Board Thread:Lore Discussion/@comment-29729442-20161212012142/@comment-29729442-20161213094845

Party Vanderbilt wrote: Blademaster Jauffre wrote:

Party Vanderbilt wrote: Tactics change over time. Who'd have thunk?

More to the point, we don't know when the Manual of Armor was written, or for what army (if any specific army at all). Tactics don't just change over time, they change from one army to another. Armies do not all fight the same.

Lastly, at the end of the day it's Bethesda who determine what is and is not lore friendly. This manual is commissioned by General Warhaft to serve as a guide and manual to armor for all officers in the Imperial service.Manual of Armor was written for use by the Legion. I'd actually forgotten about that. Huh. Appreciate the reminder.

Anywho, with that being the case I'd say it's likely that it's an instance where, ultimately, gameplay is taking precedence over story. They're not going to force you to use one type of armor over another. I mean, hell, they don't even actually force you to wear ANY Imperial armor; similar to how we're never forced to wear Shrouded Armor, or Thieves' Armor, or Mage Robes.

Sure, but the Manual of Armor still makes me take a close look at this. Besides ot would be no surprise if Bethesda decided to let us decide (they already do this with the quests. Example: did the Nerevarine do any side quests during his adventure? We don't know. We only know that he is in Akavir during the evens of TES IV).