Where did the Dragonborn cross the border into Skyrim?

[Tidus44]

You seem to be forgetting Torygg, who claims Ulfric acted dishonourably.

 

As for Roggvir, how would he know if Ulfric beat Torygg in fair combat or not? Did he teleport from the throne room to the city gate? Was he following Ulfric the whole time and for some reason the gate was completely unguarded so there was no one else there when he let Ulfric out of the city? Even if Ulfric did walk (I can't seem to find that reference you are talking about. Who said it exactly?), it still begs the question why Ulfric felt the need to leave the city at all. He had just deprived Skyrim of its king, legally or not. Shouldn't he stick around to make sure there is a smooth transition and that all is well in the wake of the death?

 

"When Ulfric Stormcloak, with savage Shout, sent me here, my sole regret was fair Elisif, left forlorn and weeping. I faced him fearlessly - my fate inescapable, yet my honor is unstained - can Ulfric say the same?"

 

Again, there is no indication that Ulfric did anything unlawful in his challenge. Torygg states exactly why Ulfric's honor is in question; Torygg had no hope of beating a much more experienced opponent (my fate inescapable) but still stood up and faced (ie: ready to fight) Ulfric without being considered a coward (my honor is unstained). Torygg is simply calling Ulfric a bully who used the means he knew would allow him to win his argument (that Torygg separate from the Empire).

 

Roggvir was a city guard who was stationed at the city gates and allowed Ulfric to leave the city. You ask how he knew the challenge was lawful or honourable, but how did anyone in the crowd know that the challenge was unlawful or dishonourable? You have stated that Ulfric was hidden and no one saw exactly what Ulfric did to kill the King. You can't have it both ways and say that people saw and know and then say that no one saw and don't know to suit your needs.

 

As for Ulfric seeing the need to escape the city, there are a number of reasons why he may have felt that way other than what he did in challenging the King being unlawful. Again, no one ever says the challenge was unlawful. As for the "honourable" issue, that is still a matter of interpretation and largely prejudiced by the fact a seasoned warrior killed an unskilled opponent by using a shout (seen as an unfair advantage) when he didn't need to do that to win his argument. Ulfric is also the leader of a rebellion in a city very much opposed to the rebellion, very much in favor of the Empire and who loved their King. Ulfric could have done everything legally and honourably, but because people got upset over what he has done and what he was leading, he figured he better get away before things got ugly for him.

[kimmera]

That is a possible interpretation of what Torygg meant but dishonourable is dishonourable. I didn't say it was illegal under Skyrim law. I questioned the honor of the duel, which in turn would presumably be brought up if a Moot was called.

 

Hence Ulfric did not stick around to defend himself under the law. He left the city. Unlike Cassius and the other conspirators in Julius Caesar, he didn't stick around to inform the people he acted in their best interests, thinking they would be pleased at his actions.

 

And the only ones who actually saw anything were those who were in the throne room at the time. Everyone else is going off hearsay and rumour. You are the one saying everyone saw the fight, not I. And regardless, no one ran past Ulfric, ignoring him completely just to tell Roggvir what happened. There might have been shouts of 'close the Gate, Ulfric killed the king.' Presumably Roggvir knew Ulfric had done something, but he certainly was not a witness. Nor were the vast majority who claim to know what happened.

 

I said those few witnesses saw what they saw. However somehow, we are told, Ulfric turned a single shout and maybe a single blow (depending on version) into a fatal attack. I gave a possible explanation that could fit what people thought they saw. What is your explanation? That Torygg was weaker than the starting PC, despite years of experience and training?

[Nilanius]

When you talk to Roggvir's sister, she states "My brother was killed because the wrong man walked out that gate". And keep in mind, Ulfric is a Jarl. His challenge was accepted, they fought a very short battle, as even I admit, Torygg was much weaker. However, as other Jarls who support Ulfric said. If you can't even defend your own crown, then you aren't worthy of being High King.

 

It is also evident, talking to various npc's around Skyrim, Torygg was made High King, because the Empire bribed the right people to make it so. He was a puppet, just like Elisif. So it makes perfect sense, for Jarl Ulfric, his challenge won, to return home and await the call for a new moot. From my understanding of Skyrim traditions:

 

• A moot meets and names a High King
• Should another Jarl challenge the High King and win, then the other Jarls are notified and a new moot is called.
• Should the challenging Jarl fail in his own challenge, then a new Jarl is assigned to replace him or her.
• The Moot, picks one of the Jarls of each of the holds, to be the new High King. Most of the time, the Jarl that beat the High King, is named High King.

Seeing as the Empire used bribery, and other tactics to ensure the High King was someone they could keep a leash on, Ulfric removing the High King, and having support of over half the holds of Skyrim (I say over half because he did have Falkreath, but the Empire was quick to replace the old man with Sidgeir to cause a stalemate), the Empire's hold on Skyrim was slipping. The other factor, was Whiterun, which did not choose any side, until the end. So the Empire did the only thing it could to try to maintain their hold on Skyrim. To quickly swoop in and say Ulfric murdered the high king, which triggered the civil war.

 

But Tullius doesn't view his side as instigating the war. To him, just being against the empire, is enough to say Ulfric started the war. Now all that aside, the map I created, still shows that the Dragonborn would of had to of been in Skyrim a lot longer, than just "getting caught crossing the border". And considering Darkwater Crossing, is within the Windhelm/Riften border, crossing it, is not illegal. So either way, them putting the Dragonborn to the Block, without a trial, still sounds quite illegal. Heck, if I had to guess, Roggvir probably had a trial, which sent him to the block. They didn't just grab him and stick him there, then wait for the dragonborn to come to Solitude to watch them do it. From Helgen, it still takes a few days to even get there.

 

So Bethesda still goofed up on the games intro. But thankfully, the mod Skyrim Unbound, helped me get around that :)

[kimmera]

When you talk to Roggvir's sister, she states "My brother was killed because the wrong man walked out that gate". And keep in mind, Ulfric is a Jarl. His challenge was accepted, they fought a very short battle, as even I admit, Torygg was much weaker. However, as other Jarls who support Ulfric said. If you can't even defend your own crown, then you aren't worthy of being High King.

 

It is also evident, talking to various npc's around Skyrim, Torygg was made High King, because the Empire bribed the right people to make it so. He was a puppet, just like Elisif. So it makes perfect sense, for Jarl Ulfric, his challenge won, to return home and await the call for a new moot. From my understanding of Skyrim traditions:

 

• A moot meets and names a High King
• Should another Jarl challenge the High King and win, then the other Jarls are notified and a new moot is called.
• Should the challenging Jarl fail in his own challenge, then a new Jarl is assigned to replace him or her.
• The Moot, picks one of the Jarls of each of the holds, to be the new High King. Most of the time, the Jarl that beat the High King, is named High King.

Seeing as the Empire used bribery, and other tactics to ensure the High King was someone they could keep a leash on, Ulfric removing the High King, and having support of over half the holds of Skyrim (I say over half because he did have Falkreath, but the Empire was quick to replace the old man with Sidgeir to cause a stalemate), the Empire's hold on Skyrim was slipping. The other factor, was Whiterun, which did not choose any side, until the end. So the Empire did the only thing it could to try to maintain their hold on Skyrim. To quickly swoop in and say Ulfric murdered the high king, which triggered the civil war.

 

But Tullius doesn't view his side as instigating the war. To him, just being against the empire, is enough to say Ulfric started the war. Now all that aside, the map I created, still shows that the Dragonborn would have had to of been in Skyrim a lot longer, than just "getting caught crossing the border". And considering Darkwater Crossing, is within the Windhelm/Riften border, crossing it, is not illegal. So either way, them putting the Dragonborn to the Block, without a trial, still sounds quite illegal. Heck, if I had to guess, Roggvir probably had a trial, which sent him to the block. They didn't just grab him and stick him there, then wait for the dragonborn to come to Solitude to watch them do it. From Helgen, it still takes a few days to even get there.

 

So Bethesda still goofed up on the games intro. But thankfully, the mod Skyrim Unbound, helped me get around that :smile:

 

Again, you are confusing popular opinion or the opinion of relatives with actual facts. Roggvir's sister wasn't in the throne room and likely wasn't at the gate either. If she was at the gate, then why doesn't she stand accused along with her brother?

 

There are people who could defeat pretty much any US president in a duel, including Washington (who was a soldier living in a time when duels still happened). Does that mean no US president was worthy to hold that post? Your argument does hold under Skyrim's system but don't try to pretend that might really does equate to right. There is a lot more to running a kingdom than fighting. Ideally if the kingdom is run well, fighting should never actually be needed.

 

You are also confusing the opinions of citizens nowhere near Solitude with those who actually are close to the royal family and thus had reason to know. Which Jarls claim there were bribes involved? I don't think even Ulfric claims that. If the Empire's hold is slipping it is because the Empire just came out badly in a defensive war, and rats are trying to leave the ship.

 

As for Elsif being a puppet, who in her court tells her "The Empire says No?" Who in her court speaks for the Empire at all? When she asks the Dragonborn to deliver Torygg's horn, an act clearly in violation of Imperial Law, no one in her court objects. Not a single person says "My Lady, that is treasonous!" or "My Lady, the Emperor would not like that!" No one.

 

As for the Empire having influence over Skyrim, Skyrim is part of the Empire. They have been part of the Empire since way back in the end of the 2nd Era, when they were conquered by Tiber Septim. Remember him? The guy who became Talos? Whom Ulfric and many other Nords seem to think they should rebel against the Empire, the same Empire Talos founded, just to keep worshiping Talos openly? So this so called 'puppet state' existed since before the customs Ulfric claims to be defending existed. There have been much worse Emperor's before, Pelagius being a prime example, yet no 'omg we are a puppet' (of course he came from Solitude, so maybe bad Emperors are ok as long as they are Nords?).

 

As such, Tullius is dealing with the civil war because it is a war against the Empire, just as High Kings in the past have dealt with the Reachmen when they have tried to break away from Skyrim. The suggestion that 'the border' in question is the front lines between Imperial and Stormcloak forces makes a lot more sense. The Dragonborn isn't being put on the block for crossing the border. He is being put on the block for being captured near Ulfric near the front lines of combat, and being in the same wagon as Ulfric (guilt by association). Martial Law is likely in place, so conventional legality is likely out the window. Roggvir may well have had a summary judgement too.

[Tidus44]

That is a possible interpretation of what Torygg meant but dishonourable is dishonourable. I didn't say it was illegal under Skyrim law. I questioned the honor of the duel, which in turn would presumably be brought up if a Moot was called.

 

Hence Ulfric did not stick around to defend himself under the law. He left the city. Unlike Cassius and the other conspirators in Julius Caesar, he didn't stick around to inform the people he acted in their best interests, thinking they would be pleased at his actions.

 

And the only ones who actually saw anything were those who were in the throne room at the time. Everyone else is going off hearsay and rumour. You are the one saying everyone saw the fight, not I. And regardless, no one ran past Ulfric, ignoring him completely just to tell Roggvir what happened. There might have been shouts of 'close the Gate, Ulfric killed the king.' Presumably Roggvir knew Ulfric had done something, but he certainly was not a witness. Nor were the vast majority who claim to know what happened.

 

I said those few witnesses saw what they saw. However somehow, we are told, Ulfric turned a single shout and maybe a single blow (depending on version) into a fatal attack. I gave a possible explanation that could fit what people thought they saw. What is your explanation? That Torygg was weaker than the starting PC, despite years of experience and training?

 

Good comparison, as the senators who assassinated Caesar walked through Rome telling all what they had done, the citizens of Rome closed their doors to them and remained silent. The citizens, enraged by the actions of the senators, set fire to parts of the city and attacked the homes of the Senators causing them (including Cassius and Brutus) to flee the city.

This is the exact same thing Ulfric experienced because in the same way the citizens of Rome didn’t support the senators (much to their dismay and peril), the citizens of Solitude and others in Skyrim didn’t support Ulfric – regardless if it was legal or honourable – it was a matter of Ulfric killing their beloved King and that he better get out of the city before the citizens killed him. I said previously that Ulfric isn’t the sharpest person in Skyrim, and much like those Roman senators, he certainly didn’t think it through very well. He just expected to be supported because he feels he is right and everyone else is wrong.

 

I've already stated what I believe happened and provided substantiation for why I believe it.

 

Ulfric challenged the King and the King accepted the challenge and faced Ulfric bravely even knowing that he stood no chance of defeating Ulfric. Ulfric used a shout and then killed the King, likely by sword (or axe, as that is what Ulfric normally carries) as shouts don't do much other than knock people down. Ulfric then found that what he had done was not sitting right with people for a wide variety of reasons and that further he was a leader of a rebellion in a city where a soldier and his troops who had been sent to capture him and execute him were located and thus Ulfric found it prudent to "escape" to a safe location to await the Moot.

Roggvir was a gate guard who had the misfortune to be at the gate when Ulfric left the city. With no Ulfric for the citizens to punish, they directed their anger at the gate guard for letting the killer of their King and leader of an unpopular rebellion "escape". Roggvir's only defense for a man about to be executed is to claim that what he had done was not wrong and what Ulfric had done was not wrong. (Does anyone expect Roggvir to say, "Yeah, you're right I let the criminal Ulfric escape, please chop off my head."?).

 

While I do not claim that I am 100% accurate, all the unsubstantiated garbage about "honourable" and "lawful" and what people saw and say and whatever it is one can imagine is all just that.... unsubstantiated garbage prejudiced by individual's opinions and imagination.

[MidbossVyers]

Based on her dialogue, Sayma of Solitude was never exactly a fan of Torygg: http://uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Sayma Also, the Nords originally joined the Empire because they were impressed by the Dragonborn leadership: http://uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Nord Is the current Empire led by a Dragonborn?

[Tidus44]

Based on her dialogue, Sayma of Solitude was never exactly a fan of Torygg: http://uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Sayma Also, the Nords originally joined the Empire because they were impressed by the Dragonborn leadership: http://uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Nord Is the current Empire led by a Dragonborn?

 

There is no Emperor.... I killed him on board his ship.... and no Emperor of Dragon blood has existed since the Septim line ended with Martin's death in the 3rd Era ~200 years ago, but at least Mede was Colovian and likely a descendant of Nords.

[kimmera]

 

That is a possible interpretation of what Torygg meant but dishonourable is dishonourable. I didn't say it was illegal under Skyrim law. I questioned the honor of the duel, which in turn would presumably be brought up if a Moot was called.

 

Hence Ulfric did not stick around to defend himself under the law. He left the city. Unlike Cassius and the other conspirators in Julius Caesar, he didn't stick around to inform the people he acted in their best interests, thinking they would be pleased at his actions.

 

And the only ones who actually saw anything were those who were in the throne room at the time. Everyone else is going off hearsay and rumour. You are the one saying everyone saw the fight, not I. And regardless, no one ran past Ulfric, ignoring him completely just to tell Roggvir what happened. There might have been shouts of 'close the Gate, Ulfric killed the king.' Presumably Roggvir knew Ulfric had done something, but he certainly was not a witness. Nor were the vast majority who claim to know what happened.

 

I said those few witnesses saw what they saw. However somehow, we are told, Ulfric turned a single shout and maybe a single blow (depending on version) into a fatal attack. I gave a possible explanation that could fit what people thought they saw. What is your explanation? That Torygg was weaker than the starting PC, despite years of experience and training?

 

Good comparison, as the senators who assassinated Caesar walked through Rome telling all what they had done, the citizens of Rome closed their doors to them and remained silent. The citizens, enraged by the actions of the senators, set fire to parts of the city and attacked the homes of the Senators causing them (including Cassius and Brutus) to flee the city.

This is the exact same thing Ulfric experienced because in the same way the citizens of Rome didn’t support the senators (much to their dismay and peril), the citizens of Solitude and others in Skyrim didn’t support Ulfric – regardless if it was legal or honourable – it was a matter of Ulfric killing their beloved King and that he better get out of the city before the citizens killed him. I said previously that Ulfric isn’t the sharpest person in Skyrim, and much like those Roman senators, he certainly didn’t think it through very well. He just expected to be supported because he feels he is right and everyone else is wrong.

 

I've already stated what I believe happened and provided substantiation for why I believe it.

 

Ulfric challenged the King and the King accepted the challenge and faced Ulfric bravely even knowing that he stood no chance of defeating Ulfric. Ulfric used a shout and then killed the King, likely by sword (or axe, as that is what Ulfric normally carries) as shouts don't do much other than knock people down. Ulfric then found that what he had done was not sitting right with people for a wide variety of reasons and that further he was a leader of a rebellion in a city where a soldier and his troops who had been sent to capture him and execute him were located and thus Ulfric found it prudent to "escape" to a safe location to await the Moot.

Roggvir was a gate guard who had the misfortune to be at the gate when Ulfric left the city. With no Ulfric for the citizens to punish, they directed their anger at the gate guard for letting the killer of their King and leader of an unpopular rebellion "escape". Roggvir's only defense for a man about to be executed is to claim that what he had done was not wrong and what Ulfric had done was not wrong. (Does anyone expect Roggvir to say, "Yeah, you're right I let the criminal Ulfric escape, please chop off my head."?).

 

While I do not claim that I am 100% accurate, all the unsubstantiated garbage about "honourable" and "lawful" and what people saw and say and whatever it is one can imagine is all just that.... unsubstantiated garbage prejudiced by individual's opinions and imagination.

 

 

 

Pardon, but in the play Julius Caesar, to which I was referring, the crowd didn't really turn on the senators until after Marc Anthony's speech.

 

As for Roggvir, make up your mind. Was he set up as a scapegoat by the Empire? Or was it the crowd calling for his and Ulfric's blood? If the latter, why would Ulfric expect to do any better at the moot? And how well would he expect to rule if the citizens in the capital are that angry with him?

 

While it is true that shouts don't kill, anyone remotely prominent doesn't get one shot outside of a surprise attack. Considering Torygg an unreliable witness is blaming the victim.

 

Based on her dialogue, Sayma of Solitude was never exactly a fan of Torygg: http://uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Sayma Also, the Nords originally joined the Empire because they were impressed by the Dragonborn leadership: http://uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Nord Is the current Empire led by a Dragonborn?

 

 

 

Based on her dialogue, Sayma of Solitude was never exactly a fan of Torygg: http://uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Sayma Also, the Nords originally joined the Empire because they were impressed by the Dragonborn leadership: http://uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Nord Is the current Empire led by a Dragonborn?

 

There is no Emperor.... I killed him on board his ship.... and no Emperor of Dragon blood has existed since the Septim line ended with Martin's death in the 3rd Era ~200 years ago, but at least Mede was Colovian and likely a descendant of Nords.

 

 

That doesn't happen until well after Ulfric's actions, and is illegal even under Skyrim law let alone that of the Empire. Also the reports seem to vary as to the 'impressive leadership.' The Skyrim armies defected to Tiber Septim at Sancre Tor, but his victory was the result of a turncoat revealing a back entry to the Castle.

 

Meanwhile he had used a ruse to draw most of the Skyrim forces out of the castle.

 

So although he is said to have fought well, he used trickery and the services of a traitor to achieve his win. Interesting man for the 'honourable' men of Skyrim to admire enough to swear to. To paraphrase Marc Anthony: But Ulfric is an honourable man. They are all honourable men.....

Edited June 26, 2015 by kimmera

[JustATac0]

this is too confusing for me haha

[SargeTiTan]

In which part is it really verified that he was crossing the border into Skyrim, not going out of the same?

Hadvar then explained that he was captured crossing the border into Skyrim, but with the fact that Hadvar needs to read a report to do so, which also means that Hadvar was not present at the moment + place where the capture of the protagonist happened, also due to the fact that the protagonist can not confirm or deny it, & that he can not read that report later, the possibility that Hadvar only had a report with a note that contained something like "he was captured intending to cross the border", but Hadvar only assumed that the protagonist came from the outside, & expresses itself in this way because of that, anyone can also consider the opposite, that the protagonist was trying to immigrate to another nation from Skyrim.[0_0]

Edited October 21, 2017 by SargeTiTan