Gabryal

Not sure if you ever got an answer to this, but I have the exact same problem, I have the same mods installed except for the Interface Scaling Mod Edit: I figured out what is happening but I have no idea how to stop it, the player is clipping through the floor in the cutscene, and eventually falls to their death. Why this is I have no earthly idea

Where did we go into US politics? I missed that. Otherwise I accept the rest of it as your opinion, though personally I see your unwavering acceptance of a central authority as more of a nod to the Catholic ( strangely they have never changed the name, they either haven't noticed or do not accept that there are other legitimate Christian denominations, though personally, I'm an atheist ) Church I'd also not like to base the future of an institution as thoroughly corrupt as the Empire on a " possibly ". It's the same sort of blind faith to my eyes " Don't worry Skyrim, the Empire will fix itself up " I've been hearing rumors about the Dragonborn DLC and " The Dragonborn becoming Emperor " before the DLC had a name, all I'll say on it is it would be the easiest way to tidy up the story, especially since it doesn't matter who wins in Skyrim if the Dragonborn becomes Emperor, which is why I think it is unlikely. If they make the Dragonborn Emperor then the entire civil war in Skyrim was pointless from the word go, because no matter what Skyrim will come back into the Empire, either by military conquest or by personal Renown of the Dragonborn. If they -do- go that direction though, this entire thread has been a colossal waste of everyone's time, and frankly the " war " part of the game would be a colossal waste as well. Why even bother? Wouldn't it be interesting if the Dragonborn DLC is about the Dragonborn going all around the Empire helping other nations throw off the yokes of the Empire? That would make me chuckle. It probably won't be that either, as it too would make the outcome of the war moot. Anyway I'm done with this, I still don't understand about 99% of what you've said, so frankly I'm afraid to even address most of it anymore, plus it really is exhausting. Other people I'm sure will pick up the slack if you keep at it, but I stand by everything I've said as well, and always have, and always will. I will say you obviously didn't understand the two things you quoted above, at least I hope you didn't, because if you did and responded the way you did then I'm not even sure that you made a human response

Wow you spent a lot of time on this, it's honestly funny. Let me see if I can be succinct and answer this. Take your bruised feelings and go elsewhere then, because life is a helluva a lot rougher than a forum. If I find you frustrating then that's on me, allowing you to frustrate me. That doesn't mean you get to throw away the reasons I've given as to why you do. I would argue that I more than frustrate you considering you're accusing me of personally attacking you. Let me straighten you out, it's less about you and more about every ignorant, illiterate person I've ever met in my life. You personally just happen to be a current representative of them. As far as my not believing you know what those things mean, it's not an attack, it's my personal opinion. I truly do not believe you know what they mean. That's not an attack it's an observation that happens to offend you. I guess I could add that to the list of things I don't think you understand, that commenting on your perceived flaws isn't an insult, it's only observation. If I attacked you personally I wouldn't do it that way, I'd just say you're an idiot ( which is not what I'm saying here, it's put out as an example, whether or not I think you're an idiot will not be brought up on this forum because it does nothing to continue the public discourse, so no saying I called you an idiot ) the fact I have to stop and explain this might also explain why you don't seem to understand the other things I mentioned. I've conceded that Ulfric is a rascist, and power hungry, and many other things. If you don't know the things I've conceded it's because you didn't bother to look anything up about me before posting this. I'm not going to be held responsible that you made the choice to be ignorant. Next. You accused me of personal attacks twice in one post? You really don't care about my opinion of me? Really? Only posting this because it's amusing to me coming on the heels of the one before it. Point out just once where I have gone back and edited my post to something other than what it was after you responded to it, just once. I may have fixed grammar, I may have fixed punctuation, but I've never changed the entire thing. You have, and do so constantly. I have no interest of speaking for everyone out there, at least half the people wouldn't agree with me if I personally saved them from drowning. I'm not even speaking for the Stormcloaks at the moment because I have no need to, all I am doing is my best to keep the discourse honest and based in facts. I don't ask everyone to agree with the Stormcloaks, I just want the people who don't to have a good argument for not doing so. I've yet to hear one. It doesn't really matter how many people agree with you, the majority is rarely right, however what this has to do with the fact you go back and re-edit your posts I have no idea I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Are you saying I am attempting to prevent people from having a choice ( and if I do, please let me know how I go about doing so, I wasn't aware I had this power)? Or I'm a Stormcloak Fanatic? Or are you making fun of me because I'm literate, or is it that I'm doing my best to explain myself as clearly as possible? I'd love to see some of those questions, but more than that I'd like to see any quote from anywhere, ever, where I said that I feel threatened by any of your posts. Seriously, quote me where I said I felt threatened by you in any way, ever. I just like quoting these two together. I am curious where the hell the NRA got involved, because this last year I withdrew my membership. I used to look up to Charleton Heston, until he debated a bar stool, and now they're stuck with a President who publicly implied he was going to assassinate the President. Also don't restrict your language, it's more offensive to me that you " MFer "'d me than if you'd actually said it. Seriously though, the NRA? What brought that into an argument about Skyrim? I actually love to shoot, even if not everyone is into that, but you have left me utterly lost as to what the hell you're talking about here I think this should be the opening to a holy book somewhere, are you planning on founding a religion? Does that have something to do with the DNA all those witches in lab coats are talking about? Where exactly did I imply in any way that I'm not unique? Hell I think I've been arguing that I -am- unique this whole time. Thanks for confirming though, until you did I thought I was Case Zero in a secret government cloning lab So your argument is that it's going to be ok because some mystery pinch hitter is going to come in and fix all the massive screw ups the Empire has had under the Reign of the Mede's? See cleaning up only works if you have someone clean up immediately after the mess has been made, it's infinitely harder to fix it a decade after the fact. Following your reasoning though I suppose Ulfric could defeat the Empire in Skyrim, march on Cyrodil, and clean up the mess... That was meant to be Sarcastic, I know Ulfric is no Churchill. Churchill was made Prime Minister for a very specific reason, he had been for 7 years warning the UK about Hitler, and everything he said ended up coming true. I suggest reading a biography on Churchill called " The Last Lion ", can't remember who wrote it off the top of my head, but you'd get a better spin off of it. If your argument is some mystery person is going to clean up the mess though, then I guess everyone can be whatever they like without consequence. It's kind of like burning your house down because Jesus is coming back tomorrow. It's about 50/50 on wishful thinking and dangerously deranged. I warned you not to go down the History road with me, you got off light. Also is Gaby a stab of some sort? I can't figure out why you used it, there was no need for the word to be put in, there was no need to make it diminutive when you put it in, so I don't get it. Why not Gabryal or nothing at all? Are you giving me nicknames now? You say after you do exactly what I asked people not to do, somehow it doesn't seem as sincere as perhaps it was meant too. So... we've reduced our level of discourse to bumper stickers you can buy out of a catalog at the back of World Net Daily? What the hell does this have to do with anything? Am I supposed to shout something left wing in response? What does an anti-Obama bumper sticker have to do with Skyrim? Also who said I was pro-anything political in the real world? This thread is about Skyrim's Stormcloaks and Imperials, not the RNC and DNC. That's the strangest thing I've seen you say so far, and you've said a lot of strange stuff. Whew, that was a lot, let's not do that again OK, all the quotes are a pain in the ass.

Oh and people do me a favor and stop with the Historical analogies, just stop. I don't have time to correct them all, and certainly don't put something that you message with me in private and turn it around and put it on this thread as well. Do one or the other. I'm so damn tired of people getting things wrong, and horribly so. History in this world ( and too a good extent in TES as well since I spent the time actually looking things up ) is my realm, you come to play in it at your own peril. Unless of course your purpose is to annoy me, because screwing up History for your own ends is one of the things that truly does annoy me. The amount of ignorance on the topic is truly astounding, and as a Historian ( this is my job people, it is how I make money ) it's appalling to think that people out there are willing to say things about the History of the human race that is only true in the most obtusely possible interpretation of events. History is made up of real people who lived through the times of which you are speaking of, and when you twist the events to your own end you do nothing but disrespect those who actually lived through those events. Since the topic is almost exclusively based on Military History in this thread, it is attains an entirely new level of disrespect, since people died in these events that people twist to their own ends. In the information age it's generally expected that when you make a statement you know something about the information you're referencing.

Example of what I just said about editing post. Post #476, me, posted 4:29 Post #475, StormHammer, edited 4:33 See people? This is what Stormhammer means by " Honest Discussion "

Your words would lend more weight StormHammer if I actually believed you understood what " open, honest discussion " and " free-thinkers " and " dogma " actually mean. It's been well established you have no idea what oppression means, and the evidence so far is that you aren't too familiar with these terms either. Frankly, while I'm willing to listen to just about anyone else and give a good defense to my arguments and concede that others have good points that I disagree with, with you it's the conversational version of an out of body experience. Your comments couldn't make less sense to me if you were speaking in an African-Click language, and are far less interesting ( Wouldn't it be cool to give your kid a name with a *click* in it? ). I don't if it's just that you aren't making sense, or if you're incapable of making sense. It's frankly painful to communicate with you on any level. Do us all a favor too would you? Stop going back and editing your posts after someone has responded to them. You do it constantly, and it is always altered in such a way that you look less foolish but the response looks more so. I am tired of having to remind people over and over and over to go back and check the date and time when you edit your posts so that the responses to those posts are understood to have actually made sense at some point. If you insist on continuing to edit your posts after responses, I hope people realize that it's a sign that even you have no idea what you're talking about. In fact I hope that's what they think, because the only other option I can think of is that you aren't courageous enough to stand by your original statements and feel the need to edit them. Which is not exactly the shining example of " honest discussion " though considering what I said earlier, about you having no idea what the phrase means, you may not realize that. When you go back and change all your posts back to what they were before, then maybe I'll consider trying to have an " honest discussion " with you again, until then I consider you to be a fanatic, who justifies everything they do on the back idea of " I'm right and it's more important to show that than it is to stand by what I say ". You're so emotionally invested in your opinion that you don't see reason, ever, yet another reason to not have a discussion of any measure whatsoever with you. When I bring up facts, concepts, logic, reason, analogy, or even theoretical arguments, they aren't aimed at you. I am not trying to convince you, in fact I don't want to convince you, I don't think you'd be a good example of someone who is on the Stormcloak side. I like you where you are doing damage to your own case every time you post. The people I'm talking to are the people who actually have opinions based on a measure of fact, opinions that are open to being altered if new evidence comes to light. I'm sure someone out there will or would say something like " But Gabryal you aren't open to altering your opinion if new evidence comes up ". Actually, yes I am, I was at one point a die-hard Imperial, and then new evidence came to light and I switched sides. I've received no new evidence to support being on the Imperial side, I haven't even heard an original idea. Most of what I hear are the exact same things I used to tell other people, I've heard nothing new about the Imperials in months, so why on earth would I change sides when presented with things I already knew? It's like being told " You know that lever on the side of the toilet? It makes it flush " when you're 30 years old. You can't help but want to say " Well Thank you! Up till now I've been going out and getting the hose and spraying the toilet to make the water go down ". So frankly either offer something worth reading, or don't bother offering anything, because there -is- a level of annoyance to being told the same obvious, first glance, emotionally invested, surface only, and pre-mature arguments I've heard a thousand times before. It's a waste of time, it's a waste of energy, but hey just like my neighbor who spends his weekends on the corner with his sign yelling at cars about how Obama is a Kenyan, Muslim, Socialist, I don't expect you to stop, change your opinion, or listen to anyone else, ever. You exist for me as only someone I rebuttal for the sake of people who are still in the process of making up their minds, people who actually understand what analogy is for example. I'd say you were a lost cause for the Stormcloaks, but that would imply you were ever a cause. Now, since you still haven't gotten the message.. and listen this time. ">" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="295">

My friend, you might as well give it up, if there is anything that this batch of Pro-Imperials have in common is an emotional attachment to their cause that is undeterred by facts. You know facts like. Whiterun was never neutral, it only gave that appearance because Balgruuf knew that if he joined the Imperial side prematurely he'd have his own citizens killing each other. Simple facts about Whiterun. More than any other city in Skyrim, Whiterun is the least neutral, the citizenry is openly and roughly evenly divided by the conflict. If the War is an earthquake this is where the fault line is. Unless we assume that Balgruuf is an incompetent ruler ( and he isn't ) it is obvious to him that there is no possible way that this war comes to an end without Whiterun getting involved, he will never join the Stormcloaks, this is well known, he and Ulfric have an old grudge, that being said Ulfric does have the decency to let Balgruuf know what's coming. He may not do it in the most diplomatic way, but he does give Balgruuf both the knowledge that Whiterun is going to be attacked, and the option to surrender without bloodshed. Since Balgruuf is, and will always be, an Imperial he of course refuses and so the Battle which he could have avoided but chose not to happened. I just hope that no one makes an argument that Balgruuf wasn't an Imperial from the start, they can of course, but it's just laughable. A couple of facts to refute the claim that Balgruuf was ever neutral. 1) He refuses to allow Redguards hunting down a traitor who betrayed a city in Hammerfell to the Dominion into his city, and arrests at least one of them, yet he never bothers to investigate their claims, nor does he have a problem with -other- Redguards in his city, nor harboring the alleged traitor ( who turns out to be in fact a traitor, as evidence I present that if you turn her over you'll end up attacked by Dominion forces not long after ) 2) His First Councilor is an Imperial who doesn't even pretend to respect the Nordic traditions 3) He doesn't even bother to look into Battleborn oppression of the Greymane's. The Battleborn's knew and perhaps had a hand in turning over a citizen of his city to the Dominion to be tortured to death. Despite pleas from the Greymane's that he look into it, he refuses, so it's left to the Dragonborn to do so. Not taking a side there at all, you know, only representing and treating with respect the pro-Imperial faction. 4) Whether in Victory or Defeat, he never once puts his people before the desires of Imperial troops, whereas with his replacement his first thought is -always- for his people first and Skyrim second. Balgruuf is the complete opposite, putting the Empire first and his people second. No no, he's not an Imperial puppet. In some ways I'd say Balgruuf is the perfect Imperial, able to talk out of both sides of his mouth, give lip service to the " principles " of ruling without practicing any, cares more about his own wealth, power, and importance than the people he rules, and at the end of the day puts his own Pride before the good of his city. By Mede standards he'd make a good Emperor. All of this of course is just another way of saying he's a Politician that says whatever he needs to to stay in power, and then gets all snotty and bitter if it's taken from him. His replacer is a man who never sought power, and in fact attempted to remain anonymous inside of Whiterun itself ( it's very very easy to miss him unless you don't do the Companion quests ) and even when you do meet him you have to press him very hard to even get him to admit he's a Greymane. He's not devious at all, he all but has to be shoved into taking up the Jarldom of Whiterun. Not that any of the above matters, because like I said, this new breed of Pro-Imperials are much more interested in their emotionally invested opinions than any sort of logical progression of ideas, or facts of any kind. No matter how many times I say it, they don't listen, so I've more or less given up trying to reason with people who don't even understand what I'm saying. It's nice to see you again Stormcloak, and I like the new name. I would like to say that there are some things I have no listed in this post because they are responses I gave to people who messaged me in private, however if those people do indeed bring up a private message into public debate, I can copypasta. It hardly matters though, as I said before, the thing that unites this new front of Pro-Imperials is like a label on a dyslexic food product " fact-free "

" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="295"> And for you once again, maybe you'll get it this time

To My Imperial Friends on the other side of the aisle ">" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="295">

*facepalms* Facts: Britain sold out Czechoslovakia not Poland. It was because of Poland that the war started, because after giving away Alsace-Lorraine and Crechoslovakia, Britain had to draw the line somewhere, so no Britain didn't conceded Poland. That was Chamberlain's Government, not Churchill's. Churchill wanted the US to get involved, but if they didn't they would still have fought. If you read anything at all about Churchill I guarantee that as close as anyone can. Your knowledge of history is dismally depressing Here's a question for you just to see if you know: Who declared war on who? Germany on the USA or the USA on Germany? If you can get that one right without looking in the back of the book I'll have some hope I suppose. There is always a question of whether or not they would have lost, and maybe they would have, and your point would be? Actually I don't even want to know, I don't think I can keep up with the sheer number of inaccuracies and muddled arguments being presented. What I find amazing here is that the two of you are arguing with a retired Army Officer and a professional Historian on topics of Military strategy and History. I think I should take a break from commenting on this thread for awhile. I just want to leave with a few final things. 1) Anyone can message me privately to ask questions 2) Unless you've looked it up yourself, assume that Stormcloak81 doesn't have clue about what he's talking about, it's not an insult to call someone who's painfully ignorant, painfully ignorant. I truly am beginning to question why I'm putting myself through this at all, I can't even keep track of all the things that you've gotten wrong Stormcloak, it's literally astounding. If you were one of my students I would have failed you out on principle. The part about it all that truly distresses me isn't the errors in logic, the muddled thinking, the lack of responsiveness. I think it's that you feel the need to defend your ignorance. Why not actually learn something? Be an Imperial if you want, from my point of view you couldn't be more wrong but that's my opinion. Just don't be willfully ignorant, god my head hurts. I should never bring analogy into these discussions. I want bigmagy back, he at least knew what the hell I was talking about.

Parts of the Empire had been occupied though, specifically in the Far East, no Hitler didn't capture London but he tried. Hitler did occupy France and had the USSR on the ropes at the point that the British Empire resolved itself to fight to the last Hitler wasn't losing anywhere, it was winning on every front. However I do think you're missing the point, in one case an Empire in dire straights chose not to fight evil, in the other it did. Churchill said that they'd continue to fight even if the Islands themselves were occupied. They were prepared to go on fighting forever if necessary, they had courage and conviction. Things that the Empire did not have. It also misses the second point I was making. Do you think that a Churchillian British Empire, with King George on the Throne, would ever under any circumstance allow the Gestapo or the SS access to any part of their empire by treaty? Do you think they'd ever sign an agreement outlawing the religious practices of their citizens? At the time of the speech given in part below, Britain was outnumbered and outmatched in every possible way. Defeat seemed certain and still the people of Britain resolved themselves to fight to the last. The Empire failed the test of nations, and therefore has failed the right to exist by standards upon which people who judge history base the right of a nation to exist. A nation is not defined by what it stands for at it's best times, but at it's worst. At this Empire's worst it was defined by capitulation, betrayal, weakness, cowardice, and consorting with the worst sort of villains. As far as countries that had treaties with Hitler the biggest one I'd name is the USSR, which you listed before as part of Hitler's " two-front " war. At the time this speech was given, Hitler was nearly at the gates of Moscow and it looked as if the USSR itself would topple as well. Before Churchill, Hitler had signed several treaties with Britain ( always involving dismantling other countries without their consent ) however that's part of the point isn't it? All it took, the only difference, was the stance Britain made in the end. When a leader of conviction took the reigns. Under Chamberlain, who is Universally condemned by history, Britain was like the Empire in Skyrim. Under Churchill it wasn't. It's that simple to me, they had a choice, be like Chamberlain or be like Churchill and they decided to be like Chamberlain. If it was wrong when Chamberlain and worthy of universal condemnation then it's wrong when the Empire does it in TES: Skyrim. To defend the latter, is to defend the former, and I can't accept the idea of anyone defending the former. To do so will always lead to a fundamental and irreversible disagreement from me. It really is as simple as that for me. Even though large tracts of Europe and many old and famous States have fallen or may fall into the grip of the Gestapo and all the odious apparatus of Nazi rule, we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.”

He also slaughtered every single citizen of the city that so much as sold the Dominion troops a loaf of bread, including the entire High Elf population, whether they were guilty of anything or not. I'd also argue that signing the WGC behind the backs of the Redguards ( which gave away half their lands ) and the Nords ( which outlawed their religion ) especially after they had just helped him save his Empire was pretty shady. I did a comparison awhile back between what Titus Mede II did to a comparison of " What If " the British Empire had done so in World War 2. It looks pretty different if you were to put it in perspective of say. The British Government making a peace treaty with Hitler after Dunkirk that allows the SS access to Scotland to make sure that the Scots don't practice Scottish Presbyterianism and allows them to arrest any Scot that does without trial and killed. Then when the Scots rebel against this treaty the British Empire sends it's own Army into Scotland to enforce a treaty signed between themselves and Hitler. Doesn't sound quite as nice in that situation, and the players are all more or less the same as far it all goes. The Dominion is at least as bad as Nazi Germany, the British Empire defeat at Dunkirk was at least as great a Military Crisis as what faced the Empire after the Battle of the Red Ring, Scotland is more or less allegorically correct in it's positioning, size, and importance relative to the size of Cyrodil ( England ). In a real world situation I don't think I'd be on the side of a British Empire that thought that signing a treaty with Hitler and occupying Scotland is a good idea. By analogy I therefor don't think I'd be on the side of an Empire that would sign a treaty with the Dominion and occupy Skyrim. Analogy is always suspect, but I've analyzed this one and I'm having difficulty finding the flaws. If we today were looking back at the Second World War we'd despise a British Empire who had signed a treaty with Hitler, and we'd be right to do so. Instead of what Titus Mede did, they fortunately had Churchill ( and even King George ) who agreed that they would " Never Surrender " no matter the cost. That's more or less the bottom line for me. That's the short version in my opinion anyway.

*facepalms for a 3rd time* I was reffering in game. If you know a better adjective for people who suppress foreign races and execute civilians for simply not fighting for you, then I'll apologise to a fictional millitary group and call them that instead.Wow. Just Wow. Let's see. Every nation that's ever existed from the beginning of time including the US? The Irish Draft in the Civil War by the Union Leaps immediately to mind, Oh and Lincoln killing 20,000 New York civilians when they rebelled against the Draft, that seems like a suppression of foreign race. So you could call them Unionists I suppose. The Empire has done exactly that throughout it's History dozens of times over you could call them Imperials I suppose. There isn't a nation that's ever existed on the face of this earth that hasn't suppressed foreign races. From 1899-1902 the US killed as many as 1.5 million ​ Filipino's when they rebelled because they didn't want to be a part of our Empire. So you could call them Americans. You could add close to 20 million Native Americans to the list if you wanted. God knows how many Indians the British Killed. These are just things that have happened in the past 100-150 years. Just because you know of one group of people who are famously known for oppressing and executing civilians doesn't mean you get to just throw the word around when you don't understand it. Do you even know what a Fascist is I wonder. Here's a better word for you. Rascist; and guess what? You can't use that one either unless you're willing to call Imperials that too because they have been so at least 100 times worse since the existence of the Stormcloaks was started. See the Stormcloaks arose as a militia ordered by The Empire Titus Mede II, same Emperor in the game, in order to among other things to take back Makath. They then were charged with holding off the Dominion while the Empire stripped Skyrim of it's Legions to save Cyrodil. They did the same thing with Hammerfell. They left the Dunmer to the mercy of the Argonians, they left the Bosmer at the Mercy of the Dominion, they abandoned the Khajit completely. All to save their Imperial asses, and anywhere at all that people rebelled against them they killed them. Hell they were going to execute you for no particular reason aside from they found you walking alone in Skyrim trying to get to Cyrodil at the beginning of the game. Just Wow. So there, call Stormcloaks " Imperials of the Second Worst sort " which would actually be an accurate comparison, or come up with some other grievance against them. @StormHammer81 Pride is something to be earned from achievement, of which there has been none, rather there has been whining and false outrage and other things that people should be ashamed of, so if an Imperial wants to be proud they should definitely come up with something worth being proud about. @Mopar63 Well reasoned, though I still find the Empire as it sits today to be despicable from the point of view of my own particular values. I think that if you were to RP those particular races correctly that would be close to where you'd end up. I would think that the Bosmer would be more likely to go against the Empire because of the Imperial betrayal of Valenwood and the Dunmer more likely to go for the Empire because of the Nord blockade of Morrowind, but these are relatively minor considerations for those particular two races. The Bretons might sit back through the entire thing because if the war continues and neither side wins, the Thalmor win, and the Bretons ( the Forsworn particularly ) have been receiving weapons and supplies from the Thalmor. The Orcs might also lean towards the Empire because a Nord win in Skyrim would leave less need of Orcs as Mercenaries, since Skyrim is unlikely by culture to hire them, but the Empire isn't ( I can't picture the Nords, who think of themselves as great warriors with a lot of Pride stooping to hiring Orcs to fill out their ranks, the Imperials however have no such qualms ). An Argonian probably would lean pro-Empire just to keep the Dominion off balance so that the Argonians could continue their wars against the Dunmer and the Khajit would probably lean anti-Imperial if only because the Empire betrayed them when they asked for help during the Crisis of the Moon and the Empire refused to help them. Those are just little tiny RP considerations to make for those races. High Elves honestly to me are the wild card strangely enough. Why would a High Elf be in Skyrim? There is a huge number of possibilities there. Dominion Spy, Refugee, Renegade, Member of the Summerset Resistance ( can't remember what the name of them are now ). However because in Skyrim the Summerset Isles are the one's most shrouded in mystery of all the lands, it gives the most options for RP. Incidently Stormcloak81 I'm really sick of having to go back and reread your posts when you edit them after someone has responded to them. I hope when people read through these they go back and check the times and dates of when you edit your posts.

*facepalms again* I don't see any apologies for fascists, not that I expect any, because I understand the stupidity of the statement. Amazing to me that people consider " fascist " ( people who killed 6 million people ) is less evil a statement to make than " child raper ". If you're offended by child raper and not fascist I have no idea what's wrong with you, if it bothers you that much then you have my apology for making the comparison. However I think it's absolute idiocy that you're demanding an apology and not offering one, especially since apparently you can't understand why I said it in the first place. You don't understand oppression, you have once again you have not used the word in the correct definition. I'll rephrase " child raper " with " serial killer " or any other inflammatory phrase you want to use if you want, but frankly I don't think I owe you or anyone else an apology, since I didn't call you anything at all, and you have completely and totally missed the point. Your inability to understand that is beyond my ability to comprehend. Do you truly believe I literally called you, or anyone, a child raper? Really? Actually screw it, I can't talk to someone who simply is unable to understand anything I'm saying. You're unable to, completely unable, to follow what I'm saying so what's the point. Don't talk to me again, in fact don't talk period again, because I will show up to tell you that you're not making any sense whatsoever. My assumption I now consider fact. This is Gibbon vs. Voltaire, and has completely fallen into the lowest wastelands of the saddest excuse that the mass delusional call " debate ". This is like swatting a fly with a buick, and frankly isn't fun for me at all, it's quite disturbing. It was once mentioned by someone who was sponsored to attend a USO event in Afghanistan ( though not while in Afghanistan ) that a comparison could be made of the average person in the United States, and the Soldiers in Afghanistan this statement. " Why is this first group fighting to defend this second group "? The answer to that question is so that you can be free to make uninformed, anti-intellectual, redundant, ill-educated, and obtuse comments on internet chat forums. For that you are welcome. However it was also so that when I returned I could face down those people and call them out on those same properties. I feel I have done so with you. If you respond I will respond to you, however your constant and unrelenting inability to show any signs of talent to debate, fact, or even the basic understandings of Oratory or Rhetoric leaves me speechless in most respect. Frankly you scare me, and those like you scare me. This is no longer about Imperial vs Stormcloak, it left that behind apparently before it even began. As for people PMing you, I frankly would invite them to PM me and perhaps I can explain it to them privately. Why they would PM you asking for an explanation for what -I- said is baffling, but so be it. If they wish to learn why I said what I said, then I'll tell them. If they don't then it's their choice to remain ignorant. As for an apology, I will never apology for standing on principle, ever, for any reason, till the day I die. The fact you don't get that I'm standing on principle and not that I'm insulting you or anyone else by that statement ( What's wrong with you people? Seriously? Really? Especially when the next post down I explain it and mention I'd shoot a child raper in the head with no thought of consequence just on principle? Then go on to explain the reasoning for it all as if it wasn't obvious to begin with? Really? ) is truly your problem and frankly one that is a likely terminal blow to your ability to analyze the world around you for the rest of your life.

*facepalms* I'm not sure how to respond to this statement, I'm not even sure it's a full thought, I fear it... using the same sort of logic though I'll say The Imperials are the worst sort of child rapists P.S. It's Fascists It's called comparison by the absurd. See the part that says " using the same sort of logic "? I could make an argument that killing six million people by being a fascist is worse than being a child raper, which you will notice I'd murder without provocation, and admitted to it. The point was to say something inflammatory for the sake of being inflammatory to make the point that saying something inflammatory without point, comparison, argument, fact, figure, or even more than one sentence is inflammatory and is pointless in a debate, and what's more drags down the discourse to a play ground " he said she said " level of intellectual sewage. The point wasn't to call you guys child rapers, the point was to call the statement itself pointless, to say it achieved nothing other than to lower the intelligence level of the discourse into something akin to 4th graders. Now onto more absurdity So Imperials make mistakes like Mass Murder, Genocide, Regicide, Laws persecuting the rights of certain citizens and certain religious passages, pointless wars, cowardice, and the systematic economic ( both in material and personal ) pillaging of other nations? These aren't mistakes my friend, these are in fact what we would call War Crimes. This is Pol Pot level stuff. These aren't " mistakes ". These are things that any sane person, any person in their right mind, would go to war over, to the death. These are things I'd die to prevent, personally, in my own life. These are recorded, they are demonstrated, and they continue to this day in this " Empire " you serve. If you are ignorant of them, that's on you, if you agree with them then I couldn't disagree more. If you want to say that I called Imperials Child rapers in some sort of literal form, you have completely missed the point, and honestly the debate between us should cease because it's really starting to aggravate me. If you don't understand the most basic things I'm saying, then how am I supposed to make any point at all? Step up or Step aside because frankly I'm becoming frustrated with your inability to understand what I'm saying. You obviously do not know what oppression is, that's for certain based on your last sentence, I'm running out of options as to how the hell to have a debate with you Storm. I started out with respect towards you, and you know it, that's the part that's craziest to me. I was patient right up until now, I'm no longer patient because sometimes frankly if you do not see any way, any way at all of reaching a person and having a true exchange of ideas then what's the point? I have only two question left for you, and then I'll give you the only possible explanation that I must ask if the following two things are false. Question One: Are you below 9th grade? Question Two: Is English your first Language? If neither of those are true then I have to assume that it is simply a matter of the story of Gibbon vs. Voltaire