Join Empire or Stormcloaks? My Thoughts

[MidbossVyers]

The Moot rejected him, when?

[Elimc]

@Kimmera

 

Ulfric never ran against Torygg at a moot. Even if the moot that elected Torygg wasn't just ceremonial, as it seems to have been, there is no mention of Ulfric trying to run against him. All Ulfric does is try to persuade him to leave the Empire.

 

Ulfric does understand politics, and he has an ability to govern. If he didn't understand politics or governing, then why did the citizens of windhelm want him to be Jarl? And why did half of the remaining holds (well, 3 out of 8 ) decide to join him?

 

Ulfric would rather fight and die than be forced to worship Talos in secret, remain a part of a dying empire, and kneel before the AD. And so would half of Skyrim. If Ulfric was the dumb barbarian you say he is, then how did he become Jarl, and why did half of Skyrim follow him? They could have chosen a different leader, but they kept Ulfric.

Edited June 30, 2015 by Elimc

[kimmera]

The Moot rejected him, when?

 

 

@Kimmera

 

Ulfric never ran against Torygg at a moot. Even if the moot that elected Torygg wasn't just ceremonial, as it seems to have been, there is no mention of Ulfric trying to run against him. All Ulfric does is try to persuade him to leave the Empire.

 

Ulfric does understand politics, and he has an ability to govern. If he didn't understand politics or governing, then why did the citizens of windhelm want him to be Jarl? And why did half of the remaining holds (well, 3 out of 8 ) decide to join him?

 

Ulfric would rather fight and die than be forced to worship Talos in secret, remain a part of a dying empire, and kneel before the AD. And so would half of Skyrim. If Ulfric was the dumb barbarian you say he is, then how did he become Jarl, and why did half of Skyrim follow him? They could have chosen a different leader, but they kept Ulfric.

 

He could have stuck around and insisted on a Moot, even if it meant a trial first. He did not. He knew he would fail to be crowned if he did.

 

Regarding the Moot that put Torygg on the throne, the source of it being ceremonial is referenced as Sybille, but this is what she actually says: "No. Even after Istlod died, the moot voted to make Torygg High King of Skyrim. But Ulfric was at that moot, continually talking about Skyrim's independence in terms just shy of treason."

 

She says they voted, and there is no mention of it being merely formality. Ulfric was arguing for independence, but against whom at such a vote?

 

If Ulfric was trying to persuade Torygg to leave the Empire, then why didn't he attempt that rather than challenging Torygg? Sybille again claims Torygg was already sympathetic, and likely would have agreed. Between those two pieces of evidence, it seems much more likely that Ulfric wanted power for himself, not merely independence for Skyrim.

 

Jarls don't get their positions based on popularity, and the non-Nord citizens of Windhelm are certainly not happy with him. Those that are happy with him like his xenophobia. His rule is oppressive to non-Nords, and his is the city with the serial killer. As for the holds that follow him, it is easy to rule when you are just making promises and telling the people what they want to hear. It is not so easy when you actually have to govern for real. There is a difference between 'a dumb barbarian' and being politically an idiot. A lot of otherwise very bright people are idiots in the field of politics. It isn't clear how Jarls get appointed. It certainly isn't a democracy. What makes you think the people have a choice?

 

The point about worshiping Talos in secret is that the Empire was only pretending to kneel, and the main reason that got harder was Ulfric's temper tantrum at Markarth.

Edited July 1, 2015 by kimmera

[TheObstinateNoviceSmith]

According to Elsif's dialogue, Ulfric never tried to convince Torygg of anything as she believes that her husband respected Ulfric and held him in high regard also believes that if Ulfric had simply asked Torygg to leave the Empire he would have.

 

Not all the Jarls are good at being Jarls. You can tell just by talking to some of them and at least one Jarl (as well as many of his soldiers) only aligned with the Stormcloaks because of their cause to restore the worship of Talos. Many actually don't trust/believe in Ulfric at all.

 

It has been implied but several sources that Ulfric is just using the cause to further his personal agenda to be the High King of Skyrim and his words do sometimes suggest as much.

 

But Ulfric is definitely not a dumb barbarian that is for sure, I just don't know if he is as noble, wise, and or politically intelligent as you're giving him credit for. I simply do not know.

[kimmera]

A further point regarding Ulfric. In Battle for Whiterun (Empire side), the Jarl of Whiterun sends the axe to ask Ulfric where he stands and also considers challenging Ulfric to a personal duel.

 

Ulfric's response is an immediate attack with troops. Ulfric himself doesn't even show on the battlefield.

 

Some 'leader' willing only to lead easy battles that he knows he can win (such as his 'challenge' of Torygg).

 

He has also been captured twice. Once by the Thalmor who figured him more useful to them free than imprisoned (which should tell you rather a lot about how effective he'd be trying to oppose them) and once by the Empire, only escaping due to random chance.

[MidbossVyers]

A further point regarding Ulfric. In Battle for Whiterun (Empire side), the Jarl of Whiterun sends the axe to ask Ulfric where he stands and also considers challenging Ulfric to a personal duel.

 

Ulfric's response is an immediate attack with troops. Ulfric himself doesn't even show on the battlefield.

 

Some 'leader' willing only to lead easy battles that he knows he can win (such as his 'challenge' of Torygg).

 

He has also been captured twice. Once by the Thalmor who figured him more useful to them free than imprisoned (which should tell you rather a lot about how effective he'd be trying to oppose them) and once by the Empire, only escaping due to random chance.

OMG. Really. I thought we already got past this. First of all, you do realize that if you're a Stormcloak, Ulfric is the one who sends his axe to Balgruuf, which Balgruuf rejects, right? The axe is NOT a challenge for a duel. The axe is a symbol of alliance. During the Stormcloak side of the battle for Whiterun, Ulfric demands Balgruuf's alliance, while during the Legion side of the battle for Whiterun, Balgruuf demands Ulfric's word not to attack Whiterun. Secondly, as I mentioned before, "random chance" can play a crucial role in any given war. A pivotal point of the Battle of Red Cliffs was literally the wind changing direction.

[kimmera]

 

A further point regarding Ulfric. In Battle for Whiterun (Empire side), the Jarl of Whiterun sends the axe to ask Ulfric where he stands and also considers challenging Ulfric to a personal duel.

 

Ulfric's response is an immediate attack with troops. Ulfric himself doesn't even show on the battlefield.

 

Some 'leader' willing only to lead easy battles that he knows he can win (such as his 'challenge' of Torygg).

 

He has also been captured twice. Once by the Thalmor who figured him more useful to them free than imprisoned (which should tell you rather a lot about how effective he'd be trying to oppose them) and once by the Empire, only escaping due to random chance.

OMG. Really. I thought we already got past this. First of all, you do realize that if you're a Stormcloak, Ulfric is the one who sends his axe to Balgruuf, which Balgruuf rejects, right? The axe is NOT a challenge for a duel. The axe is a symbol of alliance. During the Stormcloak side of the battle for Whiterun, Ulfric demands Balgruuf's alliance, while during the Legion side of the battle for Whiterun, Balgruuf demands Ulfric's word not to attack Whiterun. Secondly, as I mentioned before, "random chance" can play a crucial role in any given war. A pivotal point of the Battle of Red Cliffs was literally the wind changing direction.

 

 

Whiterun is neutral at the time in both situations. From the Stormcloak side, Ulfric is declaring a neutral city that has NOT sided with the Empire at the time an enemy simply for remaining neutral.

 

From the Empire side, the Empire warns Whiterun of Ulfric's intent with respect to the city. Balgruuf calls Ulfric on it and Ulfric essentially confirms the Empire was correct.

 

In both cases, Ulfric is the aggressor towards a neutral power. That isn't diplomacy.

 

And you ignored my point that he doesn't lead the battle personally. Regardless of the meaning of sending the axe, if Balgruuf had the option of a personal duel, so did Ulfric, yet Ulfric doesn't even show up personally. And lest you say the Empire does the same, they have an excuse. They leave it to the Jarl to defend his own city, which he does (not sure if he leaves the walls but he fights just inside them), thus letting the Jarl retain his own honor.

 

The only random chance at Whiterun is which side the Dragonborn fights on. Neither side seem to understand the power of the Dragonborn, nor does either do the obvious, namely use the Dragonborn as a political symbol to rally the people.

[MidbossVyers]

... No top military leader leads the army from the front. They got shot by a stray arrow, and the war is over. Heck, Balgruuf only fights if you manage to break into the throne room, anyway.

[Elimc]

@Kimmera

 

If Ulfric had stuck around in solitude he would have been killed. Elisif probably would not have cared about if the challenge was legal or not,I think she simply would have ordered Ulfric killed for killing her husband. Unless the guards in Solitude would have listened to Ulfric instead of her, he probably would have been killed. Of course, maybe she would have let him have a fair trial. We don't know, and never will.

 

Sybille Stentor contradicts herself. First she says, "Ulfric was at that moot, continually talking about Skyrim's independence in terms just shy of treason." Then she says that if Ulfric had merely asked Torygg, he would have left the Empire. This does not make any sense. Ulfric did ask Torygg to leave the Empire at the moot, and Torygg refused.

 

Well, Vignar says that the people of Whiterun elected him Jarl if the Stormcloacks take it, and Denegier is taken off his throne by the people of his hold, so the people do play some role in it.

 

The Markarth Incident allowed Thalmor Justicators to patrol Skyrim searching for Talos worshipers, it did not effect Cyrodil at all.

 

The reason Ulfric doesn't just go around challenging Jarls to duels is probably that he doesn't want to get captured while he is traveling to or from the hold of the Jarl in question. You win wars with armies, not by killing Jarls.

 

If you side with the Stormcloacks, Ulfric forces Balgruuf to choose a side. He does not simply march his army up to Whiterun and sack it, he sends an axe to Balgruuf, and when Balgruuf refuses it, siding with the Empire, Ulfric attacks Whiterun. That is not the same thing as attacking a neutral city. Whiterun gave up its neutrality when Balgruuf returned Ulfric's axe.

 

From the Imperial side, Balgruuf sends his axe to Ulfric. If Ulfric keeps it, it means he will not try to take over Skyrim. He returns it, because he does want to take over Skyrim. This does not mean he is evil, just that he can't fight the AD with only half a country.

 

Personally, I think the reason the commanders don't fight until the last battle is just to make the last battle cooler.

[kimmera]

... No top military leader leads the army from the front. They got shot by a stray arrow, and the war is over. Heck, Balgruuf only fights if you manage to break into the throne room, anyway.

 

This is medieval level warfare, and moreover warfare in which these leaders aren't going to be felled by a single arrow a la Harold at the Battle of Hastings. In those conditions leaders took the field often. Furthermore, Jarl Balgruuf is on the battlements just inside the walls the instant you win in the Imperial version. Does he have some sort of magical 'port to battlements' ability?

 

In the Stormcloak version, it is possible he fell back to the castle given the strength of the attack.

 

 

@Kimmera

 

If Ulfric had stuck around in solitude he would have been killed. Elisif probably would not have cared about if the challenge was legal or not,I think she simply would have ordered Ulfric killed for killing her husband. Unless the guards in Solitude would have listened to Ulfric instead of her, he probably would have been killed. Of course, maybe she would have let him have a fair trial. We don't know, and never will.

 

Sybille Stentor contradicts herself. First she says, "Ulfric was at that moot, continually talking about Skyrim's independence in terms just shy of treason." Then she says that if Ulfric had merely asked Torygg, he would have left the Empire. This does not make any sense. Ulfric did ask Torygg to leave the Empire at the moot, and Torygg refused.

 

Well, Vignar says that the people of Whiterun elected him Jarl if the Stormcloacks take it, and Denegier is taken off his throne by the people of his hold, so the people do play some role in it.

 

The Markarth Incident allowed Thalmor Justicators to patrol Skyrim searching for Talos worshipers, it did not effect Cyrodil at all.

 

The reason Ulfric doesn't just go around challenging Jarls to duels is probably that he doesn't want to get captured while he is traveling to or from the hold of the Jarl in question. You win wars with armies, not by killing Jarls.

 

If you side with the Stormcloacks, Ulfric forces Balgruuf to choose a side. He does not simply march his army up to Whiterun and sack it, he sends an axe to Balgruuf, and when Balgruuf refuses it, siding with the Empire, Ulfric attacks Whiterun. That is not the same thing as attacking a neutral city. Whiterun gave up its neutrality when Balgruuf returned Ulfric's axe.

 

From the Imperial side, Balgruuf sends his axe to Ulfric. If Ulfric keeps it, it means he will not try to take over Skyrim. He returns it, because he does want to take over Skyrim. This does not mean he is evil, just that he can't fight the AD with only half a country.

 

Personally, I think the reason the commanders don't fight until the last battle is just to make the last battle cooler.

 

This is the same Elisif who waits for a Moot rather than declare herself High Queen? What is your evidence she would have given any such orders? Ulfric (and you) just make that assumption.

 

Sybille doesn't contradict herself. She is talking about two separate events. The first is the Moot, and the second is later when Ulfric challenges Torygg. Ulfric could have asked Torygg about independence then, tried to convince him before challenging, but instead he went straight for a challenge.

 

Vignar isn't elected. When exactly did this supposed election take place? He is appointed immediately on Balrguuf's defeat. Denegier is not taken off his throne. He is asked to step down due to old age, and his nephew took his place. That isn't the same thing as elections or the people deciding.

 

Do you know for a fact the Markarth incident didn't affect Cryodiil? Evidence please? How are the Thalmor supplied? Hammerfel kicked them out so supplies aren't likely coming by ship.

 

You don't win wars where you are claiming moral high ground by hiding in the back either. Even Napoleon and Wellington moved with their armies.

 

What do you think 'forcing to choose a side' means? It means saying Whiterun cannot remain neutral. The Empire, despite their supposed authoritarianism are willing to leave Whiterun neutral, to let them decide their own fate. Its like saying Germany was justified taking over Belgium rather than go through the Maginot Line, simply because Belgium didn't immediately ally with Germany. And it isn't Skyrim that Balgruuf is asking about, just Whiterun.

 

(And yes there are storyline reasons that the commanders don't fight but that doesn't change the arguments against Ulfric :) )