sukeban

Not gonna lie, bigmagy, I would have been 100% okay if Abe HAD let the South go its own way :-) But where is this proof about Ulfric's policies? We never really hear much about Ulfric really doing anything in terms of actual governance (which is one of my main critiques of the man), there just aren't enough lines for his character. He obviously neglects his duties as a Jarl, but we have no idea as to how things used to be before he ascended Ysgramor's throne. Joking aside, bigmagy, but there has been so much blood spilled in useless colonial wars through the ages, wouldn't all peoples have been so very much better off if the ascendant colonial powers of the time had just said "whatevz" and allowed their colonies to leave on their accord. So much animosity averted, so many lives saved. No Revolutionary War, no Simon Bolivar, no Mexican Revolution, no Philippines, no Sinn Fein, no Gandhi, no Algeria, no Vietnam, no Afghanistan, no ridiculous African conflagrations, no (or much reduced) problems in the Middle East. Remember the Canadian Revolution, you know, the great war where they defeated the English in order to gain their independence? Er, wait... that never happened. England just let them go, let them go free as an independent nation. Ditto for Aus, ditto for NZ. And you know how all of these countries vehemently hate England for letting them go... er, that never happened either. Sometimes states just have to know when to cash it in when it comes to territories that they cannot and should not seek to control. Self-determination is the right of all people, even in Tamriel.

@Calamachus Much sense in your words, for sure. I would just posit that it isn't Skyrim's responsibility to be Danny Glover to the Empire's Mel Gibson in terms of realizing their revenge in Lethal Weapon TES. Nothing is stopping the kingdoms of men from uniting as separate political entities to ravage the Thalmor. Skyrim being a province of the Empire is not a precondition for a successful military campaign against the Thalmor. Given the psychological import of nationalism, allowing free men to fight for their own homelands in a common cause seems the more potent method of defeating the Thalmor, taking RL history as a reference. Conscripted troops just don't put up the same quality of fight as free men fighting for their homelands. That the great historical empires have crumbled is testament to this fact. As an aside, I suppose I just don't see the institution of empire as being a desirable template for political organization, as by definition it presupposes the primacy of the original imperial peoples over all of their conquered territories. The Empire, even before the Oblivion Crisis, would have been like a dictatorial, dystopic United Nations, with one home province calling the shots for literally ever other province of Tamriel. Such an outcome is unnatural in the real world, and, I suppose, I find it unnatural even in a fictional world as well.

I think the reason zombies are popular is because zombies are, or at least they were when zombies were still new, supposed to be "us" or that they were created by us. The original Night of the Living Dead was some HEAVY social commentary about the civil rights movement and about the modern organization of society. Zombies are popular because they play upon realistic fears in industrial societies, i.e. technology, immoral scientists, apocalypse, etc. Zombies, as such, are far more "modern" than vampires or werewolves which are rooted in far older, primitive fears. But, actually on topic: I don't have beef with vampires and/or werewolves, and I think that Dawnguard looks pretty cool in a highly Van Helsing sort of way. If it were me making the DLC, however, I would have just added in short swords, spears, crossbows and built out the map toward either High Rock or Hammerfell. Then I'd have added in an epic Thalmor invasion of High Rock/Hammerfell and tasked the Dragonborn with destroying all Thalmor soldiers on mainland Tamriel. So I guess I view Dawnguard as cool but also sort of "...really?" in terms of what else they might have done. There just seem to be so many plot holes and obvious segues built into the Main Quest and CW in Skyrim, that they seem kind of hard to ignore. Dawnguard seems more like a distraction than an obvious subject for DLC.

1. I dusted off Oblivion and kept eavesdropping in the taverns: "I hear that Daedra worship is gaining popularity in the Summerset Isles... these are indeed troubled times in the land of the Altmer." I'm certainly no loremaster, but I wouldn't put it by the Thalmor to be in league with various Princes. 2.. TM2 surrendered because he was fooled and desperate. If memory serves me, the Battle of the Bulge was Hitler's last ditch attempt at ending WW2. His objective was to inflict a crippling blow on the Allied armies and then come to them with peace terms on equal footing. He knew that he wouldn't win the war at that point, but he gambled that one great victory might leave his regime intact and with Germany still holding some of its conquests. I imagine the Red Ring battle to be sort of like this, one last ditch attempt to achieve parity rather than victory. TM2 messed up in this because he achieved his objective (unlike Hitler), but failed to actually achieve peace on equal terms. 3. I don't even think that TM2 was that bad of a guy. All things considered, he did relatively well given the ridiculous 100X Pearl Harbor situation that was handed to him. As a warlord and general, his skills should not be questioned, but his shortcomings lie in political affairs. I give him credit for allowing Hammerfell to leave. He even allowed portions of his Legions to stay behind and fight with the Redguards in a guerrilla campaign against the Thalmor, inflicting damages on them indirectly. I just do not understand why he did not apply this same methodology to Skyrim. If he lets Skyrim go without bloodshed then the two states are easy allies. All Skyrim wants is self-determination; if self-determination were given by the Empire without violence, Skyrim would still view the Empire quite favorably for honoring their wishes. 4. Larger states don't automatically mean better states. Sometimes countries just become too large for all of their constituent peoples to live together in harmony, as it is difficult to align the interests of all peoples within one government. Look at any colonial empire, look at the USSR, heck, look at the United States. Fantasy empires present an idealist's view of people living together, when in reality, empires ruled by promoting one ethnic group's (the "home province") interests over those of all the rest. In the best case, that just means that peripheral regions are politically ignored, in the worst case it means that they are suppressed and mined for their resources and/or labor. The Empire wants gold/silver and soldiers from Skyrim. It obviously does not care about what Skyrim has to say about being ruled against its will, as a sort of general strip mine and military spawning pool for the Empire. That is not equality, but is exploitation and repression. In any colonial scenario there are always a few "upper class native" families/clans whatever that make friends with the colonists and use that position to become "king of the ant hill" over their longtime ethnic rivals. Colonists, if they know what they are doing, are only too happy to accept this assistance, as it gives them an "in" with the local population as well as deflects some of the negative externalities of their rule onto the collaborative local chiefs. This model fits Skyrim like a glove, with the Jarl of Solitude playing the "cooperative chieftain" that represses the outlying provinces in the name of the larger Imperial state. Other Jarls, bought with chests of Imperial gold, serve as the local "satraps" enforcing Imperial interests over those of their own local people. 5. Finally, how do you know that the condition of Windhelm has anything to do with Ulfric's policies (we do not even know what such "policies" you are talking about). We never saw Windhelm when it was ruled by Ulfric's father. From a lore perspective, it seems as though Windhelm (and the Eastern side of the map in general) has been deteriorating ever since Solitude seized political power after Ysgramor's royal line died out. I refer you again to the Washington DC subway system versus the BART system of the California Bay Area. Areas geographically closer to the seat of centralized government power WILL receive far more largesse from that government. This holds true also for the most "loyal" regions of the country, given a particular government. It is a fiction to think that all areas of a state receive equal resources from its central government. Resources are a means of ensuring control, and why, from a ruler's point of view, would you want to reward regions for anything other than eager submission? When the central government says "jump" local political bosses better say "how high?" as otherwise they are likely to miss out on the goodies. The Western holds of Skyrim have better infrastructure because for hundreds of years they have been only too enthusiastic to jump whenever Solitude demanded that they do so. Dispensing resources is not egalitarian or meritocratic, it is strictly "what have you done for me lately?" EDIT: 6. I think that Ulfric is obviously referring to taking the fight TO the Thalmor, not the any of the other Imperial (or former Imperial) provinces. He knows what the Thalmor are and what they want to do (he was their prisoner after all), and he is sick of watching the Empire sit on its hands and practice its whittling. Maybe he figures that if he is the one to strike the first blow for the human cause, that everybody else will be more or less forced to back him up. He knows that the Thalmor are only growing stronger and that it is unlikely that the Empire has any serious plans for attacking. He knows that there is a short "window of opportunity" to attack the Thalmor, and he doesn't want to waste it. As for HOW he would go about attacking the Thalmor... lol, I have no idea. I doubt he intends to send longboats to the Summerset Isles. Attacking Valenwood seems like the best course of action, but that is far, far from Skyrim. But who knows, maybe Ulfric intends to ally with the Redguards and set sail for Valenwood or the Isles from Hammerfell? Or else just march through Anvil and dare the Empire to stop them.

Barking up the wrong tree here if you think I'm defending the Legion. Not sure if that's meant just as a general polemic though? Probably the latter. In any case, you're undoubtedly right when you say that any movement has fringe elements as hangers-on among its supporters. That's probably inevitable for any cause once it grows large enough. That said, whilst it's not mandatory, it would be nice if more leaders distanced themselves from the more sketch voices in their crowd. It doesn't make them in agreement with those voices, but it does show a certain lack of resolve to confront them. To me, that reflects on character. But, of course, it would make Ulfric too easy of a CW choice if he went around saying 'Skyrim is big enough for us all, we only want the right to self-determination." If that were the case, you'd see something like 90/10 in favor of the Stormcloaks rather than the 50/50 that it is now. Crafty on Bethesda's part to spur discussion. And it goes both ways, of course. Tullius would do well to repect Nordic culture a bit more than he does, as well as tell his minions to be less surly to the local population. Tullius is an Imperial chauvinist, which is arguably worse than Ulfric's Nord chauvinism given that we are in Skyrim rather than Cyrodiil. I wouldn't get that mad to find a Chinese chauvinist in China, but the Chinese chauvinist becomes intolerable if he is attempting to peddle his views (or enforce them militarily!) in Japan. Ultimately, I believe in the Stormcloak cause more than I believe in Ulfric personally. Ulfric is a flawed vessel, but there aren't any other vessels readily available. It would be kind of an awesome Command & Conquer-style expansion if Ulfric turned against the Dragonborn (fearing our power) and framed us for treason against Skyrim. Then we could clear our name through valorous deeds before sweeping aside Ulfric and coming to rule Skyrim for ourselves.

My analogy would be this: Donald Trump is a fool who says that Obama's birth certificate is a fake and insinuates that he is actually a Kenyan. Donald Trump also supports Mitt Romney. Given that Donald Trump is a fool (something that I should hope we all agree on), it is good politics for Mitt Romney to distance himself from Donald Trump, lest other people begin to think that he agrees with him. By not denouncing Donald Trump, Mitt Romney is not saying the he agrees with Donald Trump, but he is making a political statement by holding back. Said political statement is that he is afraid of alienating those who do believe Donald Trump, and that he wants their support in the election. So then, whilst Mitt Romney might not believe what Donald Trump says about Obama's birth certificate, he desires the support of those who do. That doesn't make Mitt Romney a "birther," but it does make him a candidate that who accepts "birthers" within his ranks. Likely this does not reflect favorably on the man. For Ulfric, merely substitute "racism" for "birtherism." TLDR; Ulfric is not a racist himself by not denouncing some of the Windhelm Nords, but it does mean that he is okay with having racists among his supporters. We can judge for ourselves how important that is.

IMO, I think it would be monumentally neat if the next TES iteration did roll with some elements of procedurally-generated terrain to fill in some of the "gaps" between cities. I agree with the OP when he says that the scale of Skyrim feels a bit off. I also agree with the post about Solitude being 12 houses large. I really couldn't care less if Solitude required a couple of doors and loading screens (like the Imperial City in Oblivion) to walk through if that allowed the city to feel like a properly inhabited and powerful town. Procedurally-generated terrain would be AMAZING if placed (disclaimer: I know nothing of software engineering or programming) in certain cells between cities. Beth could spend time making "hand-placed" terrain near and around cities while relying on PG terrain for more outlying areas. We've come a long way since the days of Daggerfall; I'm sure that PG terrain could actually be very good now and would make the world feel FAR more expansive than it is when everything is hand-placed. Imagine it actually taking a couple of in-game days to get from Solitude to Markarth, imagine it taking an in-game week to get from Solitude to Whiterun. Perhaps a two-week journey to traverse the province from Solitude to Windhelm? You could maybe have clusters of PG cells surrounding hand-placed cells where dungeons would be found to heighten the sense of exploration. In vanilla Skyrim, it is almost laughable how few feet you have to travel between dungeons and locations; in some places they are almost stacked on top of one another. Rolling with PG would also give WAY more of a reason to hire a carriage or buy a horse and would jive perfectly with stated lore about Tamriel being a large continent that takes much time to travel in. How you work that out with PG LODs and all of that... I honestly don't know. But as computing tech continues its advance, I can't imagine that such a thing would remain as issue for long. Finally, how awesome would Skyrim's random encounters in PG terrain be? You could get lost, disoriented, actually have to use your compass or ask for directions because you honestly don't know the way. IMO, that would make for the best TES game ever!

I think that glass armor looks more like a "futuristic NFL uniform" than a space suit. My take is that if the unnecessary "fins" on the legs, arms, and helmet were taken off, then it would actually look really cool. Right now it just looks mad bulky like a heavy armor. And those pauldrons... ew. Ebony armor looks aight save for the fugly helmet. The pauldrons are a bit long for my liking, but they at least look at home on a heavy armor. The only thing that I think looks wack is when a hefty dude is wearing ebony (or glass) armor and they balloon out to fit his dimensions, kind of like a sausage about to burst its casing. Definitely not a flattering look. Huge chars should stick with Daedric, Orcish, and below. I think the biggest WTF about some of the Skyrim armors is, as had been said, that they look cartoonish or out of place given the setting. The armors in Oblivion all looked plausible given the game's setting. Generally speaking, I think that the simpler armors (Hide, Fur, Iron, Steel, Plate, etc.) look the best, both in terms of artistry (or fashion sense for the character) as well as believability given the setting.

@bigmagy Jarl B definitely does accept chests of Imperial gold, Stewart Avenicci himself says as much after you take over the city for the Stormcloaks. "I'm sure that all those chests of Imperial gold didn't hurt things either, eh?" is more or less exactly what he says. Jarl B doesn't deny it and just gets mad. Not his finest hour as a Jarl. But, don't get me wrong, Jarl B is probably my second favorite Jarl in Skyrim, second only to Idgrod Raven-Crone, the Jarl of Morthal. Truth be told though, nearly every Jarl in Skyrim is a tool in one way or another, so that's not really that high of praise. Jarl B does have the luxury of not having Thalmor patrols taking place within Whiterun city, a luxury that other Imperial Jarls do not seem to share. He is thus not experiencing the true consequences of being allied with the Empire. Perhaps if the Thalmor were to insist that they be allowed into Whiterun and then started purging Heimskr, the Grey-Manes, Jarl B's brother, etc. he might suddenly begin to see what Ulfric was talking about with respect to leaving the Empire. Jarl B is in a privileged position, but that position cannot possibly last forever (i.e. even with an Imperial CW victory). Sooner or later the Thalmor will want a tour of Dragonsreach and will have some interesting questions for his brother. Perhaps losing a blood relation will cause him to re-evaluate his decision to spurn Ulfric. Better yet, an Imperial victory means Thalmor purges in Dawnstar, Winterhold, Riften, and Windhelm. I am sure that all Nords in those cities would thank the Dovahkiin mightily. TLDR; You've got rose-colored glasses when you're looking at Jarl B. He is a good Jarl, for sure, but he's also really, really lucky. And any gambler will tell you that sooner or later your luck runs out. EDIT: bigmagy -- Just remember that you can't take "The Bear of Markarth" as the gospel truth of the situation. It was written by an Imperial and is definitely pushing a certain (anti-Stormcloak) agenda. It is not an un-biased source. It might contain some factual material, but I would trust it about as much as I would trust "Nords Arise!" or "The Talos Mistake." Always take your sources with a grain of salt.

@Archone There definitely won't be a forthcoming example of Ulfric putting that wack, racist, hobo Nord in his place, simply because said example does not exist. Ulfric is demonstrably more of a "Skyrim for the Nords" type of hombre, but, as a Nord leader in the homeland of the Nords, his attitude toward the other races really isn't that difficult to comprehend. I'm definitely not attempting to say that Ulfric is right in turning a skeptical eye toward the other races, but rather that you see this same sort of pattern even (especially?) in our modern world, even in mature, Western democracies. Really, it happens anywhere different cultures are thrown together within the confines of the same nation state, the same broader society, likely for humanitarian or (more likely) economic reasons. Witness France and its regard for Algerian immigrants. Witness Germany with its Turks. Witness Sweden and Norway with their Iranians. Witness the United States with Mexicans, Great Britain with Indians and sundry other Middle Eastern peoples. Witness Japan with... historically anybody non-Japanese. Witness China with Africans. Witness Gulf Arab states with Indians or those from poorer Middle Eastern nations. Witness Russia with... anybody non-Russian. Point being that when very much different populations are thrown together, over time hostility and resentment does tend to build, especially when the economy turns sour and/or there's a war on (questioning the loyalty of the non-natives). It is therefore easy to be a "racism grand-stander" from the perspective of a nation with very low net immigration or exposure to other cultures (Korea, Luxembourg, Finland, Denmark, etc.), as you are commenting on an issue that you have never really had to deal with. I would venture that Ulfric is really the only Jarl that has to even deal with "immigration" (defined really as beast race or Elven) on a wide-scale. Certainly Solitude is about the most homogeneous population out of any of the major towns in Skyrim. Who is to say what would happen in Solitude if suddenly half of its inhabitants became Dunmer or Argonian. Would the Nords of Solitude welcome them with open arms or... as is more likely, view them as a threat to their way of life, their traditions, and to their economic station? I think the latter scenario is FAR more likely, given what we know of human nature. Really, the entire Stormcloak side of the map is far more racially diverse than the Imperial side. Riften has a huge population of Elves and Argonians, Winterhold has the college. True, Dawnstar has but its one lonely Elven court mage. However, I think there are more Elves and beastfolk is Windhelm than there are in the entire Imperial side of the map, making the Imperial side about the equivalent of Korea commenting on race relations in the United States, aka swimming in waters that they know beyond nothing about. Which is not to say that Ulfric's position is correct or anything like that. Rather, I'm just trying to apply the real world to Tamriel. Most nations like/can accept token "cute" minorities (interesting "other people" found in small numbers), but when those minorities begin to enlarge and threaten the preexisting ethnic majority's perceived grip on political and/or economic power... that's when issues begin to arise. Solitude does not have that "problem." Windhelm does. Solitude can talk whatever noise it wants to, but until Solitude is 60% Dunmer + Argonian, I don't really know how much attention we really need to pay their policy proscriptions for racial harmony. TLDR; Ulfric needs to lighten up and get down with some Rodney King "Can't we all just get along." At the same time, I ain't brookin' no high and mighty Imperial jive about about race relations in Windhelm, as it is fundamentally an issue that they have never had to grapple with directly.

@bigmagy Bwaha. I actually loll'd pretty hard at that :-) Good old magz coming with that levity. I'm down with it. I'd just say that I probably wouldn't accept your challenge if I knew you were packing an RPG and all I had was a stick. I'd probably just say "Damn, I wish I'd planned for this in advance" and start packing up my things (AND! my fine wife). I'm not fool, yo. Death before dishonor... yadda yadda no thanks... where's the door? When you meet up with Torygg in Sovngarde he straight up tells you essentially, "Yeah, I knew I was going to die, but eyy" so he knew what he was getting himself into. I'd also say, on a more serious note, that just like how something being a Law doesn't inherently make it morally correct, neither does a head of state lay any sort of claim to moral authority or legitimacy simply because he is the head of state. I forget which one, but that is definitely a logical fallacy of the highest order. A tautology at the very least. Nowadays, heads of state are supposed to derive their legitimacy from the fact that they were elected by the people, but in Skyrim they are supposed to gain their legitimacy from either a) their military prowess or b) their election by an independent (meaning in Skyrim's best interests and no one else's) Moot. Rulers may then maintain this legitimacy if they do not act against the interests of Skyrim's citizens or grossly violate established customs and traditions. Reasonable men and women may differ as to where Torygg rated on this, but it is my belief that Torygg (and his father before him) was indeed placing the interests of a foreign power over the interests of Skyrim's citizens, i.e. continuing to tow the line regarding the ban on Talos worship. I also believe that every man should have a chance to change his mind, however, which is why I think that it so shady that Ulfric did not even bother to ask Torygg for his support. Had Ulfric asked him to secede and he had refused, then... I think that he would have been fair game for overthrow. Certainly I think that weak-sauce Elisif is fair game for being deposed. Really, what I would have liked to see would have been this: a) Ulfric askes Torygg to secede, b) Torygg accepts Ulfric's offer and notifies the Empire of Skyrim's wish to become indepdent, c) rather than sending in the Legion, Titus Mede II just says "whatevs" and lets Skyrim go its own way, wishing to not waste troops trying to reconquer it and desiring good relations with the newly independent state, and d) all sides (Hammerfell, Skyrim, Empire) agree to synchronize their efforts in planning for the final war with the Thalmor. In truth, all sides share blame in the Civil War. IMO, the Empire should have just washed its hands of Skyrim after Torygg, letting it go the way of Hammerfell. If they did this, there would be no reason to think that an independent Skyrim would be hostile to the Empire (no war, remember). Quite the opposite, in fact, as I would imagine that an independent Skyrim would have been only too happy to lend its support to any and all efforts intended to weaken the Thalmor and prepare for the war. In this way, both sides could have got what they wanted, with Skyrim able to freely worship Talos again and beginning to arm for war and with the Empire not wasting troops in Skyrim and instead plotting along with its ally (Skyrim) about the final downfall of the Thalmor. In would have been win-win, but alas... Bethesda had other ideas keke. EDIT: You can't really use the cities as that compelling of an example of Imperial vs. Stormcloak rule. Soltidue may be nice but remember... it's also been the seat of government for how many hundreds of years? Just look at the nice infrastructure of Washington DC vs. Compton; he who has the most political sway gets the most resources to make their city awesome. By selling out to the Empire for hundreds of years, Solitude has reaped much in the way of Imperial largesse. Windhelm is a dump for sure. Bigmagy, you and I went back and forth over this one forever, so I don't want to revisit it again. Ulfric could improve his governning ability quite a bit, no questions about it. Winterhold... you can't really hold that against Ulfric. That is like some seriously wrath of god type shizz. Riften is a bad city mostly due to the Thieves Guild and Maven Black-Briar who is... a great friend of the Imperials! How about that? I'm sure that Rfiten will get a whole lot less crime-ridden after she becomes Jarl *rolls eyes* Finally, Dawnstar is actually a pretty okay town, my favorite (with mods) actually. It's sleepy, but so is Morthal and Falkreath. Markarth is NOT an example of good Imperial governance, but again, we've been there before, you and I. Really, the Empire has Whiterun (Jarl B is indeed a good man, even though he is bribed by the Imperials with chests of gold) as the "feather in its cap." But Whiterun also doesn't allow Thalmor agents inside its walls (Heimskr is still alive) nor does it allow in Legion troops. So it is only *sort of* an Imperial city. When you ask Gerdur or Advar about it, they say that "he hasn't chosen one side or the other." So that is really only a partial victory for the trope of "superior Imperial governance."

Lol, this topic is awesome. I would probably say Imperial. IRL Lincoln was mad tall, but I don't really see him as a Nord. And he's definitely not a Redguard. He could be a Breton, but I imagine Lincoln to be more of a warrior rather than a magic user. I guess it would depend on the direction that you wanted to take him in. Imperials are good at Restoration magic, which is great against undead and would fit the movie perfectly. They are also good at Speechcraft, which would synch with his reputation as a fantastic orator. This type of a character would probably be more in the archetype of the paladin, wielding Restoration magic and carrying a sword to smite the undead. I could definitely see this sort of a character joining up with the Dawnguard. But I could see a sort of Crossbowman and magic Breton Lincoln, even though he would be pretty short. Bretons are probably the most naturally intelligent of all the human races, a trait I think would go well with a Lincoln character. But they are physically rather weak and trend toward Conjuration magic, which would be a big no-no if you were to take the movie at its word (Lincoln versus the undead). I could maybe see Lincoln conjuration atronachs, but I could never see him as a necromancer. Maybe if they introduce "Bound Crossbow!" Of course, you could cross the two: make an Imperial Lincoln that wielded Restoration magic and a crossbow. That might be the closest that we can get and actually also sounds really fun to play. Maybe I too will adopt a Lincoln character :-)

@bigmagy -- Hell again, old friend :-) @thread -- We probs don't need to rehash all those long-dead threads about Empire vs. Stormcloak. By now, people tend to see it one way or the other and that's just kinda the way things are. Not really much mind-changing to be had about the subject. That said, we should probably all agree that those inhabiting the courts of Windhelm and Solitude definitely are not unbiased sources of information. I would trust Elisif to be unbiased in her statements about as much as I would trust Galmar. To a lesser extent, this applies to most NPCs in Skyrim or at least any of the Jarls and/or prominent families concerned with political affairs. It's just the nature of historiography, evaluate (and be skeptical of) your sources. Most everybody is biased in some way or another, especially about polarizing issues such as the Civil War. We do know that Torygg and Elisif continued to worship Talos in secret, sharing the practice of many Nords in Skyrim. Sybille (probably the least biased source in the Blue Palace) tells us that Torygg respected Ulfric and might have tossed in his lot with him in declaring Skyrim's independence. Obviously, Torygg's hypothetical answer is completely unknowable to us, which is the main problem here, IMO. It is my personal critique with Ulfric that he challenged Torygg without bothering to here his answer, making me believe that Ulfric probably didn't care what it was, that he was there to kill him anyway. (Indeed, had Torygg assented to independence, that might have been highly problematic for Ulfric if gaining the title of High King was his overriding goal; much easier to just kill him and assume that he wouldn't have.) The duel was, IMO, totally legit and legal. Bigmagy, just because something is law doesn't mean that it is right or just. Being law =/= morally correct. Sometimes this is good (not forcing everyone to obey one, potentially narrow, understanding of morality) and sometimes this is bad (when Justice writ large is thwarted by a corrupt, ignorant or self-serving law). But something being Law definitely does not make it inherently right nor make people morally obligated to obey it (American Civil Rights movement). Tyrants and dictators make all sorts of pretty laws, but that does not make any of them morally correct. Laws only mean something if a) they adhere to a common morality that people will not willingly violate and/or b) there is the proper force of arms arrayed to enforce it. In many/most cases, this takes the form of the police force/judiciary and military. The there's the bit about Imperialism. Reasonable people can differ on when native practices range from "okay, but different" (from the perspective of the potential Imperialist) to "savage." Perhaps if ancient Skyrim custom espoused cannibalism or slavery we might be able to argue that the Imperial Legion was saving Skyrim from its own savage, backward ways (Morrowind *cough cough), but resolving leadership disputes through an honorable duel, IMO, definitely does not meet the criteria for being "savage." Furthermore, using the Thu'um, IMO, doesn't constitute a breach of duel etiquette. Torygg accepted the duel knowing full well that Ulfric had knowledge of The Voice. That he would use it seems to me to be a logical extension of his training as a warrior. The Voice is just another weapon at the disposal of a Nord. The High Kings of Skyrim would have done well to learn it for themselves to defend against just such a situation. Ulfric was the superior warrior, with superior training and ability, and he won the duel. The only way that one could understand Torygg's death to be immoral (i.e. murder) would be if they recognized the moral legitimacy of Imperial Law to trump Nordic custom, an understanding that I do not share. Dueling is not barbaric and was not being superseded by more morally correct set of laws. Imperial Law only forbade dueling because it posed a threat to their power ruling Skyrim. They sought to make their High Kings unassailable, by buying off the Jarls voting in the Moot and by outlawing the only other option left to those seeking to challenge the High King -- the duel. That they succeeded in trumping local custom testifies not to their superior moral or legal code but instead to their at-one-time superior force of arms (though perhaps, if you squinted, you could kind of see this as sort of a duel in and of itself baha). MacSuibhne -- I'm not actually sure when the Thalmor appeared as they are presented in-game. I always had the feeling that they were there only in the post-Torygg Skyrim, that they were sent there to ensure compliance with anti-Talos policies in Imperial lands in the aftermath of Torygg's slaying. I don't believe that they were there before the duel (which is why people generally say that in the pre-duel era worshiping Talos on the downlow really wasn't that big of a deal). Presumably, worshiping Talos is much more difficult now (in Imperial lands), since the Thalmor are freaking everywhere. This isn't 100% fact or anything, just the inkling that I get from NPCs. If this were the case though, Torygg wouldn't have been in league with the Jusiciars, as the Justiciars weren't there until after he was dead. Elisif and Tullius (especially Tullius), on the other hand....

As we can't exactly ask him about the matter, I would say that neither of you (nor I, for that matter) could have known what Torygg might have said re: Ulfric's request to secede. Sure, Torygg had hitherto been nothing if not an Imperial toady, but hey, if he truly did count Ulfric as a friend or viewed him as some sort of an elder statesman sort of figure, who is to say what he might have done? By all accounts Ulfric enters the Blue Palace on routine business, as a friend to the High King. His challenge is viewed as a surprise and preemptive of further discussion. I would submit that Ulfric should have at least asked Torygg to go along with him before he issued his challenge. That he did otherwise absolutely betrays his consuming desire to become High King himself, a goal that he places over his professed objective of freeing Skyrim. I'm also pretty sure that Torygg was totally not High King at the time of the Markarth Incident. Just sayin. In-game, he is referenced as being "just a boy." The Incident was 25 years ago. I'm going to go ahead and say that Torygg's father was in charge then. The Moot was formed after some bitter civil war in Skyrim's ancient times to resolve the question of legitimacy for Skyrim's rulers. In the old, bloodstained times, yes, the High King was nothing but a glorified warlord, able to rule only so long as he could defend his claim through his personal force of arms. Then there was that devastating civil war and the all the jarls decided, essentially, that enough was enough. So the Moot was established precisely as a sort of electoral college for choosing Skyrim's High King. I'm pretty sure that the practice of dueling was still allowed, but that it was curtailed heavily because Jarls had less of a cause to be disgruntled with the choice of High King, as they themselves elected him. The Moot seems like a fine insitution and it probs saved Skyrim much bloodshed over the years. The problem with the Moot came with the advent of the Empire and how it undermined the Moot's authority to actually independently choose the High King. Imperial coins flooded into the coffers of their "client Jarls" (like Balgruuf), effectively "buying" their vote in the Moot for their hand-picked candidate for High King (historically the Jarl of Solitude). In this way did the Moot become an instrument for enforcing the Imperial agenda in Skyrim and guaranteeing submissive High Kings and Jarls. But it did not begin as this way. Imperial law seems to have "outlawed" the practice of duels after it absorbed Skyrim. This, I would venture, was an attempt to solidify their control over the province, as all of their hard-bought work might have been undone had some principled Jarl come along to militarily challenge their handpicked, submissive High King. Imperial law then trumped local Nordic custom, not for purposes of "civilization," but for the purpose of guaranteeing the reign of their candidates even if they were domestically unpopular.

@Relativelybest I think that yours is an eminently fair-minded and accurate description of the situation. I'd agree with you on most of your points made, but would perhaps emphasize a few of them slightly differently. I'd agree with you that the Concordat signing is, at the time of Skyrim, water under the bridge. There is the argument to be made that both sides were equally exhausted after Titus Mede's epic counter-attack to end the Great war, and that they could/should have signed a treaty on even footing, but... that was thirty years ago and all those actors are dead. Can't hold anybody alive in Skyrim responsible for any of that. My nominal siding with the Stormcloaks stems more or less from my dislike of Elisif and the whole notion of Skyrim being a "client state" of the Empire, with no actual input into its own internal affairs due to the fact that its leaders are/were bought-aid-paid-for Imperial lackeys. You can see this at various times as you interact with her, especially in the Potema cave quest, that she is quite obviously in way over her depth being Jarl/potential High Queen, yet her attitude to govern is so entitled, that she has really done something or earned the position somehow, that somehow she is more qualified to rule than any other geek on the street. What Skyrim precisely doesn't need, with the Thalmor threat looming on the horizon, is a weak Jarl who flip-flops in the breeze of insider opinion as though she were a kite on a tether. Then there is also Ulfric's duel to think about. In ancient Skyrim custom, Ulfric's actions entirely legal and, likely in the eyes of Ysgramor, honorable. Torygg accepted Ulfric's challenge as an equal, a brave, if foolish act that I respect Torygg for. Had he refused, Ulfric would have been within his rights to convene the Moot and call for a new election of High King. So Torygg, seeking to preserve his throne, accepted the challenge. I suppose it comes down to one's opinion on the use of the Th'uum (sp) in combat as to whether or not you think the duel was conducted fairly. I would say this though, that The Voice was, from the very beginning (cut-scenes on top of the Throat of the World) a weapon of the Nords to wield against their enemies. They used it against the dragons and they used it against the Dunmer. It wasn't until after they were defeated by the Dunmer that that Jurgen Wind-Caller started up what amounts to his cult up at High Hrothgar. In my eyes, the Greybeards are the exception rather than the rule. Ulfric was not bound to follow their prescriptions. He had an additional tool to use in battle with Torygg. This was not exactly a secret to Torygg, as Ulfric was already famous for the Markarth Incident where he "shouted the Forsworn from the walls." In my eyes then, his slaying of Torygg was not anything approaching murder, but an honorable challenge, in the Old Way, of a weak High King. Skyrim is not the only Imperial province to allow duels to the death either, as they are mentioned in several in-game books and, in Morrowind, one of the larger quest chains ends in such a duel. I think that you are right about the calculated nature of Ulfric's challenge, that he had every intention of killing the Torygg rather than attempting to persuade him to join his side. That, I can't back Ulfric on, as I think it clearly displays his ambitions to become the ruler of Skyrim, with Skyrim's liberation being but a convenient coincidental outcome or the means to Ulfric's desired end. Which is why I agree in principle with the Stormcloak's desire for self-rule, but have great reservations about Ulfric as a leader. IMO, if Ulfric were a true Skyrim patriot, he would have asked Torygg for his aid in a) first issuing a proclamation to the Empire that they would no longer be respecting the Concordat and would worship Talos openly again, and b) if that was met with Imperial hostility, that they would fight the Empire as a unified province, with Torygg as High King and Ulfric as some sort of Chief Adviser and High Warlord. It is even stated in-game that Torygg greatly respected Ulfric and that they were friends, that Torygg likely would have gone along with Ulfric had he but asked him to do so. Torygg, as you point out, also secretly worshipped Talos, making him a natural ally. This failure to even ask is, in my estimation, the greatest outrage of the Civil War. Had Ulfric done so and had Torygg agreed with him, so many lives might have been saved. But, as you say, Ulfric had ulterior motives and is ambitious, ruthless, and conniving. Which is why I hold that the Stormcloak cause is true, but with enormous reservations about its leader.

Does Ralof specify the Eastmarch border? I only remember him saying "crossing the border," but I could be wrong. There is also the dialogue with Ralof (never escaped with Hadvar) where you say "Who's Ulfric Stormcloak?" and he says something like "What, certainly they have heard about Ulfric even down in Cyrodiil!" But yeah, this question bugged me for quite a bit. No matter how you slice it, the Imperial ambush took place well inside Stormcloak territory... talk about Special Ops. Looking at a map, I just sort of imagined that the PC transited the Cyrodiil border, likely from the near-Riften gate. From there, they probably followed the road south from Riften until they more or less hit DC. In the intro sequence, you're definitely on the DC --> Ivarstead --> Helgen road, even though you're only shown from about the Clavicus Vile cave area. Or they just messed up and recorded the dialogue, subsequently changed the intro, and then couldn't get the voice actors back to record the new scenario. Looking at the map again, there are Imperial field camps near where there opening cut scene starts as well as more or less on the Morrowind border in Eastmarch. Perhaps the ambush troops were supposed to have come from either of these places?

There's also heaps of burning things and rubble laying about in at least two cities (Whiterun + Solitude/Windhelm). Poor Heimskr's house gets destroyed :D Pretty sure you also get bad-mouthed in Solitude if you finish as a Stormcloak. And you can find all of the deposed Jarls in the basement of either Solitude or Windhelm. Needless to say, they're no longer fond of you. Some NPCs in Whiterun have new dialogue after the siege. You cannot complete a certain "peace deal" quest if one side holds only their capital province or has been eliminated. Nothing gameplay-wise really "changes" though. Most/all NPCs still make asinine comments about how the war is still going on :-( The Thalmor embassy still continues on as if they're still welcome, even if the Stormcloaks win. Argonians still live outside of Windhelm even if Imperials win. Technically, you are told to "hunt down the remainders" of the enemy army, but their commanders are Essential are cannot be killed. Eventually, the camps all respawn. There's probably more, but as you can see, it's likely to be underwhelming.

Word to this. All I'm saying is would it REALLY have been such a hard thing to just have had these NPCs posted up in a location and your talking to them activates an option to begin the quest? You know, like in many of the past ES games. What is a Vigillant of Stendarr doing standing in front of a random building in Markarth? I don't know, maybe I'll ask him.... That would be such a vast improvement over the "Arnold hunted by the Predator" experience I also have whenever I enter Riften or Markarth for the first time. Does Beth really think that players are so thick that they cannot be trusted to start quests for themselves? You hear over and over again about Riften is home to the Thieves Guild, how about going there and asking around town, eventually NPCs will direct you to "that shady guy selling god knows what in the marketplace." Then you ask Brynjolf about the Guild. Bingo bango, problem solved for all sides. Ditto for essential NPCs. For real, if you run around just going all Slayer "Reign in Blood" style in towns you are deserving of borking your own game out of sheer stupidity. Either that or you are role-playing a sociopath, which is fine, but don't expect to receive quests from the dead (and if you are a sociopath, why are you even doing quests?). I don't really care if it is bundled into a quest or not, but... I would have really liked to kill Maven Black-Briar in vanilla. Obviously, based on what you learn in Riften, this SHOULD get you thrown out of the Thieves Guild, make you persona non grata in Riften, have you hunted down by her thugs, etc. This is an example of an organic world in whcih what you do actually makes a difference and you, as a player, are responsible for your own actions. There certainly are quests with some minimal degree of choice, but in terms of in-game consequences (negative or positive) and recognition of choices made, these choices are very small. And a lot of this is just counter-intuitive and, IMO, just lazy game design. Taking the CW as a shining example, why am I even allowed in Solitude if I am an avowed member of the Stormcloaks? Shouldn't they bar me at the gates, suspecting that I am there for spying, warfare or assassination? You can betray your original CW choice by taking the Crown of Thorns or whatever to the opposing faction, shouldn't this permanently destroy your relationship with your original CW choice? Instead, it just resets their dialogue to what it was before you joined *facepalm* It would have been nice and excellent game design to a) give you an in-game "incentive" to join a CW faction (perks, gear, disposition, whatever) and then b) after you make your choice, have the other side hate you, increasingly so as you progress with the war. The only way to revisit enemy cities would be to take them for your CW side. That, more than anything else, would give the otherwise copy-paste CW storyline some gravity and would imbue it with more than superficial and illogical choice. TLDR; I just think that Beth needs to give us players a bit more credit when it comes to playing their game. We don't need our hands held and forcibly marched into every quest line. We can take responsibility for our own in-game actions, AND, beyond that, rather than wanting fewer consequences for our actions, really, we want MORE.

Do you feel like vanilla Skyrim is balanced? If so, why? If not, why? What do you think is the most unbalanced aspect of the game? Personally, I feel like Skyrim is heavily imbalanced compared with other RPGs/previous ES games. Characters fly through the first twenty or so levels in no time flat and leveled gear saps most of the thrill out of exploring as a bandit chest = a Dwarven chest = a Falmer chest = a Jarl's chest, etc. Crafting, as people have said a zillion times before, is rather exploitable in vanilla, allowing the player to smith godlike weapons/armors out of even the wackest of base equipment (iron weapons/hide armor, etc.). These factors combine to create bland gameplay that, in my games, leads to a quick retirement for that character. Or at least it used to. Before I began modding, I'd severely self-nerf my characters in order to avoid careening into inevitable dissatisfaction. Now, in an RPG, difficulty is far from everything, but it is still very important. I mean, without any sort of meaningful difficulty gradient, what incentive does the player really have to search out better loot or to improve upon their skills? There's only so long that a player can keep their mind occupied by nice graphics before they ask themselves why their gameplay experience is so shallow. This sort of answers my own question, which is that I think that the loot in Skyrim is the most egregious offender in terms of generating a "whatevs" relationship with dungeon-diving. Given that all loot is more or less the same for your level, why press yourself and loot a difficult dungeon? Wouldn't a far better way to handle this have been to keep certain dungeons "hard" and effectively closed to the player until he/she is strong enough to survive them? Then you could stash all manner of unique loot in them and really give some meaning to exploration and questing. But I'm not really trying to rant here. Instead, I am interested in finding out what people think leads to a good, well-balanced game. Because well-balanced games are fun, and a fun game means loads of replay-value.

Hey Hangman, I have to say, this looks really nice! Way better than vanilla glass! Wasn't quite what I expected though, as isn't obsidian technically black? I could swear I have an obsidian arrowhead lying around somewhere and it is definitely black glass. But, I'm no geologist, so maybe it can be many colors. As far as down the road plans, I can only advance my secret agenda (or at least it would be if I were any good at 3d :D ). Said secret agenda is to envision glass armor without the ridiculous fins on the legs and helm, also without the football- (American) style pauldrons. Imagine it, a sleek, streamlined glass armor mesh that no longer looked like a borderline heavy armor or Power Ranger. The rest of the mesh is really nice, but these fins really throw the look off, at least IMO. Anyway, I mention it in case you might want to work with the meshes for one of your racial variants. Keep up the great work in the meantime!

I'm no loremaster, so I can't truthfully say otherwise. I guess I just don't want Daedric to be the best because in Skyim Daedric weapons/armor look straight out of a 90's GWAR video, which is to say really, really cheesy (sans Daedric warhammer, that thing is divine). Behold: http://www.fearnet.com/fearnetImages/imabfaaakd9qYzJzb12C1rJ6xg==.jpg http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/500/55177989/GWAR.jpg http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20111117020422/elderscrolls/images/d/dd/Skyrim_Daedric_Armour.jpg Bwahahaha

I'll definitely agree with the above. In truth, I wish that all weapons were knocked down about five points of damage and smithing nerfed into the ground (which, not to be coy, I've long since made a mod for mwaha), so I would opt for a dragon materials ruling the DPS roost, but far, far from being godly. Truth be told, I like the design of basic iron weapons the most and use them for any warrior-type character. For the same reason, I prefer iron armor (minus the helm...). Less fantastical/cartoonish >> por vida.

Hmm. Do you know for sure that they can't get diseases? I ask because the "infected" (that little spiral of sparkles) animation definitely DOES play on a follower when they are struck by a disease-carrier and the disease chance procs. This is most evident when battling wolves at low levels. I don't know if this actually changes their stats (gives them Rockjoint) as I've never tried to console their damagemult afterward. I do command them to use shrines though, just in case. Anyway, the disease CAN definitely proc on them, the question is: does it do anything?

I've never really been able to decide which weapons I like the least aesthetically: Elven, Glass (those cartoon swords) or Ebony. (Probably Elven, none of those weapons look good.) Dwarven definitely gets the nod for best-looking. As far as ebony goes, the swords look wack, but everything else is pretty nice. I just wish that the Skyrim models looked like the those in Weapons of the Third Era. Ebony battleaxes are awesome, however. In all honesty, I think Beth should just kick that modder KTA some serious septims for his mod and call it a day. I doubt anything that Beth can do will look better than those. Stat-wise, I have to disagree. I think that Dragonbone weapons should be better than Daedric because they are made out of the very bones of immortal, demi-godlike beings. Sure, Daedra are also immortal, but I think that a dragon's bone would do more damage than an ingot of ebony + a flunky Daedra heart. Artifacts should always be the most powerful, sure, but run-of-the-mill Daedric equipment isn't crafted by Daedric Princes. I would agree with Daedric equipment taking better enchantments, however. Btw, I too think that Daedric should only be able to be crafted at night, etc.

Hey guys. I'm already in deep with current mods, but I just thought of this and wanted to share it. You know how alchemy is boring after you discovered (or worse yet, just looked up) all of the alchemy ingredients' combinations in your first play-through as a thief? Well, I think this is boring, and it completely eliminates the usefulness of both of those perks related to discovering what ingredients do. Well, my request/idea is for a mod that scrambles all of the known alchemical effects upon each new roll of a character, allowing the player to re-discover what each ingredient does in every play-through rather than rely on internet guides or rote memory. It would make playing as an alchemist WAY more fun if you had to "learn" the craft anew for each character. In any case, what do you guys think?