Lore talk:Staff of Sheogorath

Staff of Sheogorath or Dyus' Staff

Evidently, we need some consensus on whether the image from Shivering Isles should be called "Dyus' Staff" or "Staff of Sheogorath", or maybe we should come up with a more precise description. Somebody want to chime in? --Xyzzy^Talk 05:47, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

They're all the Staff of Sheogorath. Captioning the image as "Dyus' Staff" is simply to distinguish it from the original. If people find it confusing, it could be changed to "Staff made by Dyus" or something more eloquent, but the main text of the article clearly explains the new Staff's creation so I don't see why this should be the case. —Legoless 11:14, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

How about "Dyus' Staff of Sheogorath"? That's a comfortable compromise, I think, and doesn't sound awkward. Vely^►t►e 00:38, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I think "Dyus' Staff of Sheogorath" works, it's simple and clear, and definitely more correct. ABCface^◥ 00:47, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Vely and ABC.It is definetly better.--Skyrimplayer 01:05, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Creation Club

Should this really be included in the lore page for the staff? It was made rather clear in the Shivering Isles that the Staff of Sheogorath is a symbol of the Daedric Prince's power and office, not just some Daedric Artefact that can be given to mortals after completing a little quest. Regardless of SHeogorath's personality, it is not something the Daedric Prince would give to a mortal, even if said mortal is the Last Dragonborn. - Andrefortes (talk) 16:30, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Creation Club is official content and therefore considered canon by the wiki, so yes it should be included on the page. —Dillonn241 (talk) 16:34, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) That is our policy, yes. See References in Lore regarding the purpose of this namespace, the main objective of which is to document official sources. Criticism of Creation Club's implementation of this artifact is better suited to our forums. —Legoless (talk) 16:37, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Very well. Still, it feels a bit contradictory, even in the article itself. - Andrefortes (talk) 18:01, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

The wording in the article is meant to convey that contradiction ("This specific staff could not stop time, but bore a powerful paralysis enchantment"), since it seems worthwhile to point out. There's a developer explanation here if you're interested. —Legoless (talk) 18:22, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Didn't know about that interview. Thanks! - Andrefortes (talk) 18:28, 7 October 2018 (UTC)