Skyrim talk:Mistwatch

The UESPWiki – Your source for The Elder Scrolls since 1995
Jump to: navigation, search

Bug[edit]

I encountered an escaped prisoner who warned me about the bandits at Mistwatch... next to Skaarthal ruins. I somehow doubt the prisoner would have run all the way past Windhelm and over mountains to escape. The quest did properly place Mistwatch on my map, though. — Unsigned comment by Mormegil27 (talkcontribs) at 03:19 on 30 December 2011

This IS clearable[edit]

I've cleared it in my current game on PC. — Unsigned comment by 67.172.225.158 (talk) at 22:30 on 15 May 2012

The article reflects the accurate clearable status as of now (it was changed here, just a couple days ago). There is a bug listed on the page with more related information as well. I'm guessing you saw that it said "Clearable: No" because you were viewing an outdated version of the page, which is a known issue for users viewing the site when not logged in. Creating an account would resolve this issue. ABCface 03:28, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
I see that the map in my game shows the location as "cleared" but my count of cleared locations did not increase, so I suspect this location does not count toward the Delver achievement. On the Angarvunde page, there is an issue identified wherein the script for the associated dungeon quest interferes with the registration of the area as cleared, and I suspect the same issue may be at work in Mistwatch. Don't know how to confirm this, but it is worth being wary of, as (again) despite reading as cleared on my in-game map, my stat for "dungeons cleared" did not increase after I "cleared" this dungeon. Grey 22:02, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
That problem is noted in the Bugs section at the bottom of the page. ABCface 00:27, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

() I'm questioning whether or not it gets counted in your "dungeons cleared" stat in the journal, which is not addressed in the Bugs section - it definitely gets marked as cleared on the map, but in my game, my count of cleared dungeons did not increase, which also occurs in Angurvadal, which also has a dungeon quest that may override the journal's "locations cleared counter script." I'm looking for a confirm or deny about the journal stat aspect, not what the map shows. Sorry if I was unclear. Grey 12:28, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I guess I'm still not understanding your question. The Angarvunde has this information related to cleared status:
  1. "Angarvunde is marked as cleared when the related quest is completed. Therefore, clearing this location is not triggered by killing its boss enemy (unlike all other dungeons in the game), but rather by discovering the word wall."
  2. "Clearing this location does not increment the number of "Dungeons Cleared" displayed in your journal, and therefore does not contribute to the Delver achievement."
This Mistwatch article has this information related to clear status:
  1. "Mistwatch is marked as cleared when the related quest is completed, regardless of how you choose to complete the quest. Therefore, clearing this location can either be triggered by killing its boss enemy (i.e., the Bandit Leader), or else by talking to her, convincing Christer to leave, and then returning to tell her that he is gone."
  2. "Clearing this location does not increment the number of "Dungeons Cleared" displayed in your journal, and therefore does not contribute to the Delver achievement. "
Information about the related quests and journal stats is noted on both pages, can you clarify what information is missing from this one? ABCface 13:04, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
OMG - I see it now - so sorry (was that there the whole time?) Grey 14:39, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
The information was added on the 13th of May. And no need for apologies, I almost missed the part in the notes section myself. I think I'll bump it up to the top of that section, so it's a little easier to spot. :) ABCface 17:03, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

help him by searching for his wife is correct, help him search for his wife clearly wrong![edit]

By showing it as help him search for his wife , it means he's searching as well as you, which is incorrect. Whereas help him by searching for his wife means you are doing the searching for him/instead of him. He asks you to do the searching for him and even says he'll wait here as he isn't capable of doing the searching, so there is no possibility that he is also actively involved in the search. Biffa (talk) 16:23, 16 June 2014 (GMT)

It's close enough to where it doesn't matter. •WoahBro►talk 16:34, 16 June 2014 (GMT)
(edit conflict) He was in the tower looking for her before the player arrives, so by offering to help search in his stead, the player is helping him search. Either version conveys the message fine, but the previous one flows better. I don't think it's necessary to be so meticulous in our wording that we sacrifice readability. ThuumofReason (talk) 16:35, 16 June 2014 (GMT)
He clearly asks you to search for him and not as well as him. No either version doesn't convey the message fine, one is correct and the other states that he is searching as well. Correct is correct and suggesting that this wiki is more concerned with readability or flow than getting the information correct is absurd. But why am I not surprised by the responses? Biffa (talk) 08:01, 17 June 2014 (GMT)
I have to agree with Biffa on this. This wiki is supposed to be as correct as possible, keeping out a word that would completely change the meaning of the sentence doesn't help this site at all.Lorenut (talk) 09:14, 17 June 2014 (GMT)
Look at it this way: do you really think that he wouldn't look for his wife at all, as in not before meeting you in-game? Besides, why is this such a big freaking deal? Why? It's a minor specific that really doesn't matter that much. •WoahBro►talk 09:27, 17 June 2014 (GMT)
I didn't want to get into this, but WoahBro is right. One word that barely changes the content of the sentence is hardly worth all of this trouble. I don't think there's any need for us to get so pedantic about this. ThuumofReason (talk) 12:04, 17 June 2014 (GMT)
I'm gonna make a call on this and revert to Biffa's version, since the wording is more correct. Maybe let's end it here. —Legoless (talk) 14:33, 17 June 2014 (GMT)