Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Civil War Story Concepts

11 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Concept:

The Civil War in Skyrim felt very underwhelming, this is why the mod, which at this time is taken down by Apollodown, The Civil War Overhaul mod was so popular. What this mod did was add more sieges, instead of just taking forts, you'd also have to fight for every city and it was possible for the Dragonborn to loose a battle. 

I want to implement this as well, but I want to go about it a little differently, incorporating a far more heavy story-driven Civil War Questline with tactical choices. The Dragonborn may start off as a lone soldier in either the Imperial or Stormcloak army but after the battle of Whiterun will have proved himself to be worthy of helping the war effort more tactically. I also want a battle for a Hold to be far more then just one battle, or capture the fort and then join the siege. There should be more battles then that, it should be story-driven to keep it interesting and there should be consequences for making mistakes. Elements such as being captured, rescuing say... Ralof from an Imperial Camp, going undercover, stopping a Stormcloak messenger, using diplomacy to turn the fallout of an engagement and more unique battles such as at sea, and on land. A good example of a land battle could for instance be that the Stormcloaks ambush the Imperials on the road, or just an ordinary battle in the fields. 

A downside to having big battles in Skyrim is that the engine cannot tolerate more then a certain number of NPC's in the Dragonborns area at once. I believe in Vanilla Skyrim this limit without an ENBOOST is around 25, and with ENBOOST is 50. With the Special Edition I believe its around 200. Eitherway there is a workaround for this and that is simply to say that there are battles being fought elsewhere, and the Dragonborn happens to be fighting this group. Maybe their army is split up, maybe the Dragonborn arrived just a little late for the fight and most are dead, etc... If its an attack on a fort/city/boats then there are ways to make the battle seem much larger then it really is by using various occlusion planes or triggered spawns of troops. I believe Bethesda themselves also approached the Civil War through this method.

I also want the Dragonborn to have the opportunity to shape the direction the faction he is fighting for will take once the war is over. For instance, say you've just escaped an Imperial ambush and you, Ralof and Ulfric Stormcloak are escaping through an Imperial Fort attempting to avoid capture. There's a pause while Ralof tries to figure out how to unlock a door and you strike up a conversation with Ulfric. Ulfric is a racist piece of SH*T but the opinion of the Dragonborn might resonate with him. Say that the Dragonborn tells him to get his shit togheter and treat the Dunmer better in Windhelm. Or that the Dragonborn tells him to ensure the execution of Elisif the Fair. This makes your part of the Civil War and your choices far more meaningful.

Further more Ralof and Hadvar should have a more active presence in the story. Regardless of who you escaped Helgen with, the other should be actively fighting for the other side, and if you can avoid killing the person, he should re-appear later continuously in the story. There should also be some story elements revolving around the two and their relationship.

There should also be introduced more characters fighting for its faction, giving you more story characters to fight together with. These characters should be part of the Dragonborns circle and fight alongside him, as well have more of a story presence. If you side with say the Empire, then the Stormcloaks characters will be killed off, and vice versa.

Jarls and their opposing potential usurpers should have a more active role in the Civil War, and they should be killable if the Dragonborn makes a choice that allows this to happen. I cannot verify this but I believe the reason from a lore perspective why the Jarls are allowed to wander to the capital of their faction is due to Nordic tradition of allowing safe passage to a surrendered opponent. Its kind of dumb. The only character that I wish to ensure can leave is Jarl Balgruuf who I intend to allow to attempt to take back Whiterun once the Civil War is over, allowing Stormcloak players such as myself a chance to re-instate the Jarl in Whiterun. Other Jarls as say Skald the Elder should be killable. Lets say you've finally taken Dawnstar after many battles and losses. The legionaire commander wants Skald to pay for the deaths he's men caused on the battlefield. Naturally you can allow this to happen or you can stand up to this commander and try to see if you can help Skald leave Dawnstar in one piece. I think the reason Bethesda implemented a system where the Jarls would simply pack up and leave was because the Civil War questline was originally intended to be far more dynamic. Allowing factions to re-take their cities, and subsequently re-instate their factions Jarl. There is also the Peace Summit negotiations, but still... I personally think it becomes far more impactful if a Jarl can die, and the player gets to either make that decision or intervene against such a decision. Naturally at times intervention or demanding an execution is not do-able due to previous decisions during a siege. (Like say... the Stormcloaks hold someone else captive and Legate rikke wishes to make a trade and therefor overrules you, this capture was also your fault so its therefor preventable, another consequence of wrong choices in tactical).

Thanes/Nobles should also have some impact on the Civil War. Gerdur of Riverwood for one makes it very clear that she is a Stormcloak supporter, where as I imagine Thane Rorik of Rorikstead is a staunch Imperial supporter. Their impact on the Civil War should be noticeable. Should the Stormcloaks march into Riverwood then they should be greeted and allowed to raise their banners there. Should the Imperials try to do the same, then say Gerdur betrays you and tries to poison or create an ambush against the legion. There are many ways this can be made more interesting and make the war feel far more fleshed and stretched out.

Instead of a steady progression taking one enemy hold at a time there should be cast in events that forces the player to make decisions. Aside from making tactical decisions before a battle, when its natural to do so I mean, the Dragonborn will get informed that say... the Imperials has sent two ships with legionaire's and mercenaries to Windhelm. The Dragonborn therefor has the choice of going and helping defend Windhelm from this siege or press the battle against for instance.. Falkreath. Tactical decisions during a battle normally involves the Dragonborn deciding which battle he can participate in, as there are naturally more battles going on at once. Will he head to Blackmoor and attempt to suede the Thane there to fight for the Empire, or he will join the battle for Riverwood. In such cases the choice doesn't always guarentee success. The battle for Riverwood may be doomed from the start, or the Thane of Blackmoor may be ideologically opposed to fighting alongside the Empire, or may have terms that the Dragonborn chooses not to accept. Upon finishing the choice the Dragonborn becomes informed of the consequence which may have consequences on the war effort. Each choice has a consequence, much like when its just normal tactical of choosing what battle the Dragonborn will fight, making too many wrong choices changes the progression of the story and can result in a retreat, the enemy gaining an upper-hand forcing a confrontation, or a loss. Its like a game of Risk, make too many wrong decisions and you've lost. Make the right decisions and you'll win.

Naturally the Civil War should have multiple endings. I'd say there should be around 10 loss endings and 10 victory endings for each factions, which rely on the choices you've made through out.

 

 

 

Multiple Endings / Consequences:

 

 

Trivia:

Edited by Galandil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I agree whit most said here, I think the quest line should be more dynamic, but I also recal an other conversation that I think me and Christopher (Galandil) had, where we discust the fact that in bouth factions you do a verry specific and extream interduction test, but then are just treated as an ordenary soldier.

Now I think we could go one futher and have you start of as a kind of "hero" unit whitin the imperial army or stormclocks, so insteed of marshing along side the legion or stormclock hord, you would run and do special missions to tip the scale of battle, you would still be a part of battles, but prehaps come in later in the battle or at the begining, depending on your mission before hand.

this would also allow for the dragon born to speak whit the armys of the two factions, and meet the characters moving from one camp to the next awaiting the actual battles, you could there find specific characters whit backstorys quests and other intressting tings. making the two armys more unic, wile keeping a reason that the dragonborn dosen't march along whit them.

also as the dragonborn rises in ranks, he could possibly get his own squad of people who he orders to locations and then meet up whit, and then order around and deside on a plan for the task they are given to do.

also I agree on choices, but I feel that a good way to do the large scale tactical choices would be dynamicly, as the dragonborn rises in ranks the more people lisen to him around the tactical tabel. and the dragonborn would after gaining a high enought rank be part of the planing meeting, where the dragonborn will put in his/her own opinion on for exampel how they would attack a fortress, and then we could have a prusuation cheak or intimidation cheak if general talius/ ulfric stormclock support the dragonborns suggestion, or choices something else.

this kind of desision making should be key in how successfull the war is, the choices can have effects sutch as making things more difficult, or straight up making it so you fail all together or if you choice well, things gets easyer.

for large scale battles I think deviding the armys, so that you only se a section of the battle is the best idea, make it feel as if there are hundreds and hundreds of soldiers on the battlefiled even tho you only see a handfull, and then have the entire battlefiled litered whit bodys, hinting at the fact that the battle was huge.

I also think the vanila way of spawninging more and more enimys work quite well, as the battles generaly feels grander then they are in vanila.

the one thing I don't agree whit is trying to influnce away bad things from the two sides, (espasly as you can't relly do mutch about the empire, but you can influence the one man ulfric realisticly) this would make it extreamly one sided for the stormclocks as the biggest arugment in general would go away as you now convince ulfric to be less rasist etc. I agree that you should be able to change the faction leaders a bit, but in the end they should stay relativly the same, and still have the main flaws that makes imperial vs stormclocks sutch a divided conflict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

the one thing I don't agree whit is trying to influnce away bad things from the two sides, (espasly as you can't relly do mutch about the empire, but you can influence the one man ulfric realisticly) this would make it extreamly one sided for the stormclocks as the biggest arugment in general would go away as you now convince ulfric to be less rasist etc. I agree that you should be able to change the faction leaders a bit, but in the end they should stay relativly the same, and still have the main flaws that makes imperial vs stormclocks sutch a divided conflict.

Sure you can. Ulfric is a good example of someone who comes off as someone you can influence and sway in a direction. But he's opponent, isn't really General Tullius, or Legate Rikke, but Elisif the Fair. Now Elisif is a dumb cow. No one really respects her, she relies on her advisers, her Thane's are laughing all the way to the bank and will likely find ways of politically replacing her in the future. So as the Dragonborn, giving some advice, helping her toughen and smarten up, would definitely go a long way towards giving Skyrim a respectable and wise ruler.

Beyond that there's Legate Rikke, a secret Talos worshipper and nationalist. I can imagine many ways of influencing her view of her country and her views of the Empire. 

Then there's General Tullius who's a stubborn mule and practicalist. In vanilla, it is clear that Tullius slowly goes from loathing being in Skyrim and being surrounded by stupid mountain barbarians, but upon the end says he has come to respect the people, and see Skyrim in a different light. I can imagine many ways the Dragonborn could lean in and have some lasting effect here. What if instead of parting with Skyrim with his mission complete and trusting the new Jarls to rule favorably for the Empire, he declares martial law? Maybe you convince Tullius to go rouge and turn on the Thalmor; To say an extreme example. 

 

@Edit; As for Ulfric being racist being the only argument against joining the Stormcloaks. ... Eh- NO. The Stormcloaks may be extreme nationalists who want their country to be self-governed and as free as possible of other cultures and races. Self-governing is the positive that draws people to support them, and the "Build-a-Wall"-esc is what makes people less inclined to support them. True. But there are other reasons. For one, Skyrim finds itself in a bad spot. It is clear there'll be another war with the Aldmeri Dominion and the wise choice is to preserve the Alliances that are to have a stronger bulk against the coming war. There's the matter of trade, exchanging of cultures, resources and breakthroughs. However, then there's the argument of the Stormcloaks: The Jarls of Skyrim are useless, grown to their station puppets who when asked to jump, asks how high. Speaking to people around Skyrim shows a great resentment towards this, and an un-ease at having their country so firmly under the thumb of an Empire. Foreign Laws, Foreign Gods, Foreign Treaties, Foreign Customs. All of this creates discontent. To pull this into a real world sense: The European Union is something very unpopular and while there are benefits to being a part of it, it still creates a lot of resentment. Now, who's in charge of a country, the people or the Jarls. A Jarl still needs to listen and act on the discomforts and fears of her people, if she refuses to do this, or fails to explain why she cannot do this, then yes, civil wars will erupt and the person will be exchanged for someone who is far more willing to please he's people. So yes, if Ulfric stops being racist, Ulfric the man will become far more likable but anyone who chooses a side simply because they detest one person, clearly shouldn't have anything to do with politics. Its like the election, you vote on policies, not the person, and there are always far more nuance to each parties position then the superficial.

Edited by Galandil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

well no, you got my complaint all wrong, what Im saying if firstly that the balance between the two factions is verry good, and if we start messing whit it it could easly lead to an unbalance and making the choice of who is right and wrong more clear.

also what I was saying was that one of the main arguments agienst the stormclocks is their rasism, now there are as you said plenty more, or well it wouldn't be sutch a balanced conflict. but resolving sutch a large complaint of the stormclocks would make it verry... uneven. I would personaly still support the empire for the other reasons alone, but often when you hear peoples argument for supporting who they are supporting it often boils down to the Nord rasism. and well, it could tip the balance a lot.

now the influences you talk about (whit the expection of talius declaring war on the thalmor) are extreamly minor in comparecen. the only one large enought I can understand is Elesif as she is a bad leader, but still its not an often dealbreaking argument for or agienst the empire. those who support the empire and even most stormclock supporter know that others will rule whit her as a pupit and are quite frankly fine whit it, so changing her into a stronger leader would ofcourse boost the inisative to join the empire, but not break the balance as the huge Rasist card on Ulfrics sholder, the diffrence between ulfric and the empire is that ulfric is the stormclocks, the entire rebelion revolves around him, and if he changes he has the power to change the people whit his carisma, and there for making him less rasist would make the nords less rasist as many would follow him. and the empire has no sutch one person who his that kind of influence. 

futher more, Legate rikka is clearly an exampel of the nord loyalty, and she is loyal to the empire even if she strongly belives in the old ways. and her repsect for ulfric or love for talos arn't there to prove that she secretly supports ulfrics couse, but rather to show that nords are a loyal people, who fight alongside their empire. and that they sometimes do sacrefices for it. even if it hurts them personaly. it also shows that a lot of imperial nords still kling to the old way but in secret. raher then in the open like the stormcloks do. so I don't belive she secretly wishes she was a stormclock or something like that.

also what ya think of the rest of the ideas?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

well no, you got my complaint all wrong, what Im saying if firstly that the balance between the two factions is verry good, and if we start messing whit it it could easly lead to an unbalance and making the choice of who is right and wrong more clear.
 

... Wat?

Did you read what I posted above? If not then let me put it this way: There's no balance in a choice like this. Its either you prefer the Imperials 'Because' X. Or you prefer the Stormcloaks because X. If that choice bases itself solely around is this guy a dick or not, then... well.. too bad then. I'm gonna upset that balance. But for most people Ulfric and Elisif are irrelevant. It comes down to what is best for Skyrim, or what is best for the Empire as a whole. None of that gets unbalanced if you can influence the faction you join, if anything it allows you to have a lasting footprint on the storyline.


 

also what I was saying was that one of the main arguments agienst the stormclocks is their rasism, now there are as you said plenty more, or well it wouldn't be sutch a balanced conflict. but resolving sutch a large complaint of the stormclocks would make it verry... uneven. I would personaly still support the empire for the other reasons alone, but often when you hear peoples argument for supporting who they are supporting it often boils down to the Nord rasism. and well, it could tip the balance a lot.

... No. ^ Read the above.

And again: If the choice comes down to racism or not, well... 'kay. Its not like the racism will get removed. You only get to have an influence if you first choose to fight for the Stormcloaks. What your insinuating here is like: "I voted for Trump cause I believe that he'll change his mind on immigrants when he wins the election" .... No. And besides, you have many ways of influencing it in a worse direction. Lets say because of the Dragonborn the Dunmer are driven out of Windhelm after the civil war. Or something or other. .. Build a wall to Morrowind, and let the Dunmer pay for it.

Also: The Imperials are also racist to a degree. Have you even played the games? They have the same high opinion of themselves and their culture and believe its only through them that the world can be civilized and ruled justly.

 

now the influences you talk about (whit the expection of talius declaring war on the thalmor) are extreamly minor in comparecen. the only one large enought I can understand is Elesif as she is a bad leader, but still its not an often dealbreaking argument for or agienst the empire. those who support the empire and even most stormclock supporter know that others will rule whit her as a pupit and are quite frankly fine whit it, so changing her into a stronger leader would ofcourse boost the inisative to join the empire, but not break the balance as the huge Rasist card on Ulfrics sholder, the diffrence between ulfric and the empire is that ulfric is the stormclocks, the entire rebelion revolves around him, and if he changes he has the power to change the people whit his carisma, and there for making him less rasist would make the nords less rasist as many would follow him. and the empire has no sutch one person who his that kind of influence. 

Elisif being incompetent was actually the reason why I chose to lean towards the Stormcloaks.

... ... What? ... Others will rule with her so they are fine with it? Can you name someone who thinks having a very bad leader surrounded by lesser leaders who are very ambitious and corrupt is a good idea? If you ask the citizens in Skyrim you will hear it often said that Elisif is but a puppet, and no they are not too happy with that. Making her a strong leader is an equal footed development due to the Dragonborns choices influencing the leader as the Dragonborn influencing Ulfric Stormcloak. But again; These are but choices the player can make. It doesn't mean we're changing the default outcome to always mean that Ulfric becomes less hostile towards outlanders, or Elisif suddenly starts her brain engines.

And no. The entire rebbelion revolves around the issue: Whether Skyrim should be independent and self-governed. Ulfric like.. say Donald Trump is only a catalyst and figurehead. No one voted for Trump the person, they voted for his policies and idea's. Same goes for those fighting for Ulfric. 

 

futher more, Legate rikka is clearly an exampel of the nord loyalty, and she is loyal to the empire even if she strongly belives in the old ways. and her repsect for ulfric or love for talos arn't there to prove that she secretly supports ulfrics couse, but rather to show that nords are a loyal people, who fight alongside their empire. and that they sometimes do sacrefices for it. even if it hurts them personaly. it also shows that a lot of imperial nords still kling to the old way but in secret. raher then in the open like the stormcloks do. so I don't belive she secretly wishes she was a stormclock or something like that.

... No she does not support Ulfric's cause. And no she does not fight to prove anything to the Empire. She explains her position quite clearly in the campaign. She fights because she believes the Empire benefits Skyrim. Not because Skyrim benefits the Empire. Shes not out to prove anything but to keep her country secure, and prosperous. She does not secretly wish she is a Stormcloak, shes a Talos worshipper. Like Jarl Balgruuf. The Thalmor's anti-Talos policy is not the Empire's policy. Its a forced treaty that they have to abide by until the next war breaks out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

you are completly missing what I am saying, what I am saying is that adding changes to the core belives of the imperial and stormclocks are risky and wouldn't work whit the carfully balance made by bethesta. 

I am not saying Imperials arn't rasist.

Im not saying any of this are the only reasons people do anything

Im not saying nobody whatsover dissagrees whit me.

I am saying that the balance we got is crafted by bethesta. and when you look online what people think and why they think so, its mainly about Stormclock rasism and imperial oversite. now I don't want to mess whit any off it, as it might threw off the balance achived by bethesta. I rather just we didn't mess whit it and focused on expanding on whats already there. or it could become as they say at algrens bilar: "In every persons mouth" or as its more comonly said in english, it could make people change their opinos of the factions drasticly favoring one side over the other, or something else. 

what I am saying is, and Im attempting not making this into a huge argument wile still explaning my point here, Lets not mess whit the foundations of the game. and only expand on whats there, and whats not there. and not change anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

you are completly missing what I am saying, what I am saying is that adding changes to the core belives of the imperial and stormclocks are risky and wouldn't work whit the carfully balance made by bethesta. 

I did not misunderstand you. This is what I responded to.
 

I am not saying Imperials arn't rasist.

Okay...
 

Im not saying any of this are the only reasons people do anything

.. Aha.

 

Im not saying nobody whatsover dissagrees whit me.

:victory:

I am saying that the balance we got is crafted by bethesta. and when you look online what people think and why they think so, its mainly about Stormclock rasism and imperial oversite. now I don't want to mess whit any off it, as it might threw off the balance achived by bethesta. I rather just we didn't mess whit it and focused on expanding on whats already there. or it could become as they say at algrens bilar: "In every persons mouth" or as its more comonly said in english, it could make people change their opinos of the factions drasticly favoring one side over the other, or something else. 

So when you say: "I am not saying the Imperials aren't racist" your still insinuating there's an important decision balance which requires us to forego any possibility of the Dragonborn having an influence with the Stormcloak that might make it a little more tolerateble. Its not like there are things about the Empire that can be made more tolerable for a Stormcloak player that we can add in?

The balance as far as I'm concerned has nothing to do with racism, Ulfric or Elisif. Its about what do you think is best for Skyrim. Independence or not. Yes, is Ulfric a charismatic and strong-headed leader figure. Yeah. Is Elisif as intelligent as a wet plank... ... ... yeah. When you make the decision of joining a side the Dragonborn has not influenced anyone yet. So the choice still comes down to whether Skyrim should be independent or not. If players decide to use knowledge cause they prefer turning Ulfric Stormcloak into a nicer person then so be it, that's entirely up to them. Someone might find it far more appealing to turn Elisif into a stronger and wiser leader for the province. It really comes down to preference. 

And if this in the end upsets a balance Bethesda has set up, then I think it is a stupid balance. Its not what the decision should come down to, in my opinion.

 

what I am saying is, and Im attempting not making this into a huge argument wile still explaning my point here, Lets not mess whit the foundations of the game. and only expand on whats there, and whats not there. and not change anything.

:throw:

N O

Adding more choices and letting the player have a lasting effect on the world is something Skyrim sorely needs. Your decisions in the vanilla game feels lackluster and aside from choosing Empire or Stormcloak, none of your choices really matter- even with the few times you actually get choices. Adding choices and consequences is exactly what Holds is going to be about.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Galandil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

your still not reading my point, its not about making stormcocks better or imperial better, its about keeping it on this unbalanced sweetspot that makes it that people for so many reasons deside on way or the other, and changing around diffrent reasons why players might have desided on one or the other would mean we change around some players foundumental reasons of picking their faction.

and Im not saying we can't have change and choices, Im saying we shouldn't change the foundation of skyrim. it would be waird if we added a choice to spare alduins life, we could but we shouldn't as we shouldn't mess whit the foundations of the game world. as I said things we add can be messed whit as mutch as we like, the things that arn't founumental to the game can also be changed, but foundamental truths about the game shouldn't be changed. Ulfric is a rasist. Elisif is bad at her job. and alduin dies at the end of the game.

we can add a ton of meaningfull choices that dosen't change that :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

your still not reading my point, its not about making stormcocks better or imperial better, its about keeping it on this unbalanced sweetspot that makes it that people for so many reasons deside on way or the other, and changing around diffrent reasons why players might have desided on one or the other would mean we change around some players foundumental reasons of picking their faction.

We need to preserve a balance, but its not about making one better then the other?

The player still decides for the same reasons as before. The option to influence the leaders isn't something that just happens. Its a player choice, and doesn't really have to happen for you to finish the Civil War.

And I have responded to this a few times now. I do understand what your saying, I just don't agree. I mean.. are you saying you would choose the Stormcloaks if there was a chance for you to make Ulfric a better person?

 

and Im not saying we can't have change and choices, Im saying we shouldn't change the foundation of skyrim. it would be waird if we added a choice to spare alduins life, we could but we shouldn't as we shouldn't mess whit the foundations of the game world. as I said things we add can be messed whit as mutch as we like, the things that arn't founumental to the game can also be changed, but foundamental truths about the game shouldn't be changed. Ulfric is a rasist. Elisif is bad at her job. and alduin dies at the end of the game.

I have absolutely no idea what your on about. We can add meaningful choices, but they can't have any influence or anything on the story, or the land? Then whats the point?

We are going to add an option to spare Alduin's. Read the main story topic. 

 

we can add a ton of meaningfull choices that dosen't change that :)

Unless it has any impact on the world in any shape or form? ... No thanks :D

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Please, excuse me for posting in this thread now.

However, I've recently dabbled with Alduin option, and I arrived at unreleased yet mod in which

using the Elder Scroll (Dragon) at Alduin instantly wins the fight in Sovngarde, with all the animations and effects of sending forth in time

compatible with World Eater Beater and most others overhauls of that quest.

Not sure yet completely how this will end up in the larger context. Still, in a way, there are some foundations of Skyrim it does not change. Yet, there might be some consequences even to this, if you think of it as a choice. In this case I'm thinking of consequences pertaining to some mod-added content, obviously.

As far as Civil War is concerned, I've dug into how its missions are launched. Here's a small mod that injects a tiny but mandatory content just before the Imperial Rift mission - Open Civil War: Missions. By design it does not require any patch to use with Civil War Overhaul. No such guarantee for other overhauls.

I vaguely consider using this approach to introduce hooks to extra main plots, should the player overlooked them. Inspired by, but not entirely similar to how the vanilla Civil War hooks the vanilla main story during Message To Whiterun quest.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Please, excuse me for posting in this thread now.

However, I've recently dabbled with Alduin option, and I arrived at unreleased yet mod in which

using the Elder Scroll (Dragon) at Alduin instantly wins the fight in Sovngarde, with all the animations and effects of sending forth in time

 
 Hide contents

compatible with World Eater Beater and most others overhauls of that quest.

Not sure yet completely how this will end up in the larger context. Still, in a way, there are some foundations of Skyrim it does not change. Yet, there might be some consequences even to this, if you think of it as a choice. In this case I'm thinking of consequences pertaining to some mod-added content, obviously.

That is actually a very interesting idea. I'd love to implement that! :D As an optional way of defeating Alduin I mean. Otherwise the idea I had was that upon defeating Alduin he would fly off. And land at a distant area, the other tounges who fought with you are incapable of following and you go off alone to slay the dragon. Upon reaching Alduin he is too wounded to fight and you can either kill him, or talk and explore an alternative conclusion to the Dragon Crisis. If Alduin is the world eater, (A fragment of Akatosh), and devouring the world is in his nature, then while allowing this to happen will just end the game with a narration screen before sending you back to the main menu. Perhaps having a quick save before the decision so you can go back and re-do the decision. Sending Alduin back in time also sounds very clever, I'd love for that to be do-able either during the battle itself by just using the scroll, or during the dialogue at the end.
 

This is what I had in mind too. Adding new quests within the Civil War that needs to be completed before the Civil War itself carries on as usual. This includes sieging towns, battles, and just normal quests. I want the Civil War to be far more story driven and to have little things here and there happen that forces the player to make decisions which will impact either the few named NPC's the Dragonborn works with, or the war itself. :) Thank you for uploading a hook mod, it'll give me a good overview over how to do this! Thank you!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0