Board Thread:Lore Discussion/@comment-24267938-20130323172448/@comment-25047024-20140429143049

Dark Jeto wrote: AngryEnclaveSoldier wrote: I don't see why the Last Dragonborn is supposed to have some special claim at the throne just because he's Dragonborn. Let's face it:

1. Nirn does not need a Dragonborn Emperor anymore. Martin created a permanent barrier with his sacrifice. The Dragonfires don't have to be relit and the Amulet of Kings is destroyed.

2. The LDB could never just walk into the Imperial City and say "hey im zeh dragonbourn me wanz be emperur" while the Thalmor and the servants of the Mede Dynasty are still there. They'd never allow him to just take the Ruby Throne for himself.

3. The LDB would have to conquer the Imperial City if he'd really want to become Emperor. But attacking the Imperial City needs an army, and I doubt that the LDB can take the whole Imperial Legion down with just his Thu'um. Also, if he'd attack the Imperial City and/or Cyrodiil, the Empire would be weakened even more and would be an easier target for the Thalmor. The whole idea is based on the belief that only a Dragonborn can rightfully claim the Imperial Throne, not just that they are used for the sake of lighting the Dragonfires. This is actually the very reason why the conflict in Elder Scrolls Online exists.

Titus Mede I could become Emperor without being Dragonborn. Because he had a whole army to conquer the Imperial City.

The Last Dragonborn, however, doesn't. And in ESO, the barrier wasn't permanent. I think it's widely known (atleast widely known by Imperial scholars) that a Dragonborn Emperor wouldn't be needed anymore after Martins sacrifice, or else there would have been a strong resistance to Titus Mede I and the Mede dynasty.