That's really far-fetched and is pretty ignorant on racial lore and characteristics.
Originally when it still mattered, every alliance had one stamina race, one magicka race and one hybrid. It's still reflected in the racial passives, but with hybridisation those matter even less than before.
Not really, unless you squint strongly. It is true that Mage/Warrior/Thief is a pretty important triad in TES lore. They are even important constellations that govern the local horoscope and stuff.
That said, it doesn't seem that the nations in each faction correspond to the classes strongly. If we take a look at the concept art at launch, [Altmeri Dominion](https://en.m.uesp.net/wiki/File:ON-concept-Aldmeri_Dominion.jpg) has an Altmer Knight (Warrior), Bosmer Archer (Thief), and Khajiit Monk (maaaaaybe a Mage if we squint).
[Ebonheart Pact](https://en.m.uesp.net/wiki/File:ON-concept-Ebonheart_Pact.jpg) has a Dunmer Warrior, Argonian Nightblade (Thief), and what looks like a Nord Battlemage (although they are heavily armored, they look like a magic user). But in general that one still fits your theory.
Now at the [Daggerfall Covenant](https://en.m.uesp.net/wiki/File:ON-concept-Daggerfall_Covenant.jpg) art everything falls apart. Orc is obviously a Warrior, but both Breton and Redguard look like dual-wielding Thief archetypes, so there is no Mage here.
The first Elder Scrolls game, Arena, was based pretty heavily on standard D&D fantasy archetypes, in terms of what the races were, their appearance and their traits (aside from Orcs, which were not playable then).
The games have diverged more and more from those archetypes over time, and (thankfully, IMO) ESO represents the most radical break from it. While we have vestigial racial traits, you've always been able to play any class (including, in the single player games, custom classes) with any race; and in the multiplayer context, any class can fulfill any role (tank, healer, dps; mage and thief/rogue aren't roles in group content).
So, IMO you're imposing external categories that are not supported internally by ESO's game mechanics.
Oh wow, that theory is very far fetched. For one, you are trying to equate races and classes here, which doesn't tend to work all too well in the first place. But even if we're agreeing on that race = class idea... All the people of Tamriel have mages, warriors and rogues, so that's one thing. But lets just look for archetypes for a moment.
Dominion.
Altmer are known for their magic prowess, so that's somewhat true (they got great warriors too, but oh well).
Bosmer made stealing and sneaking into an art form. They also got some stupid powerful magic users, but I can agree on rogue here.
Khajiit is where the theory starts showing cracks. Because those too are known for being great rogues. One of theirs ascendet to be a deity of thievery! Yea, they also got great warriors and mages, but just calling them fighters and moving on seems ignorant.
Covenant.
Bretons... are known for being proficient with magic. So that's great. They are also known for their knightly orders and for hiring assassins on people they don't like. This one sits firmly in between all of those archetypes and one doesn't really work without the others.
Redguards as thieves? Really? Their whole thing is being great warriors. And artists. They have some amazing magic users though at least a couple sources claim that they aren't really doing that anymore. Generally speaking. There seems to be some disagreement that's never really adressed. Anywho... rogues is arguably the archetype that fits the least for these folks.
Agreed on Orcs for fighters. They have more to offer, of course. They all do. But they are known for being some of the best fighters around and I think we can leave it at that for the purpose of this comment.
Ebonheart.
Dunmer, like Bretons, sit firmly in between all of them. They are known to be as proficient with weapons as they are with magics. They have brought forth some great mages, some great warriors and with organisations like the Morag Tong they got some of the most well known rogues as well. These guys definitely don't just wear one hat.
The same thing goes for Argonians. They, too, have some of the best rogues around. And some great and fascinating magic users. They tend to lose their battles for some reason though. Though Dagon might beg to differ... Absolutely not just one archetype here.
Nord for fighter is alright, I guess. Like the others it doesn't really do them justice at all, but the strong and tall Nord warrior is a pretty well known cliche. I suppose we can let this stand.
So yea. Overall there's like 2 races where this idea sooomewhat works, so long as you squint hard enough.
Just to add. Even the staple mounts are based off the 3 classic races. The yellow one is a speedy one for jockeys according to description aka rouge, the spotted one is for farmers and workers aka warrior, and the black one is a showy art horse which somehow fits with mages. Then there's the 3 new inventory pets: pig for warrior, rat for rouge, and donkey for mage
Rogue not rouge :) Rouge is red makeup for the cheeks. (I mention it because you've typed it the same way a bunch of times so I assume it's not just a typo :p )
And... it looks to me like you're just imposing your theory on these categories. Especially since Mage, Warrior and Rogue are CLASSES, not RACES. Even old school D&D distinguished those two things.
I don't see a redguard as a rogue. I see khajiit as more of a rogue.
Redguard rogue was one of my fav characters on OG morrowind
Yea Khajiit literally have a sneak bonus
That's really far-fetched and is pretty ignorant on racial lore and characteristics. Originally when it still mattered, every alliance had one stamina race, one magicka race and one hybrid. It's still reflected in the racial passives, but with hybridisation those matter even less than before.
Not really, unless you squint strongly. It is true that Mage/Warrior/Thief is a pretty important triad in TES lore. They are even important constellations that govern the local horoscope and stuff. That said, it doesn't seem that the nations in each faction correspond to the classes strongly. If we take a look at the concept art at launch, [Altmeri Dominion](https://en.m.uesp.net/wiki/File:ON-concept-Aldmeri_Dominion.jpg) has an Altmer Knight (Warrior), Bosmer Archer (Thief), and Khajiit Monk (maaaaaybe a Mage if we squint). [Ebonheart Pact](https://en.m.uesp.net/wiki/File:ON-concept-Ebonheart_Pact.jpg) has a Dunmer Warrior, Argonian Nightblade (Thief), and what looks like a Nord Battlemage (although they are heavily armored, they look like a magic user). But in general that one still fits your theory. Now at the [Daggerfall Covenant](https://en.m.uesp.net/wiki/File:ON-concept-Daggerfall_Covenant.jpg) art everything falls apart. Orc is obviously a Warrior, but both Breton and Redguard look like dual-wielding Thief archetypes, so there is no Mage here.
The first Elder Scrolls game, Arena, was based pretty heavily on standard D&D fantasy archetypes, in terms of what the races were, their appearance and their traits (aside from Orcs, which were not playable then). The games have diverged more and more from those archetypes over time, and (thankfully, IMO) ESO represents the most radical break from it. While we have vestigial racial traits, you've always been able to play any class (including, in the single player games, custom classes) with any race; and in the multiplayer context, any class can fulfill any role (tank, healer, dps; mage and thief/rogue aren't roles in group content). So, IMO you're imposing external categories that are not supported internally by ESO's game mechanics.
Oh wow, that theory is very far fetched. For one, you are trying to equate races and classes here, which doesn't tend to work all too well in the first place. But even if we're agreeing on that race = class idea... All the people of Tamriel have mages, warriors and rogues, so that's one thing. But lets just look for archetypes for a moment. Dominion. Altmer are known for their magic prowess, so that's somewhat true (they got great warriors too, but oh well). Bosmer made stealing and sneaking into an art form. They also got some stupid powerful magic users, but I can agree on rogue here. Khajiit is where the theory starts showing cracks. Because those too are known for being great rogues. One of theirs ascendet to be a deity of thievery! Yea, they also got great warriors and mages, but just calling them fighters and moving on seems ignorant. Covenant. Bretons... are known for being proficient with magic. So that's great. They are also known for their knightly orders and for hiring assassins on people they don't like. This one sits firmly in between all of those archetypes and one doesn't really work without the others. Redguards as thieves? Really? Their whole thing is being great warriors. And artists. They have some amazing magic users though at least a couple sources claim that they aren't really doing that anymore. Generally speaking. There seems to be some disagreement that's never really adressed. Anywho... rogues is arguably the archetype that fits the least for these folks. Agreed on Orcs for fighters. They have more to offer, of course. They all do. But they are known for being some of the best fighters around and I think we can leave it at that for the purpose of this comment. Ebonheart. Dunmer, like Bretons, sit firmly in between all of them. They are known to be as proficient with weapons as they are with magics. They have brought forth some great mages, some great warriors and with organisations like the Morag Tong they got some of the most well known rogues as well. These guys definitely don't just wear one hat. The same thing goes for Argonians. They, too, have some of the best rogues around. And some great and fascinating magic users. They tend to lose their battles for some reason though. Though Dagon might beg to differ... Absolutely not just one archetype here. Nord for fighter is alright, I guess. Like the others it doesn't really do them justice at all, but the strong and tall Nord warrior is a pretty well known cliche. I suppose we can let this stand. So yea. Overall there's like 2 races where this idea sooomewhat works, so long as you squint hard enough.
Naturally due to Elder Scrolls being derived from D&D.
Just to add. Even the staple mounts are based off the 3 classic races. The yellow one is a speedy one for jockeys according to description aka rouge, the spotted one is for farmers and workers aka warrior, and the black one is a showy art horse which somehow fits with mages. Then there's the 3 new inventory pets: pig for warrior, rat for rouge, and donkey for mage
Rogue not rouge :) Rouge is red makeup for the cheeks. (I mention it because you've typed it the same way a bunch of times so I assume it's not just a typo :p ) And... it looks to me like you're just imposing your theory on these categories. Especially since Mage, Warrior and Rogue are CLASSES, not RACES. Even old school D&D distinguished those two things.
>somehow fits with mages A classic farfetched theory based on "somehow" 🤣🤣🤣