Lore talk:Paarthurnax

Paarthurnax's death

First of all, **** the Blades. **** Bethesda, too. I really, really hate to bring this up, but I'm working on Lore:Greybeards, and I'm not sure how to wrap up the events of Skyrim in relation to the Blades and Paarthurnax. This page currently acknowledges that Skyrim:Paarthurnax (quest) is given, but is it unjustifiable for us not to, you know, finish that thought?

The quest to kill Paarthurnax has been sitting unfinished in my game, and I will never finish it in any playthrough. That being said, it is a quest, and it doesn't offer any alternative; we aren't given the option to say, "No, I will never kill Paarthurnax" and end the quest (outside of console commands, at least). Players may have the choice of not finishing it, but do we? I mean, on the lore pages, don't we have to assume that all quests are pursued and completed, regardless of their repugnance?

I felt the need to acknowledge it, but I am perfectly happy with the page the way it is, and if there are no objections, I'd prefer to continue remaining vague about Paarthurnax's fate until if and when Bethesda forces our hand. I don't think this has been formally discussed yet; if so, my apologies. Minor Edits^{Threats•Evidence} 18:16, 13 October 2012 (GMT)

I'd agree with this. Even though you can't opt out of the quest, you can give the Greybeards your promise and essentially side with them to receive more Word Wall hunts at the cost of abandoning the Blades dragon hunting missions. Since neither option has clear favour and the quest has no further progression, it would be best to leave it vague while still mentioning the conflict with the Blades. As for Lore:Greybeards, it might be worth pointing out their relations with the Blades and expanding on the effects that Paarthurnax's death would have on the group (i.e., left without a leader), while still trying to remain ambiguous about the dragon's actual fate. Hopefully Bethesda will make the right choice if they ever decide to clear the issue up. —Legoless (talk) 18:39, 13 October 2012 (GMT)

Paarthurnax gender

I thought that game data is one of the best ways to establish canon. If CSlist lists his gender as male, shouldn't the Lore article reflect this? --Xyzzy ^Talk 07:45, 25 September 2013 (GMT)

Personally, I don't believe game data is always a reliable source for accurate lore. In Oblivion, Akaviri Commander Mishaxhi is listed as an Imperial, which of course isn't true. --Jimeee (talk) 12:53, 25 September 2013 (GMT)

Mishaxhi is a special case, since his race is the characteristic is question, and Bethesda hasn't implemented any races that inhabit Akavir. Gender isn't that complex. It's either male, female, some combination of the two, or neuter/not applicable. Given those choices, listing Paarthurnax's gender as "unknown" doesn't seem right, since we have game data stating he is male. If we choose to say that Skyrim gender data may just be a placeholder in this case, and that gender doesn't apply to dragons, then I would prefer to see something besides "unknown" in the infobox. --Xyzzy ^Talk 14:05, 25 September 2013 (GMT)

In the same way, though, is there even a "no gender" option in the Skyrim CS? If not, then it can be said that Paarthurnax's gender is the same sort of case as Mishaxhi's race. Xolroc (talk) 14:55, 25 September 2013 (GMT)

You see a ton of placeholders in game data. For instance, almost every single Daedric Prince has a race assigned to them, but we wouldn't want to say that Sheogorath was a Breton just because Skyrim set him as one. Lore overrides a game value. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 15:33, 25 September 2013 (GMT)

There doesn't seem to be a "no gender" option in the game data. Dwarven automata have their gender listed as male, and even The Pale Lady is designated as male. I guess this disqualifies my point about gender in game data. I'll go sulk in the corner for awhile. --Xyzzy ^Talk 15:36, 25 September 2013 (GMT)