kimmera Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 No, Torygg could have refused the duel, but then Ulfric would have had the right to call the Moot to reselect the High King. According to Elsif, who was Torygg's wife and thus in a position to know the related law, a High King cannot refuse a duel requested by a Jarl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidbossVyers Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 http://uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Sybille_Stentor says otherwise. "By Nord custom, once the challenge was issued in court, Torygg had no choice but to accept. Had he not, Ulfric would have had cause to call a new moot and a new vote for High King." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elimc Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 @MidbossVyers If Torryg refused, then Ulfric would have called for a moot to replace him. Then the Jarls would decide if he stayed High King or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidbossVyers Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Exactly. Apparently, Torygg trusted his own martial skill (of which he actually has no real experience) more than the Moot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmera Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 @MidbossVyers If Torryg refused, then Ulfric would have called for a moot to replace him. Then the Jarls would decide if he stayed High King or not. Exactly. Apparently, Torygg trusted his own martial skill (of which he actually has no real experience) more than the Moot. It may be that by the same laws, the moot is not allowed to choose someone who refused the duel. Again, Elsif seemed to think that the challenge could not be refused. Sybille may have been there a while but she is a Breton, not a Nord, is the Court Mage, not court diplomat, and claims that Ulfric tore Torygg to pieces simply with a shout, without any sword work, which strongly suggests she didn't witness anything, since that backs neither other accounts nor how the shouts actually work. As such, I'd take Elsif's opinion over Sybille's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elimc Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 @Kimmera Your first point is complete speculation, and it doesn't really make sense. Why would the Jarls want good kings to be forced to resign just because they were challenged? It makes much more sense to think that the old High King could be elected if most of the Jarls supported him. Sybille is a Breton, but she is also very observant, since she notices Falk and Bryling's relationship. She may have exaggerated about the power of Ulfric's shout, but that does not mean she didn't witness the duel. Again, I don't think that just because Torryg refused the challenge would make him unable to remain High King if the Jarls supported him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmera Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 (edited) @Kimmera Your first point is complete speculation, and it doesn't really make sense. Why would the Jarls want good kings to be forced to resign just because they were challenged? It makes much more sense to think that the old High King could be elected if most of the Jarls supported him. Sybille is a Breton, but she is also very observant, since she notices Falk and Bryling's relationship. She may have exaggerated about the power of Ulfric's shout, but that does not mean she didn't witness the duel. Again, I don't think that just because Torryg refused the challenge would make him unable to remain High King if the Jarls supported him. There is no formal written account of the law. It is just as much speculation that I am wrong as that I am right. 1) They can't be challenged by just anyone. It has to be a sitting Jarl. If the challenger wins, they don't automatically become high king so there is disincentive to challenge. If there is the ability to refuse, why bother even having the challenge? Why not just annual elections? 2) A shout cannot tear someone to pieces in the way she described. If she is willing to exaggerate that, then the rest of her opinions are automatically suspect. She is that much less credible a source. What is your counter regarding Elsif's statement? Edit: Being observant on the latest local romance doesn't mean much. It just shows where her priorities are. Edited June 13, 2015 by kimmera Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elimc Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 @Kimmera Yes, but I think it would make no sense for such a law to exist. Because a challenge is different from an election. From what I have heard, I think that only the challenger and the High King can be voted on, not other Jarls who want to become king. Challenges also seem very rare, and only take place if most of the Jarls become angry with the King, and one of them is willing to risk his life on a challenge. That is very, very different from an election. She doesn't say that he was shouted to pieces like the guards, she says that Ulfric's shout ripped Torryg asunder. That is not enough of an exaggeration to make her necessarily a liar. What exactly does she say, anyway. I can't find it anywhere and right now I'm on a mac so I can't run Skyrim to find out. But she could be exaggerating since she is so sad and angry, and she is very inexperienced, so she might not know the official rules for challenges. It means that she pays attention to stuff, so she would likely not be misinformed about the rules of the duel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmera Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 From what you have heard? Now you are just speculating unless you have a meaningful source. A challenge that could not be backed down on is also very different from an election. That was my point. If she was exaggerating on one thing, why not on others? Sybelle's exact words are "That Shout, that ancient and terrible tongue... ripped Torygg asunder." That is a pretty significant exaggeration. Ulfric himself denies his shout being that powerful. Torygg in Sovngarde feels that Ulfric acted without honor, saying "I faced him fearlessly - my fate inescapable, yet my honor is unstained - can Ulfric say the same?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Relativelybest Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Honestly, I've completely given up on picking a side - I hate getting politics mixed up in my adventuring. I only played through the Civil War questline once for completionism, and all it amounted to was Whiterun getting wrecked and, I think, Eorlund getting killed. These days I just let the sort it out on their own. 2) A shout cannot tear someone to pieces in the way she described. There seems to be a bit of a discrepancy between the game mechanics and the lore when it comes to the shouts. According to Skorm Snow-Strider, a young, fresh-faced Voice Master was able to break the siege of Forelhost where Skorm's entire army failed, implying he shouted the main gates down. That suggests Unrelenting Force (presumably the shout used) is supposed to be the sort of thing that can demolish entire buildings. And, at any rate, it is a blast powerful enough to catapult a grown man through the air, often killing him on landing. That's like being hit by a large explosion, which do frequently dismember its victims from the sheer force. So I think it's fair to say it should be able to tear someone to pieces, only the game mechanics don't really support that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts