BrettM

I agree. Looking at the capabilities of the Atmoran colonists -- the ability to construct places like Saarthal and Labyrinthian -- there must be some amazing sights in their original home. I'd like to see it.

ROTFL. So, which is it? Am I a leftist piece of trash or a reactionary neo-con? I must be doing something right if I'm accused of both for the same view. I'll give you a hint: the true answer is neither, and I am against welfare states whether they come from left-wing socialists or right-wing socialists.

I would say the second of these is the case. Even Ulfric says that it wouldn't be proper for him to just proclaim himself High King, but that tradition requires the Moot to give him the title. The duel wasn't about directly earning the throne, but about throwing the throne into contention and forcing the calling of a Moot to decide the issue. This was only possible, as near as I can tell, because Torygg did not have a direct heir. If he had, then his death would have placed that heir on the throne according to the law of succession established by the Pact of Chieftains. I don't think it would have mattered if Ulfric killed him or if he fell down the stairs while drunk, no Moot could have been called as long as a direct heir existed. Without a direct heir, however, a challenge would open the throne to all claimants regardless of whether Torygg lost or whether he refused the challenge. Torygg was screwed either way, and his only hope of keeping the throne was to kill Ulfric once the challenge had been issued. However, if a Moot had been called immediately after Torygg's death, it would have almost certainly honored Elisif's claim to being the heir by marriage. Ulfric's strategy was to delay the calling of the Moot he had forced until he had enough jarls backing him to be assured of being named High King. (I'm almost certain Ulfric or Galmar have some dialog explaining this if you join the Stormcloak side, but I don't have a transcript handy.)

Sarcasm doesn't deny the truth of anything. If you think it does, then you do not understand what sarcasm is. Yes, I did use sarcasm to make the point that Torygg had nothing to do with inviting the Dunmer to Skyrim, and I pointed it out myself. How did that deny any truth? I also used a little reductio ad absurdum to point out that you were suggesting that Ulfric start to implement a welfare state. Again, that does not deny any truth or twist any arguments. You ARE advocating steps that are part of a welfare nanny state, though not to the extent that many countries in our world are currently suffering under, whether you're willing to admit it or not. This is something that is simply unreasonable to expect in a feudal society. If you really believe that what Ulfric is doing is "creating jobs", then you really, really need to learn some economics. Really. No sarcasm. And if you really believe that it is Ulfric's "job" to help people be successful, then you really, really need to learn something about how feudal societies work. Holding the government responsible for such things is exactly what leads to a welfare state. Where in the world did you get the idea that Ulfric is paying and contracting with bandits? That is a truly bizarre contention.

You don't necessarily need to pace yourself. There are plenty of faction quests and side quests that you can do if you finish the main quest early. If nothing else, you can now join one of the sides in the civil war and break the truce, since it is no longer necessary.

Government involvement in arranging jobs for the benefit of a certain segment of the population IS seeing to their welfare, by definition. A welfare state is about much more than simply handing money to people. You don't get to pretend it isn't socialism just by refusing to call it socialism. You're demanding that Ulfric order employers to give certain jobs to certain people, or to create positions for those people even if the employer has no present need of additional employees. Whatever you choose to call that, it sure isn't free-market capitalism. There is a term, though, for a system where businesses have private owners but are operated according to government orders. See if you can guess what word I'm thinking of. Such an employment program results in the forced transfer of wealth from one segment of the population to another, whether the money to pay for those "created" jobs comes out of the pocket of the employer or the pocket of some employee who was fired to give his job to a member of the favored underclass. Jobs are created by economic growth, not by government ordering them into existence. Forced transfers of wealth IS welfare, even when the transfer is not directly between the government and the subsidized citizen. Or perhaps you had some sort of public works program in mind. But giving people money for makework jobs is just as much welfare as giving them money directly. Except now the forced transfer of wealth is from the pockets of taxpayers and is more visible than the hidden costs of mandatory private employment. At the very least you are suggesting some government agency to oversee private hiring to ensure that there is no discrimination. Hurrah for the medieval EEOC! Such bureaucracies are also symptomatic of welfare nanny states. And I'm sure you would insist that all those newly-employed Dunmer be paid a "living wage" (as determined by the government, naturally). So now we can throw a minimum wage law into the socialistic mix as well. Whether you wish to admit it or not, you are advocating that Ulfric initiate a welfare state. A small one, true, but it is the nature of such things to grow.

Really? Torygg was High King when the Red Mountain erupted, nearly 200 years ago (4E 5-6)? Wow, I had no idea he was that old! In case you missed the sarcasm, the refugees were invited in by the High King at the time of the eruption, with the support of the jarls of that time. Since then the tower used as a welcome center has fallen into ruin. All of this happened long before Torygg or Ulfric were born. In fact, it happened long before their fathers were born. Probably before their grandfathers were born. Suggesting that Ulfric should institute work programs to improve the lot of the Dunmer is a breathtaking idea. Perhaps he should implement universal health care, Social Security, and Food Stamps while he's at it. Seriously, though, this is a medieval, feudal society. I don't think they're quite ready for socialistic welfare programs yet. (And, for their sakes, I hope they never will be.)

The Greybeards should have taught you one word of Whirlwind Sprint when you first went to High Hrothgar ("The Way of the Voice"), and made you demonstrate it by sprinting through the gate in the courtyard. As far as I know, there is no way to get the Horn quest without fully completing "The Way of the Voice". I don't see how you could have missed Whirlwind Sprint because there just isn't any way to skip parts of that quest. If you do have to leave to get a word, I would suggest going to Dead Men's Respite, since that should be easier than Volskygge.

Baby-name sites are my best source for inspiration. There are many of them that specialize in different cultures or have cultural sub-sections, and they give the meaning of each name. Just google "norse baby name" and start browsing the lists for inspiration.

Did you? Because the author asks the question of whether they were ascended or destroyed at least twice, and says that he does not have an answer to it. Yet somehow you have divined that neither is the case, citing a document that says no such thing as "proof" of your contention. The very same author that determined that the Dwemer merged with Numidium says that there are still unanswered questions, which I presume he doesn't consider to be irrelevant since he took the trouble to write a lengthy addendum to address them. He makes it quite clear that their souls were merged with Numidium long before the Battle of Red Mountain, and their bodies were only destroyed later. He does NOT state that the merged souls are still part of Numidium, but that it is unknown if this is the case because Numidium was intended for multiple uses. He outlines a couple of scenarios for how a multiple-use Numidium might work, including ascension of the merged souls once they are gathered, but is unable to say which is correct. He does NOT say that the Dwemer are incontrovertibly in the same state that the Numidium is in. I read it most carefully. I have good reason to question whether you have done the same. In your opinion. Other opinions are possible, and to proclaim that anyone holding an opinion other than your own should just shut up is the very definition of arrogance. Since the author of the piece you cite asks "irrelevant" questions about the fate of the Dwemer post-Numidium, I suppose he should just shut up as well? In the words of Dagoth Ur, as related by Vivec: "And who knows, perhaps the Dwemer are not gone forever, but merely transported to some distant realm, from which they may some day return to threaten our security once again." There is absolutely nothing in the writings you cite to show that this is not possible.

If Ulfric is there, you will also find Galmar. Otherwise, if you completed the Civil War on the Stormcloak side then you will find Legate Rikke.

Right. There is absolutely no mystery left regarding that disappearance. Nope. Not a single question left. Unless you count the mystery of what exactly happened to the Dwemer -- ascension or destruction? -- and whether or not there is any possibility of their return. You linked to that document, but did you actually bother to read it? If so, did you comprehend it? Luagar Anulam himself says there is still a mystery regarding their disappearance. Beyond the fact that the souls of the Dwemer merged to form the Brass God, he does not know what became of that merged soul during the Battle of Red Mountain. He states this quite clearly at least twice in his "Addendum". He does not know which account of that battle is correct: The Battle of Red Mountain or Nerevar at Red Mountain. He does not know if the Dwemer succeeded in achieving their goal or failed. He does not know what ultimately happened to the Dwemer and he says so. So who are YOU to say we know "everything" we "need" to know about the disappearance of the Dwemer? Your own sources explicitly deny that everything is known. As to whether we "need" to know any more, that is your opinion. YOU may not need to know any more, but it is rather arrogant to tell others to stop asking questions because you have all the answers you want.

None of that is true... http://www.imperial-library.info/content/skyrims-rule Actually, according to the statements of Sybile Stentor, the statement you bolded in Breakwind's reply IS true. She clearly describes the challenge custom as giving Ulfric the right to demand a Moot to judge the fitness of the High King if he refused the challenge. We have no reason to doubt her word on that. No feudal authority is truly absolute in practice. A king is bound by custom and tradition, and the bonds of fealty impose obligations on him as well as on his vassals. It isn't a one-way street, and a king violates fealty and tradition at his peril. A king rules because he has the support of the high nobility. The high nobility rules because they have the support of the lower nobility and knights under them. The lower nobility rules because they have the support of the people. If any of them goes too far, their vassals will turn on them. For a Skyrim example of this system, look at why Dengeir stepped down as Jarl of Falkreath: his nobles pressured him into it. Without the support of his nobles, he had no authority and knew it. Perhaps Torygg could have gotten away with jailing Ulfric and using his "absolute authority" to deny Ulfric his established right to call a Moot. But I wouldn't bet on the other jarls sitting still for a High King who arbitrarily obliterates the rights of his nobles for his own benefit, even if they don't like the noble in question. If they do, they're fools.

There are a number of forts in Skyrim held by assorted bad guys (bandits, necromancers, etc.) instead of soldiers. If you clear one of those forts, it may then be taken over by either Imperial or Stormcloak soldiers, depending on which side of the civil war controls the hold where the fort is located. I'm not sure this will happen, though, unless you've at least started the civil war quest line. I usually don't clear forts until after the civil war is over and the sides are settled.

What's not to like and admire about Balgruuf? Balgruuf is one of the few jarls who seems deeply devoted to his people and is not wrapped up in concerns for his own prestige, reputation, or safety. He's a very straight-forward kind of guy, loyal to those he considers friends, and he shows respect for you from the first. Later he honors you, takes pains to advise you regarding the Graybeard summons, and, in the end, is willing to trust you with the welfare of his people even though he considers your scheme to trap a dragon to be nuts. He considers you a friend and is hurt if you end up with the Stormcloaks. He isn't in the least corrupt, and is firm and decisive when he finally gets tired of Wormtongue ... I mean Proventius ... always advising him to be passive and do nothing. If only I could talk to him and convince him that his decision to support the Empire is wrong. Skyrim needs more jarls like him, particularly if the Stormcloaks win. He, like Dengir, is not a slavish follower of Ulfric's personality cult, and would be able to stand up to Ulfric later if the need arises. In fact, he would probably be the best choice for High King in an independent Skyrim, better able to put Skyrim back on an even keel after the rebellion than Ulfric and his abrasive "with us or against us" crap.

It depends on your definition of justice. To me, true justice has to weigh the good as well as the bad. A justice system that does not allow testimony as to a person's good character and acts before pronouncing sentence hardly seems like a justice system at all. Whether or not a person is remorseful should be considered in determining the severity of their sentence. What about the concept of mercy? Shouldn't that be part of justice as well? And what about atonement? Has Paarthurnax already repaid his debt to society, or will he repay it better by being left alive to continue his good works? Nobody benefits from his death, but many may benefit from his continued life. If the purpose of justice isn't to improve the welfare of society, then it's nothing more than vengeance. You mention Nazi war criminals who reformed after the war and began doing good. But that isn't the case here. What would you do with a Nazi who switched sides during the war because he realized his moral error? Would you let him help and then afterwards tell him thanks as you led him to the gallows? Delphine and Esbern try to suggest that maybe Paarth switched sides to save his own skin, but that is ridiculous on the face of it. The dragons were winning easily until he switched sides and taught mortals to Shout, and would probably still have won if Felldir hadn't had an Elder Scroll in reserve. Paarthurnax put himself in more danger by switching sides than he would have by sticking with Alduin. Furthermore, true justice must be based on specific charges and evidence proving the accused guilty of those charges. All I hear is a vague complaint of unspecified atrocities. What atrocities? And where is the evidence that specifically ties Paarthurnax to one or more of those atrocities? Is it just to condemn someone to death based on legends recorded by Akaviri foreigners thousands of years after the events took place? It would make far more sense to demand the death of Odahviing, who was Alduin's chief lieutenant and doubtless responsible for plenty of atrocities while carrying out Alduin's orders. He shows no particular remorse or desire to atone, and shows nothing but distaste for the Way of the Voice. He only bends to your will because you've proven yourself stronger than Alduin. He makes it clear that he'd like to eat a few souls in Sovngarde himself except that Alduin doesn't allow other dov to have that priviledge. Odahviing is far more a bad guy than Paarthurnax. (And yet, he's kind of a lovable rascal, and I doubt I could bring myself to kill Odie, either. Unless he crosses me. :)) Delphine and Esbern advocate the extermination of an entire sapient species. Paarthurnax does not. Who are the real criminals here? Why would anyone even listen to accusations of atrocities coming out of the mouths of a couple of genocidal maniacs?

"Hjalti" is not a Breton name, and not all Nords live in Skyrim. What makes it impossible for him to have been a Nord born in Alcaire?

Ulfric was not an "insignificant jarl's son" at the time he killed Torygg; he was Jarl of Windhelm and had been since being released from his imprisonment following the Markarth Incident. I also seriously doubt that Ulfric could have been disappeared even if he were an "insignificant jarl's son". Supporters like Roggvir who knew that Ulfric went in and didn't come out would spread the word rather quickly. Throwing a sitting jarl, who had committed no crime by Nord tradition, in chains might not sit well with the other jarls no matter what they think of Ulfric personally. Such a high-handed act might have been enough to impel a Nord Runnymede, though I suspect Nord traditions already define the rights and obligations of the jarls vs. those of the High King, much the same as the Magna Carta did for the Barons of England. The custom of the challenge may only be a part of the code that maintains the balance. The Nords have a long tradition of both personal and group independence, going all the way back to Ysgrammor and the 500. I do wonder whether Ulfric is really guilty of simple power lust or whether it's more complicated than that. He seems to be most concerned with building a legend around himself, win or lose. He is concerned with "the dramatic moment" throughout the storyline. I get the feeling he is living some kind of fantasy in his head, like a kid pretending he's Superman except with his own real super power. He wants to ride at the head of an army and Shout his foes from the walls like Tiber Septim, hailed as a great hero and savior. He wants the Dragonborn to be part of his story, even if the Dragonborn is fighting for the other side. He wants to be like a First Era king who crushed his foes and had his people love him for it, in the words of Galmar. In short, Ulfric may not be strictly sane. I have little doubt that his reason for leaving High Hrothgar was a sincere concern for the suffering of those fighting the Great War and a desire to do his part in the Legion. Yet, I suspect this boyhood fantasy was nagging at the back of his mind and he also desired, perhaps subconciously, to test the power of the Voice in actual battle like the Tongues of old. To top it off, remember that the Thalmor convinced him that HE was responsible for the sack of the Imperial City because he provided key information under torture. Ulfric must be carrying around a tremendous load of guilt over that, though we know it isn't true, and much of what he's done since then may be driven by an attempt to compensate for what he believes is his sin.

The Nords had battlemages and no distrust of magic during the Merethic and First Eras, long before they had any Tongues. Note that some of the draugr, who are all ancient Nords, are magic users. Felldir appears to be a mage, though he is given only warrior skills in the game, and may well have been a battlemage before he became a Tongue. If you tell Tsun in Sovngarde that your right to enter the Hall of Valor comes from your position as Archmage of Winterhold, he will tell you that mages were once honored among the Nords and the profession is still honored in Sovngarde. I'm not clear on when and why magic became distrusted, but that distrust has not always been an aspect of Nord culture and tradition. Perhaps it isn't too late to reverse the trend and begin training a new generation of mages for the fight against the Thalmor. Perhaps a Dragonborn Archmage is just the person who can give magery a better public image in Skyrim.

I think my biggest surprise came with a character who ran straight off to join the Stormcloaks and didn't do "Dragon Rising" until forced into it. After the Graybeards summoned me, Ulfric had a lot of interesting dialog about his Voice training as a boy and his take on the Way of the Voice. With one character I went to Skyhaven Temple right after "Alduin's Bane", getting the demand to kill Paarthurnax before heading to Whiterun instead of after the conference. I told Arngeir beforehand that I wasn't going to do it, and he really threw the information in Delphine's face when she showed up at the conference. Now that made me grin like a skunk eating beans! :)

I have characters that have done it in about all different ways it can be done: start the civil war after finishing the main quest, start and finish the civil war before finishing the main quest, and start the civil war before and finish it after the main quest. In general, I don't see a huge difference between the different options. Doing the peace conference gives you a lot of options and your choices there determine how many followup civil war quests there will be after the main quest. The choices available at the peace conference will depend on whether or not you've started the civil war before doing "Alduin's Bane". But we're only talking a difference of one or two quests, not a dramatic change in complexity. For the most part the quests just involve taking a fort in each hold controlled by the opposing side, so anything that affects the alignment of a hold is going to determine the number of such quests. Three of the hold takeovers have a little something extra to do, and whether you have to do any or all of those depends on whether your side already controls that hold.

It would work out fine for a dragonborn if you woke up in the inn at Helgen just as the prisoners arrived. :)

The Thalmor, like the British Empire, also have other fish to fry. For example, Valenwood can't be entirely pacified or the Thalmor wouldn't be conducting purges there. The Empire entirely annihilated the armies occupying Cyrodiil at Red Ring. Is there really any question that these were the best troops and leaders that the Thalmor had at the time? The Empire may have been decaying since the end of the Septim dynasty, but they were still a force to be reckoned with, and the Thalmor would have been idiots not to send their best. Their best was then utterly wiped out. The Empire may not have had the strength left at that point to take the war into the Dominion. Yet, that hardly seems necessary. Having thrown the Dominion out of the Empire should have been sufficient to get far better terms that the WGC offered. Washington didn't need to take over London to get independence from the British, and the Empire didn't need to conquer the Dominion to maintain their independence. The Dominion's best was not enough to conquer Cyrodiil. What they had left at the end of the war couldn't even conquer Hammerfell. It really makes very little sense that the Emperor caved so completely.

If Ulfric had started attacking Thalmor, the Empire's choices would be to resume the war, disavow Skyrim and let it go, or back up the Thalmor by taking action against their attackers. There is zero chance that the Empire is going to resume the war. They haven't rebuilt the strength they lost during the Great War, and their position may be even weaker now than it was the day the WGC was signed because of the presence of Thalmor in Cyrodiil and the subsequent elimination of the Blades. Perhaps the Dominion has been bluffing about their ability to obliterate the Empire, but, if so, the Emperor fell for that bluff when he signed the treaty. Is he going to call them on it now, when he can't even be sure it is a bluff? If the Dominion has not been bluffing, then resuming the war would just be a quicker form of suicide than the slower death they face as a client state. There is also zero chance that the Empire is going to disavow Skyrim as it did Hammerfell. The Empire is in an economic shambles and they can't afford to lose any more provinces. They are dependent on the resources and taxes they're getting out of Skyrim. If they weren't, then all they had to do was pull the Legion out of Skyrim instead of sending in more troops, and not a single legionnaire would have fallen to a Stormcloak blade. The Legion is not in Skyrim to help the jarls deal with bandits and dragons; they are there to support imperial interests. Treaties have the force of law, so the Empire can't just stand by while imperial subjects -- the people of Skyrim -- violate an imperial treaty. If they won't let Skyrim go, then the only remaining choice is to enforce imperial law, which means fighting to defend the Thalmor and their rights under the treaty. If they did not, then Thalmor would have reason to claim a treaty violation and resume the war. The Empire must either fully support its treaties or repudiate them. There is no third option allowing them to stand by while some of their subjects violate it for them.

Our Dragonborn need not be related to the Septims. There have been three empires, each one founded by a dragonborn who was biologically unrelated to any of the others: Alessia, Reman Cyrodiil, and Tiber Septim. The continuity, if you can call it that, is that each carried the gift of Akatosh, so the line of dragon blood was restored in the second and third empires. However, I would be surprised if our Dragonborn ever took the imperial throne or established a new empire. The Amulet of Kings is gone and there is no longer a need to keep the Dragonfires lit to prevent invasion from Oblivion, which was the driving reason for having a dragonborn on the throne. That problem was solved permanently by Martin Septim. A new dragonborn dynasty would not have the high purpose of the previous dynasties, unless some new threat arises that again requires a dragonborn emperor. But, hasn't it been prophesied that the champion who defeated Alduin would be the last dragonborn?