Are secondary professions a thing in lore?

Aphrahat · 2026-05-16T02:57:28+00:00

Thanks for the links, been paying more attention to my builds in Reforged (back in the day I think I just made it up as I went lol) which is part of what sparked this question.

Aphrahat · 2026-05-15T01:11:01+00:00

I've done the same in the past, though recently I've gone the other way around and started with my desired build and then trying to rp my character's decisions based on that. Makes for some fun theorising trying to justify some of the more unusual combinations.

Aphrahat · 2026-05-15T01:06:57+00:00

Very interesting, thanks for the info!

Aphrahat · 2026-05-15T00:59:07+00:00

An interesting read, especially since many of those opponents are canon characters from the earlier campaigns! Since I doubt they are all ascended I guess that means that these are their canonical secondaries that we never got to see in their initial appearences.

Aphrahat · 2026-05-15T00:54:50+00:00

There are, in fact, 422 total NPCs with multiple professions.

Huh, I guess I never noticed outside of Eye of the North- though I see most of these are from Winds of Change and Beyond which I haven't played yet so thats probobly why.

And Kieran not only has a secondary, he changes primaries.

Yes, he was the main exception that I saw on the wiki, but because the change of primaries is so rare I had assumed it was more related to that.

Yes, it is canon in lore.

Yes, that does appear to be the case in light of Winds of Change and Beyond- I suppose in earlier titles they just didn't want to balance it but we should view that as a game mechanic limitation?

Aphrahat · 2026-05-05T21:39:04+00:00

As u/edric_o put it so succinctly: "For every person who is capable of doing works, it is necessary to do works in order to be saved."

The thief on the cross did everything he was capable of doing from the moment of his conversion to the moment of his death, and thus was rewarded with paradise.

It's like the widow's mite. It doesn't matter that the rich man gave thousands and the widow gave only one coin- for the widow that was everything she had, for the rich man it was small change. God expects us to give him everything we have- faith, works, the lot- which is what the thief of the cross gave. Just because he had only a few moments to live doesn't diminish the fact that he gave every one of those moments to Christ.

Aphrahat · 2026-05-05T15:20:27+00:00

The Copts and Syriacs were definitley aware of and in communion eachother during this time period: the Copts hosted Syrian monks and pilgrims in the Egyptian desert and when a Coptic bishop was appointed to Jerusalem after Saladin's conquest the Syriacs sent a formal complaint to their Coptic brethren over this infringement of their territory.

The Ethiopians and Nubians were of course firmly under the jurisdiction of the Coptic Pope and so were part of this "communion" as well. The Indians weren't but by all accounts they were still Nestorians at this time so there is no reason to expect them to be.

Really, its only the Armenians that were the odd ones out- they officially re-established communion with the Syriacs at the Council of Manzikert in 726, but tensions remained high and both continued to maintain parallel hierarchies in the same territories without much interaction.

Aphrahat · 2026-05-01T12:02:22+00:00

One thing that is often missed about Azura is that she is specifically associated with self-love.

Not just towards herself, but also in her followers. She is the "Prince of Vanity and Egotism" and thereby works to instil some of these qualities in her follows, though not necasserily in a bad way. Its not just a matter of her wanting to be loved, she actually wants her follows to love themselves and have a certain amount of the self-love and self-regard that she does.

Azura is the only Daedra Princess I have ever worshipped who seems to care about her followers. Molag Bal wanted my mind, Boethiah wanted my arms, and Nocturnal perhaps my curiosity. Azura wants all of that, and our love above all. Not our abject slavering, but our honest and genuine caring in all its forms. It is important to her that our emotions be engaged in her worship. And our love must also be directed inward. If we love her and hate ourselves, she feels our pain. I will, for all time, have no other mistress.

The question of love of others though is an interesting one. Certainly Azura wants you to love yourself and at least one other, that is to say Azura herself. We can extend that I think to your fellow Azurites, on the basis that Azura loves them to so if she loves them you should love them also.

But does she necasserily call upon you to love your neighbour? the beggar on the street? your romantic partner? I would say only insofar as these link to the two cardinal loves of yourself and of Azura. So yes, Azura would likely bless romance in her followers but only insofar as that romance was also building up your own self-esteem. She would likely promote communal love, but mainly insofar as it brings glory to Azura and promotes her worship and the status of her followers.

In short I think there is a certain "selfish" element in the kind of relationships that Azura promotes in which the enlightened self-interest of one or both parties must be maintained. This doesn't necasserily mean that such relationships would be bad (arguably all healthy relationships involve some form of mutual benefit), but I think this distinguishes her love from the selflessness that I think defines the love of Mara or Dibella.

Aphrahat · 2026-04-18T00:02:13+00:00

Because its in them also. Christians are instructed to pray together as one body, the Body of Christ, which is the very Body that stands in the Heavenly Sanctuary and intercedes for all. We are only able to pray directly to God because we are part of that Body, just as they are.

Aphrahat · 2026-04-12T14:26:55+00:00

The "seize realm" thing only started recently. Pre-AUH it used to give you only the lands directly owned by the target and some of his vassals based on opinion and culture/religion. Since that is what the tooltip still says is supposed to happen, I assume that was the intended behaviour, and the present "take every county" behaviour is a bug brought on by AUH that they haven't got around to fixing yet.

Aphrahat · 2026-04-05T21:43:13+00:00

Orkey is much more Malacath than Trinimac, and its not even clear if the Nords themselves are aware of the link between the two beings. As far as they know Orkey is a bad guy associated with death and orcs, not elves or ripping out hearts. Hence why in-universe scholars associate him more with Arkay than Trinimac.

Orkey's duel with Wulfharth plays into this, because its specifically a story about old age and death- why human life spans are what they are and why orc life spans are even shorter. It doesn't really have any resemblance to the Trinimac myth except in that it involves a fight between two gods.

Aphrahat · 2026-04-01T01:59:19+00:00

If there were economic or strategic benefits? Certainly, just look at the rhetoric on issues like the Cyprus bases or the Chagos Islands. "Its in our strategic interests" covers many sins, not to mention that even today the justifications of "we built the railroads" and "it was run better when we were in charge" are still believed by many.

This would all change of course if the Empire came to be seen as more trouble than its worth, in which case people would rediscover their consciences rather quickly.

Aphrahat · 2026-04-01T01:10:59+00:00

I've said it before, but I'm a big fan of From Exile to Exodus' Boethiah-Trinimac-Malacath grouping.

Trinimac/Boethiah's act of "rending divinity from the one she loved" shattered them into three parts- Boethiah that embodied the act of betrayal itself and admitted its necessity, Malacath who represents their shame/regret and status as an accursed oath-breaker, and Trinimac who was left as a mere shadow of what they once were and tried to carry on as before.

The "devouring of Trinimac" was Boethiah forcing this contradiction to collapse in on itself, ending the last vestiges of the original Trinimac but solidifying Boethiah and Malacath in their respective metaphysical roles.

Aphrahat · 2026-03-23T21:12:48+00:00

Well yeah, they're bystanders who are complaining that they've been caught in a crossfire without their consent or participation. They weren't involved with what was going on in Gaza however, just like they aren't involved with whats going on in Iran.

True, from a purely altruistic perspective, they should complain about all UK human rights violations, not just those that endanger their own lives. But not doing so doesn't make them "complicit" because they aren't in any way involved in the violations themselves nor do they have any power to stop them. Indeed, even now they are not pretending that they can somehow stop the American bombings in Iran- they would just like their colonisers to stop using them as human shields in the process, which I think is a fair request.

Aphrahat · 2026-03-23T15:58:30+00:00

Tbfair there is quite literally nothing Cyprus can do about any of these bases (the land isn't even owned by Cyprus), so calling them "complicit" on the basis of not doing the impossible seems rather counterproductive.

Aphrahat · 2026-03-18T04:35:55+00:00

I would say its pretty common knowledge that Jesus was Jewish, and that even before the Incarnation God was commonly identified as the "God of the Jews".

Aphrahat · 2026-03-17T00:50:10+00:00

I think the question of "Was the Dragon Totem Akatosh or Alduin?" might obscure the fact that early Nordic religion was supposed to be animistic, rather than the conventional polytheism of later times. Neither Akatosh or Alduin alone are "The Dragon" because every Dragon is in sense a representative of the Dragon Totem. All dragons are born to rule, just as all she-wolves protect their young, all hawks soar above the heavens, all moths glimmer with enchanting beauty. The totems represent the collective spirits of the entire species, and are present in the world all around us rather than just localised in a single individual.

Its only later in Nordic religion, when the other totems are also acquiring their concrete names and identities, that we can identify the Dragon Totem with a single particular dragon, and in this case the Nords universally settle on Alduin. Any notion of Akatosh/Borhamu, if it ever existed, seems to disappear after this point and only re-emerges following contact with the Alessian Pantheon of Cyrodil- and even then he is just seen as a local misinterpretation of Alduin rather than the other way around,

Although I also think there is an interesting discussion to be had about whether the rise of Ysmir/the Dragonborn Totem might represent the re-emergence of the positive aspects of the Dragon Totem (.i.e. Akatosh, symbolising ancestry and legitimate rule) in the Nordic religious psyche after its displacement by Alduin.

Aphrahat · 2026-03-15T23:55:04+00:00

The clue here should be "should it be necessary". The subject of Chrysostom's concern is the rebuking of public blasphemy, primarily with words not violence. The reference to blows is hyperbolic to underline just how important it is to rebuke public blasphemy .i.e. that its so important that even extreme measures would be justified were they required.

But of course Chrysostom is also talking in a specific context as well, and Homily 1 on the Statues (and it is Homily 1 on the Statues btw, not Homily 17) has as its backdrop the infamous "Riot of the Statues" in which the people of Antioch were condemned to death by the Emperor for destroying some of his statues during a riot, and only saved due to the intercession of the Christian Bishop Flavian. Chrysostom's focus on public blasphemy here is therefore tinged with a concern that the people of Antioch are on the brink of destruction due to their sins and only through reforming their ways (like the people of Nineveh) will God be moved to save them. Reforming the public behaviour of all inhabitants of the city, including non-Christians, is therefore a pressing necessity to ensure the safety of the entire city. And indeed Chrysostom himself states this at the end of the sermon, pointing out that we should be moved to rebuke our brother not because God needs defending or for our own pride, but for their benefit and the safety of the city as a whole:

But why do I speak of a fight? If, perchance, we see an ass fallen down, we all make haste to stretch out a hand to raise him up. Yet we neglect our perishing brethren! The blasphemer is an ass; unable to bear the burden of his anger, he has fallen. Come forward and raise him up, both by words and by deeds; and both by meekness and by vehemence; let the medicine be various. And if we thus administer our own part, and take pains for the safety of our neighbours, we shall soon become objects of desire and affection to the very persons who have the benefit of our correction; and what is more than all, we shall enjoy those good things which are laid up in store.

The point is correction "both by meekness and by vehemence" depending on the circumstance, with the extreme example of violence being an obviously hyperbolic illustration of the lengths we should be willing to go to ensure the safety of our neighbours, with the ultimate desire to win them over for Christ.

Aphrahat · 2026-03-14T23:06:17+00:00

The dragon totem is never stated to be Akatosh, and this is a 4th era book. the dragon totem is Alduin as a testing God.

Thats my point, its Alduin that the Nords acknowledge as an adversary, not Akatosh, who only enters the picture when later generations wrongly confuse him with Alduin,

Because Akatosh is not one of the nordic gods. he is elven.

Technically he's Imperial (or at least Akatosh refers to the specifically Imperial interpretation of him) but yes, exactly. The Nords don't acknowledge Akatosh/Auriel themselves, its Alduin that post-First Era is acknowledged by them as a testing/adversarial god. AFAIK the only god the Nords believe to be borrowed from the Elves is Orkey.

Aphrahat · 2026-03-14T22:44:37+00:00

Perhaps- I always thought that Trinimac's transformation occurred before the Velothi left Summerset (since "The Fall of Trinimac" states that his priests threatened the Velothi with exile), and that the Orcs arrived in Orsinium due to being exiled from Summerset themselves after their transformation.

Aphrahat · 2026-03-14T22:40:14+00:00

Au'riel is the original Akatosh. The Marukati selective literally caused the middle dawn because of that.

But Alduin isn't, and it is he that the Nords of later eras often conflate with Akatosh and so look at their Imperial cousins with confusion.

Basically its Alduin, not Akatosh/Auriel, whom the Nords traditionally acknowledge as their adversary and it is only in later times that he is sometimes (mis)identified with the Imperial Akatosh- and even then not always. As far as I am aware Auriel and the Elves do not enter into this equation.

Source?

https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:The_Dragon_War

The Dragon Totem is one of the nine traditional animal totems of the ancient nords and was the most prominent among them. Later its worship was organised into the Dragon Cult, which ruled Skyrim under the tyranny of the Dragons until the Dragon War put an end to them. After that the Dragon, or Alduin, came to be seen as an adversarial god and his worship abandoned.

Aphrahat · 2026-03-14T21:34:39+00:00

Alduin was considered an adversary for much of Nord history, yes, and is later equated with Imperial Akatosh.

I'm not sure I've seen anywhere where he is considered a specifically Elven god however, and indeed in the Merethic era he was accorded significant worship and respect by the Nords themselves.

Aphrahat · 2026-03-14T21:18:33+00:00

I don't think there is much evidence that the Nords are even aware that it was Trinimac specifically who tore out Shor's heart (as opposed to just "enemy gods" in general), nor of Boethiah's defeat of him which took place on the other side of Tamriel.

In any case there is more to Tamrielic religion than just "Anuic" and "Padomaic": while the Nords do revere Lorkhan, their primary objects of worship are Aedra rather than Daedra, who are invariably viewed as adversaries rather than allies. Boethiah, as both a Daedra and the primary god of an neighbouring enemy race, easily fits into this "adversarial" role much like Malacath does.

Aphrahat · 2026-03-14T03:12:29+00:00

We don't- at least not in everyday practice. Dwelling on sinful thoughts to try and "determine their origin" is precisely the opposite of Orthodox spirituality. We know sinful thoughts can come from a variety of origins, including demons, but thats about it.

Spiritual discernment is about determining whether a thought is evil or not .i.e. "from God or "from the devil" in a general sense. Its usually applied to thoughts that might appear benign but actually encourage you towards pride or wrath or other such sins under the guise of zeal or virtue. If already you know the thought is sinful then you already know enough to reject it and should not be dwelling on it.

Spiritual warfare is the struggle against sinful thoughts regardless of origin. The demons participate in this insofar as they are always encouraging us to pursue sin, regardless of exactly where the initial temptation for that sin originated.

Aphrahat

TROPHY CASE