages, of Beren and Luthien, of Turin, of Earendil, of Feanor, of Melkor...and Sauron and the War of the Ring became just a single story in the unfolding of the world.

You want a single storyline, a story arc if you will. And you got one. DAO was about what you described and that's the story, that's what it's about. Any lingering questions that remained after the story ended weren't meant to be answered in a continuation of the arc. Doesn't mean they won't ever be answered.

And some of them don't need to be answered.

Modifié par Icesong, 02 décembre 2012 - 07:39 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Icesong wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Not only havn't the Dragonborn been the focus of any other game than SKyrim, the Dragonborn of Skyrim is not even the same kind of dragonborn as the Emperors of tthe Septim line are.... So Nizaris is entirely wrong about this...

Didn't the lore say that Tiber Septim had the same type of power as the TES V Dragonborn, though? And yes, they were (or at least one of them was) the focus of IV and I, too. And they played a minor part in II, and a minor but essential part in III.

First of all, the bulk of TES lore comes from books written from an in-universe perspective. That means you have to filter for propaganda, cultural prejudices,  and other biases. Tiber Septim was a Dovahkiin, as was Reman Cyrodiil and maybe Alessia. The question is whether their purported descendants and heirs can claim the same.

The idea is supposed to be that only Dragonborn can do certain things, and you get evidence of this if you try to personally wear the Amulet of Kings. Whether or not that actually requires to you be able to do the Thu'um thing is the question.

And how does the dragonborn being of different types mean that the series isn't about the Dragonborn as a whole?

Because it's completely misleadingly without even a hint of truth. It would be as if Canada somehow started getting called America and the history of the United States started getting conflated with Canada's.

... Okay. But that wouldn't preclude making a historical piece where they're both major players. If that's what happened anyway.

And plus TES1-3 weren't about that at all.

My impression was that TES 1 was about saving the emperor from captivity, and that while the emperor didn't play a large part in TES 2 he's the one who set the whole thing in motion, albeit accidentally. I've actually played TES III and IV, and the emperor masterminded the plot of both of those games. And of course there's V. If any of these impressions are mistaken, please explain how instead of just telling me I'm wrong. That only makes you sound like Nizaris.

For anyone who doesn't know, read some of this to get a sense of how far beyond TES is to this stuff called Dragonborn.

Yeah, but the main plot of the five games, for the most part, either directly involves the Dragonborn, occurs under their direction, or in the exceptional, rule-proving case is tangentially related to them.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 02 décembre 2012 - 07:55 .

[Heimdall]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Yeah, but the main plot of the five games, for the most part, either directly involves the Dragonborn, occurs under their direction, or in the exceptional, rule-proving case is tangentially related to them.

Involving the Dragonborn and playing a role are not the same thing as the story being about them.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Yeah, but the main plot of the five games, for the most part, either directly involves the Dragonborn, occurs under their direction, or in the exceptional, rule-proving case is tangentially related to them.

Involving the Dragonborn and playing a role are not the same thing as the story being about them.

Yeah, but the playing a role one is the exception that proves the rule.

And by "directly involves" I kind of meant "the plot of those games freaking revolves around the respective dragonborn."

Edit: And I just looked up the Nerevarine prophecy. Yep, apparently the hero of Morrowind is Dragon-born. Again, don't ask me how.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 02 décembre 2012 - 08:22 .

[Icesong]

Yeah, but the main plot of the five games, for the most part, either directly involves the Dragonborn, occurs under their direction, or in the exceptional, rule-proving case is tangentially related to them.

Do you remember what the original claim was?

No, the whole TES is about Dragonborn, because the Dragonborn is the one who protect the world from evil. Without Dragonborn, all matter of evil come into the world. That is why the Imperial become the Imperial, the Emperor not just a ruler of physical realm, but spiritual realm too. Only that in Skyrim we play as Dragonborn our self. The whole TES is about Dragonborn.

This is talking about two different things and needs to be addressed as such. If you don't separate them you're starting from a faulty premise. The idea of a Dragonborn protecting the world from "evil" and becoming the Emperor is really silly but is based on the Dragonfires needing to be lit to guard against Oblivion, and supposedly only a descendant of Alessia can do that. This is outlined in the Trials of St. Alessia. This is clearly false because neither Reman Cyrodiil or Tiber Septim were descended from Alessia, and their heirs weren't all descended from them.

In Oblivion, when this mainly got introduced, Martin Septim sacrificed himself and in so doing removed the need for Dragonfires to guard against Oblivion. So right there ends the need for Dragonborn Emperors needing to be there to protect against "evil", if ever they truly were the only ones capable of doing it.

That's one thing. In Skyrim we come to learn another, what the Dragonborn really is and how the term got muddled. We also learn that there have been other Dragonborn in history that weren't part of the imperial lines, and that they weren't all out there fighting "evil". We ourselves are destined to fight Alduin, but Alduin is not a daedra and has nothing to do with Oblivion. Nothing to do with the idea that Dragonborn are there to guard against "evil" from another realm.

Modifié par Icesong, 02 décembre 2012 - 08:22 .

[Icesong]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...


Edit: And I just looked up the Nerevarine prophecy. Yep, apparently the hero of Morrowind is Dragon-born. Again, don't ask me how.

Dragon-born, yet another term.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Icesong wrote...

Yeah, but the main plot of the five games, for the most part, either directly involves the Dragonborn, occurs under their direction, or in the exceptional, rule-proving case is tangentially related to them.

Do you remember what the original claim was?

No, the whole TES is about Dragonborn, because the Dragonborn is the one who protect the world from evil. Without Dragonborn, all matter of evil come into the world. That is why the Imperial become the Imperial, the Emperor not just a ruler of physical realm, but spiritual realm too. Only that in Skyrim we play as Dragonborn our self. The whole TES is about Dragonborn.

This is talking about two different things and needs to be addressed as such. If you don't separate them you're starting from a faulty premise. The idea of a Dragonborn protecting the world from "evil" and becoming the Emperor is really silly but is based on the Dragonfires needing to be lit to guard against Oblivion, and supposedly only a descendant of Alessia can do that. This is outlined in the Trials of St. Alessia. This is clearly false because neither Reman Cyrodiil or Tiber Septim were descended from Alessia, and their heirs weren't all descended from them.  

Yeah, I dropped a good deal of that from my original post. Remember? For that matter, I don't see how the "has to be descended from Alessia thing" is relevant, since I didn't bring that up and I don't think Nizaris did either. For reference:

I can't believe I'm about to say this, but Nizaris actually has a point about the focus of TES as a whole. The first game revolved around saving the emperor, the second and third you were sent to do something for him, the fourth revolved around you helping his also dragonborn heir, and the fifth, you are a dragonborn. So, TES is about the dragonborn, or at least they are a substantial plot point.

In Oblivion, when this mainly got introduced, Martin Septim sacrificed himself and in so doing removed the need for Dragonfires to guard against Oblivion. So right there ends the need for Dragonborn Emperors needing to be there to protect against "evil", if ever they truly were the only ones capable of doing it.

And yet, evil ends up coming right back. Which leads to...

That's one thing. In Skyrim we come to learn another, what the Dragonborn really is and how the term got muddled. We also learn that there have been other Dragonborn in history that weren't part of the imperial lines, and that they weren't all out there fighting "evil". We ourselves are destined to fight Alduin, but Alduin is not a daedra and has nothing to do with Oblivion. Nothing to do with the idea that Dragonborn are there to guard against "evil" from another realm.

Okay, but that was Nizaris's point, not mine. I cut out a lot of her points from my post, since they weren't relevant to the series as a whole and the way she put them made my head hurt anyway. Nor does she at any point say that dragons don't count as evil, so I don't know why you mentioned Oblivion. Nor do I remember her saying that all dragonborn were related. Mostly what I was saying was that a dragonborn of some sort or another was the focus of all five of the games.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 02 décembre 2012 - 08:41 .

[Silfren]

Nizaris1 wrote...

Then DA is not interesting at all...have no real story, just bunch of things here and there without any scope or focus, no real sense.

Even history have sense, DA have no sense if it just about "Thedas"

It is like making a game about "Malaysia" or "British" or Japan" whatsoever...

The core story of DA is conflict, plain and simple.  In DA:O, the conflict centered around the Blight, while also introducing us to other conflicts unrelated to the Blight. 

To address something you said earlier, the question of royal succession in Orzammar was NOT related to the Blight, wasn't caused by it or affected by it.  It was started entirely by one Aeducan's machinations.  So no, that conflict would have occurred even if the Blight did not exist.  Same goes for the Dalish: the problem of the werewolf curse had nothing whatsoever to do with the Blight or any darkspawn.  The conflict happening within the Mage tower was the only thing really affected by the Blight, in the sense that it was the presence of darkspawn in Ostagar and the response of Cailan to enlist mages among his soldiers that provided Uldred his opportunity to conspire with Loghain.  This, however, does not mean that Uldred would not have found another means of attempting to gain control of the tower.  There's nothing about his particular conflict that REQUIRED the Blight as a trigger.  The only storyline in Origins, actually, that required the Blight was that of Arl Eamon's sickness and the resultant search for the Sacred Ashes.  That entire quest went down because Loghain had a very personal interest in seizing control of Ferelden's power structure, and he had to have Eamon incapacitated to do that.  That entire conflict was made necessary only because the presence of the Blight led to the death of Cailan and Loghain's very sudden and pressing need to have control over public perception of events.  But none of the other stories happening concurrently with the Warden's quest to gain allies to fight the Blight have anything actually to DO with it.

Dragon Age is about Thedas during an Age purported to be about dramatic, world-altering conflict.  There is no reason, beyond your own personal opinion, that all the stories set within the world have to have darkspawn and Blights as the main focus.  We've been told from the very beginning that this was the case, that Dragon Age was not about darkspawn and Blights, but the world itself and the peoples within it, and that Origins would just happen to be about the Blight.

How is Dragon Age not interesting if the core focus isn't about Blights and darkspawn?  Origins was about defeating that conflict, but it also introduced us to the Mage/Templar conflict, the Qunari-Tevinter conflict, the Elves/Humans conflict, and the internal conflict of Dwarven society between caste and casteless.  DA2 was a prequel story about the upcoming Mage/Templar conflict, and I find that PLENTY interesting.  We also have strong foreshadowy hints of a Qunari/Rest-of-Thedas conflict on the horizon.  Also interesting.  

You are incorrect that the central story of DA is the Blight and darkspawn.  That was the story of Origins, but not DA as a whole.  You are also incorrect that without the Blight there is no story.  Finally, you are incorrect that without the Blight DA is not interesting, because that is merely your own opinion, not an objective fact. 

So, instead of repeating over and over points which have been soundly refuted at least several dozen times, why don't you just tell us WHY you don't feel that Dragon Age stories that don't focus on the Blight are not interesting?  (Keeping in mind that there have been exactly two DA stories, which makes claims about patterns and themes and the like kind of premature).  At least this way, you might generate some interesting discussion.

Modifié par Silfren, 02 décembre 2012 - 08:53 .

[Heimdall]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Yeah, but the main plot of the five games, for the most part, either directly involves the Dragonborn, occurs under their direction, or in the exceptional, rule-proving case is tangentially related to them.

Involving the Dragonborn and playing a role are not the same thing as the story being about them.

Yeah, but the playing a role one is the exception that proves the rule.

And by "directly involves" I kind of meant "the plot of those games freaking revolves around the respective dragonborn."

Edit: And I just looked up the Nerevarine prophecy. Yep, apparently the hero of Morrowind is Dragon-born. Again, don't ask me how.

Really?  Well, to be honest I have a really hard time thinking of the series as being about the Dragonborn since them being Dragonborn was really only relevant in IV and V.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Yeah, but the main plot of the five games, for the most part, either directly involves the Dragonborn, occurs under their direction, or in the exceptional, rule-proving case is tangentially related to them.

Involving the Dragonborn and playing a role are not the same thing as the story being about them.

Yeah, but the playing a role one is the exception that proves the rule.

And by "directly involves" I kind of meant "the plot of those games freaking revolves around the respective dragonborn."

Edit: And I just looked up the Nerevarine prophecy. Yep, apparently the hero of Morrowind is Dragon-born. Again, don't ask me how.

Really?  Well, to be honest I have a really hard time thinking of the series as being about the Dragonborn since them being Dragonborn was really only relevant in IV and V.

Yeah, the fact that they were dragonborn was irrelevant until IV. The dragonborn themselves weren't.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Icesong wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...


Edit: And I just looked up the Nerevarine prophecy. Yep, apparently the hero of Morrowind is Dragon-born. Again, don't ask me how.

Dragon-born, yet another term.

I can't think what else it might mean. Unless Azura felt the need to equate Cyrodill with a dragon. (You know what, that actually makes sense. Consider this argument dropped.)

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 02 décembre 2012 - 08:48 .

[Heimdall]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Yeah, but the main plot of the five games, for the most part, either directly involves the Dragonborn, occurs under their direction, or in the exceptional, rule-proving case is tangentially related to them.

Involving the Dragonborn and playing a role are not the same thing as the story being about them.

Yeah, but the playing a role one is the exception that proves the rule.

And by "directly involves" I kind of meant "the plot of those games freaking revolves around the respective dragonborn."
Edit: And I just looked up the Nerevarine prophecy. Yep, apparently the hero of Morrowind is Dragon-born. Again, don't ask me how.

Really?  Well, to be honest I have a really hard time thinking of the series as being about the Dragonborn since them being Dragonborn was really only relevant in IV and V.

Yeah, the fact that they were dragonborn was irrelevant until IV. The dragonborn themselves weren't.

While true, I think to say that the TES games revolve around the Dragonborn is misleading.  I mean the Nevarine-Dragonborn thing is an offhand reference that never gets explained.  Can a series really be about something that wasn't formally introduced until several games in?

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...
Really?  Well, to be honest I have a really hard time thinking of the series as being about the Dragonborn since them being Dragonborn was really only relevant in IV and V.

Yeah, the fact that they were dragonborn was irrelevant until IV. The dragonborn themselves weren't.

While true, I think to say that the TES games revolve around the Dragonborn is misleading.  I mean the Nevarine-Dragonborn thing is an offhand reference that never gets explained.  Can a series really be about something that wasn't formally introduced until several games in?

I'm not arguing it's about the concept, I'm arguing that it's about the dragonborn themselves. The emperor was introduced in the very first game.

Besides, I already dropped the point about the Nerevarine being Dragonborn, since I thought of another explanation that made more sense. But that was never my main point regarding that game. The idea is the plot of that game ties into the series-wide theme because ultimately the main plot consists of you doing exactly what the emperor has planned.

[Icesong]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Yeah, I dropped a good deal of that from my original post. Remember? For that matter, I don't see how the has to be descended from Alessia thing is relevant, since I didn't bring that up and I don't think Nizaris did either.

It's relevant because it brings to light the possibility that they aren't Dragonborn as they should be understood, and so to say it's about Dragonborn when your main example isn't one is wrong.

Okay, but that was Nizaris's point, not mine. I cut out a lot of her points from my post, since they weren't relevant to the series as a whole and the way she put them made my head hurt anyway. Nor does she at any point say that dragons don't count as evil, so I don't know why you mentioned Oblivion.

Well, since you co-signed to her point some of my points to her have to be addressed at you. And I bring up Oblivion because she's getting the idea of protecting against evil from another realm from Oblivion.

Mostly what I was saying was that a dragonborn of some sort or another was the focus of all five of the games.

A focus of three games. The first, when none of this was known, and the fourth when most of this was introduced, and the fifth where "Dragonborn" is something else entirely. The second and third game merely involve the Emperor in a minor way, and that way wasn't to protect against evil to say again. I'm truly confounded how one could take what's merely meant as an interesting connection and expound it to encompass the driving point of the series. I mean, come on, how many times do I have to bring up Godhead before this conversation ends?

[hoorayforicecream]

There's no core story to the Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, or Eberron. Dragon Age is more a role playing game setting with stories set in it than it is an established core story.

[Heimdall]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

I'm not arguing it's about the concept, I'm arguing that it's about the dragonborn themselves. The emperor was introduced in the very first game.

Besides, I already dropped the point about the Nerevarine being Dragonborn, since I thought of another explanation that made more sense. But that was never my main point regarding that game. The idea is the plot of that game ties into the series-wide theme because ultimately the main plot consists of you doing exactly what the emperor has planned.

If that were the theme, then Skyrim wouldn't fit into it.  Heck, you can kill the Emperor in Skyrim.

[addiction21]

*sighs*

[Milan92]

I really hope they aren't because I'm getting really tired of them.

[Tigerman123]

I guess whatshisface from Legacy will show up with his archaic speech once again

And Bioware never lost an opportunity to reuse a monster

[Heimdall]

The only thing I think you say is a core aspect about a TES game is that a Dragonborn is involved to varying degrees of directness and relevance.

It's a connecting thread at best. I wouldn't really call it a Theme.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Icesong wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...
Yeah, I dropped a good deal of that from my original post. Remember? For that matter, I don't see how the has to be descended from Alessia thing is relevant, since I didn't bring that up and I don't think Nizaris did either.

It's relevant because it brings to light the possibility that they aren't Dragonborn as they should be understood, and so to say it's about Dragonborn when your main example isn't one is wrong.

Okay, but that was Nizaris's point, not mine. I cut out a lot of her points from my post, since they weren't relevant to the series as a whole and the way she put them made my head hurt anyway. Nor does she at any point say that dragons don't count as evil, so I don't know why you mentioned Oblivion.

Well, since you co-signed to her point some of my points to her have to be addressed at you. And I bring up Oblivion because she's getting the idea of protecting against evil from another realm from Oblivion.

Uh, I co-signed to the coherent bits of her point.

Mostly what I was saying was that a dragonborn of some sort or another was the focus of all five of the games.

A focus of three games. The first, when none of this was known, and the fourth when most of this was introduced, and the fifth where "Dragonborn" is something else entirely.

Again, just becaue they added to what a dragonborn was doesn't mean the previously established dragonborn were irrelevant. And if you're saying that these two groups are different, Tiber Septim doesn't seem to be. And to establish that there are two different groups seems to be needlessly multiplying entities. And since my point was that the group of which both groups are members (ie. people referred to as dragonborn) seems to be the focus of the main plots of each game, I don't see how it's relevant anyway. (I apologize if that last bit was unclear in my previous posts.)

The second and third game merely involve the Emperor in a minor way, and that way wasn't to protect against evil to say again.

Yeah, that's one of the points I didn't co-sign to. And just because the emperor's involvement in the third was minor doesn't mean it doesn't tie into the theme I'm describing. He's the one who masterminded the Nerevarine getting to Morrowind, and for his own benefit. The plot of the game is to a large extent his doing.

I'm truly confounded how one could take what's merely meant as an interesting connection and expound it to encompass the driving point of the series. I mean, come on, how many times do I have to bring up Godhead before this conversation ends?

I don't think the first, fourth, or fifth relate to Godhead. Besides, the setting's history does seem to driven by the dragonborn, or if not by the dragonborn than by some of the dragonborn. Probably because a lot of them end up as emperors.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 02 décembre 2012 - 09:22 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

I'm not arguing it's about the concept, I'm arguing that it's about the dragonborn themselves. The emperor was introduced in the very first game.

Besides, I already dropped the point about the Nerevarine being Dragonborn, since I thought of another explanation that made more sense. But that was never my main point regarding that game. The idea is the plot of that game ties into the series-wide theme because ultimately the main plot consists of you doing exactly what the emperor has planned.

If that were the theme, then Skyrim wouldn't fit into it.  Heck, you can kill the Emperor in Skyrim.

Was that emperor dragonborn? I thought the emperors stopped being dragonborn when Martin died. (Or Uriel, since I don't know if Martin actually counts as an emperor.)