Talk:Timeline of the Ultima Universe

Elves in pre-history
Does someone has a reference for the elves information in the pre-history section? It seems to me that this is information made up from some fan timeline...--Sega381 23:45, July 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * It sounds to me someone just integrated the information from the Ultima X elves' background into the timeline. While this was an interesting way of integrating them, I just don't feel they deserve a mention in the timeline anymore that the Prehistoric Meer UO2 background considering how we're talking about a cancelled game Sergorn 06:12, July 10, 2010 (UTC)

Post History
I just noticed that the post Ascension Era described in the Timeline, is also taken from Ultima X information. I think it should be removed as well Sergorn 06:51, July 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, I agree. At least for now, unless clear arguments against these appear, and we decide otherwise.--Sega381 14:22, July 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't think there is any sense to consider canons the fact of a cancelled game to be honest, or else we'd have to integrate all the prehistoric Britannia fiction and some of Blackthorn's background as canon as well and it'd be a tad silly. Besides, I find it extremly unlikely that should EA decide to revive Ultima down the road they would take into account the stuff written for any cancelled games --Sergorn 15:21, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Ultima IX dating
The dating of Ultima IX's events take a "20 years after Ultima IX approach". I think this is wrong and should be edited to reflect 200 years, citing Bjorn's dialogue in the game as source (especially since there hasn't been any objection to this in the History of Britannia page, this create a discrepency between the two here).

Now granted the game itself is not pretty clear about the whole timeline thing because of the whole Dupre mentioning "being dead for twenty years" near the end, however Bjorn's dialogue is the only one that cleary and with no ambiguity give a timeline since the last coming of the Avatar, I quote: "The Avatar? He hasn't been seen in Britannia in two hundred years! He can't possibly still be alive, can he?". So I feel it would make more sense to take this date as a basis - nevermind the fact that the evolution of Britannia also makes more sense if it's 200 instead of 20 years. Thoughts? Sergorn 06:51, July 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * I would argue vehemently against a 200 year gap. Let's bear in mind that the Columns are also stated to have appeared 20 years prior to U9. If we give equal credit to each source for the sake of argument, that would have the Cataclysm occurring roughly parallel to the events of Serpent Isle (which actually does make sense in light of the Imbalance). However, it also means that all this would have to have happened 180 years after the Avatar departed Britannia. In SI, Lord British says that the Imbalance storms and earthquakes began not long after the party set sail. I also find it a little ridiculous to think that the Guardian might have waited an entire 180 years before making another attempt on Britannia.


 * Personally, I find it a lot easier to reconcile a 20 year difference than a 200 year one. I don't think one NPC's dialogue in the whirlpool of contradiction that is U9 is a credible reason to throw all that out the window. --Terilem 11:41, July 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not fresh on the sources, but some comments. First, let's remember that time may flow differently in Serpent Isle than in Britannia (though there may be facts against this, such as Gwenno's travels, or others for it, such as the time needed to create the whole Ophidian civilization in just the 20 years between U2 and U3). But in any event, if there are two different sources that contradict themselves with the years between U7 and U9, we have no choice but to mention both. It's not our job to fix the contradictions in the games (though it surely is a fun thing to do!).--Sega381 14:22, July 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * I guess mentioning both is the most reasonable thing to do, as I agree it's not our job to fix contradictions (Does that mean I can change the Shame/Despise thing regarding Ultima VII on the wiki then ? :P). I mean basically unless EA decide to do some sort of continuation of Ultima that would state/retcon for a fact how much time happened between the two games there is no perfect answer. It would means however that the timeline would have to remove any "datation" for the events related to Ultima IX though. --Sergorn 15:08, July 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, I suppose you're right about it not being our job to fix contradictions. Also, the possibility of timeflow differences between Britannia and Serpent Isle did occur to me, but I felt there was enough in the game to suggest that the two exist pretty concurrently (the aforementioned encounter with LB, Gwenno and Batlin's travels seeming to take place in roughly the right timeframe, the mint/lighthouse swap, etc.). --Terilem 16:11, July 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * This is a personal opinion of course, but I don't feel it makes sense for any relation to exists between the Imbalance and the Columns in Britannia - there is really nothing even remotely hinting at this and the whole idea that the Guardian somehow just invaded Britannia the minute Serpent Isle ended does feel a tad far-fetched to me.


 * Also, when taking into account how much Britannian society changed between Ultima VII and and Ultima IX, I've always felt the 200 years thing make a lot sense in that regard. To be honest I just don't see how you can possibly reconcile Ultima VII and Ultima IX with only 20 years between the two games, while two centuries would basically leave a lot of room and possibilites to explain the changes Britannia have been through.


 * I mean if it wasn't for this 20 years mention of Dupre casting doubt at the very end of the game, there'll be no reasons not to take at face value Bjorn's comment about the Avatar missing for 200 years. I'll agree however that 180 years for the Guardian attack to happen on Britannia is a long time even if you consider that his plan have required a lot of planning. I actually wish they would just have kept the 80 years of the Bob White Plot, since that seemed a reasonable middle ground to me and wouldn't have changed anything in terme of the plot. --Sergorn 15:08, July 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't see how the changes between U7 and U9 are relevant in supporting the 200-year theory. Isn't the whole premise of U9 that the Cataclysm had such a catastrophic effect that Britannian society had to be extensively rebuilt? That means any changes that could have happened in a hypothetical 200-year timeframe would have been more or less made moot by that event anyway. Yes, I agree that it's a bit of a stretch to believe that all these things happened around the same time, but I'm not the one who came up with that idea; U9 did, the moment it suggested that Dupre's death and the Cataclysm are both meant to have occurred 20 years ago. I still feel that it's a better alternative than potentially invalidating an entire game with a 200 year gap, however. I don't think many will argue that consistency is one of Ultima IX's strengths, so the fact that we now have to somehow incorporate it into the wiki in a logical fashion is no mean feat.


 * As for the Imbalance/Cataclysm thing, let me make it clear that I absolutely do not hold the belief that there is any connection whatsoever between the two. I was merely pondering it hypothetically and I regret not using a clearer choice of words to convey that. On the contrary, I prefer to simply pretend U9 never existed. When it comes to the wiki, however, that's not my call to make. --Terilem 16:11, July 11, 2010 (UTC)


 * Granted, about the whole Cataclysme premise and how it changed society - but it still feels to me that that there were much more change that could easily be explained in a 200 years gap, and not just with the Cataclysm~; such as the fact that Virtue returned to the forefront of Britannia live, the way magic evolved, the return of the Moongates and so on. Also (though this is more a personal impression), I've always got the sense from both the game and the manual that Britannia knew a period of peace before the Columns rose, which is why the idea that it happens right after Serpent Isle feels wrong to me.


 * But it all bodes down to a simple thing really : if one want to craft a consistent and canon lore, you'd either have to ignore either Bjorn's or Dupre's line - I prefer to ignore the second, but it's just my view of thing.


 * However I don't undestand how having a 200 year gap would invalidate anything? I mean there was 200 years as well between Ultima VI and Ultima VII anyway. --Sergorn 16:41, July 11, 2010 (UTC)

Ultima Underworld
I've got two doubts about the Ultima Underworld related information:

1- What's the source for stating Cabirus first name as "Arthur"?

2- Can we be certain that this Baron Almric is the 3rd?

It might be unlikely that he is the original Almric, but for al we know it could be easily the 2nd, 4th or 5th. There is no attribution I can find to say it is a particular Baron. Artic Blaze Dragon 05:55, 1 November 2010 (PDT)

References and Serpent isle
Ok, I'm usually not very concerned with references and speculation, but there are quite a few things here that are qu8estionable at best, like the destruction of Skara Brae. It seems to happen way to early. We know that it happened before Batlin formed the fellowship, but that's about it. Adding Serpent Isle dates would also be cool, there is little here about it. Maybe it should be in a separate article though...