Why Ulfric was right to kill the High King

[StayFrosty05]

don't include Grant in that example. he was a great general, but he failed at everything else he did, including being the president of the USA.

 

I understand that...I own and have read about every major work written about the Civil War--Foote, Catton, Lewis, McPhereson, and numerous others...I recognize Grant was a mediocre president. Many claim Eisenhower was a so-so president, as well.

 

The point I was trying to make is that generals probably don't do well as leaders of democracies. Churchill was a good, maybe even great war-time leader but as soon as the war was over the Brits turned him out.

 

But Skyrim is not a democracy...no government in Tamriel is a democracy, as far as I know. They are all autocracies. Generals do far better as leaders of autocracies.

 

And now I finally understand the point you have been trying to make...and concur....

[landy8]

Please allow me to post my question again.

 

If modder3434 mentioned "replacing one bad king with another one", than what do you think about the Emperor? I mean Emperor Titus Mede. He might be a good leader for the times of peace, but it's no secret Thalmor are preparing for another war. Some of them even declare it openly. And what does the Emperor do about it? What does he do about the civil war in Skyrim? Replaces the Legion general?

 

And, BTW, why did this civil war begin in the first place? Considering the fact that any leader carries responibilites, as was mentioned above.

[Relativelybest]

If a leader can't defend himself, how can he defend his people or his land?

 

Toryg was slain by a Jarl, which proves he was not fit at all for the throne. In doing so, Ulfric had a valid claim to the throne,

 

Reminds me of a quote from Dr McNinja:

 

"I shall kill the president, thereby becoming the president!"

"That's... uh... not how our government works."

"I know, but by that point I will be dangerously close to convincing everyone that it is."

 

But Ulfric knew Torygg didn't know it. Using the voice on someone without it is like bringing an AK to an arm wrestling match. Where's the honor in that?

 

This is a red herring.

 

Do you play the Dragonborn? Have you learned Unrelenting Force?

 

How many Dragonborn are in Skyrim?

 

Do you use Unrelenting Force or any other shout on enemies? If they're not Dragonborn or schooled in the ways of shouts, where's the honor in using a shout against them...or anytime?

 

Unless all you care to activate is Kyne's Peace.

 

Any warrior...any general...any king...that will not use the weapons at his disposal to win, isn't fit to lead...on any level.

 

I've played Skyrim for a while now and so far only one person has ever challenged me to anything that could even remotely resemble a formal duel. That guy was a wizard, and I did actually stick to magic when I fought him, thank you very much.

 

There is also brawling (which I've never really had to do so far) where you get disqualified if you use any weapons or spells including -I believe- shouts.

 

Five bandits with swords rushing me at once shouting stuff like: "You'll be so easier to rob when you're dead!"? No. Those guys are getting the fire breath.

 

There is a big differance between killing an enemy on the battlefield and killing an opponent in a legaly recognized duel of honor, is what I'm basically saying. Having rules about what you can and can't do in order to ensure a fair fight is pretty much the whole point of dueling.

 

Leadership based on physical prowess is an open invitation to tyranny.

Incorrect. Tyranny requires an unchallengably powerful frame of mind with the ability to exert absolute control over MANY people, something that physical strength may never bequeth.

Eg, Hitler.

 

Technically, the classical definition of a tyrant is "a ruler who gained his authority through force, as opposed to heritage."

 

Sounds like anyone we know?

 

Just off topic, even more. What shout did Ulfric use, if he did nearly tear him apart, because even the Dragonborn with absolute mastery over the Thuum, you can never kill someone with one Thuum.

 

Sure you can. Blasting someone over a ledge with Unrelenting Force will often kill them from fall damage.

 

Besides, the fact that a regular Fus Ro Dah doesn't kill people is just game mechanics: Obviously a force capable of sending a man in plate armor flying several meters and crashing into the nearest wall has more then enough power to kill a person.

Edited June 7, 2012 by Relativelybest

[imperistan]

Reminds me of a quote from Dr McNinja:

 

Skyrim isn't the USA.

 

I've played Skyrim for a while now and so far only one person has ever challenged me to anything that could even remotely resemble a formal duel. That guy was a wizard, and I did actually stick to magic when I fought him, thank you very much.

 

Five bandits with swords rushing me at once shouting stuff like: "You'll be so easier to rob when you're dead!"? No. Those guys are getting the fire breath.

 

Being quaint and proper often gets you killed. That's the difference between fencers and real swordfighters, between taking the advantage when you see it and letting it go because of some inane adherence to stupid rules.

 

Technically, the classical definition of a tyrant is "a rules who gained his authority through force, as opposed to heritage."

 

No, the classical definition was "one who illegally seized the throne". That goes back to ancient Greece. Ulfric did not make an illegitimate nor illegal (by Skyrim's own tradition that is) claim to the throne.

 

Sounds like anyone we know?

 

Yup. The Mede Dynasty. They seized the Imperial throne by force.

 

Besides, the fact that a regular Fus Ro Dah doesn't kill people is just game mechanics: Obviously a force capable of sending a man in plate armor flying several meters and crashing into the nearest wall has more then enough power to kill a person.

 

What you forget is that game mechanics also warp the actual power of Ulfric's own voice. In truth, his voice is just the weak whisper of a frail child for all the power he could muster. He likely couldn't send a man flying if he tried, and even if he could, it'd be all he could do.

 

And besides that, Ulfric never used Fus against Torygg. He used Zun, which was a simple disarm shout. But of course, to frazzled and ignorant bystanders I'm sure Ulfric must've been summoning the power of all the gods and the most terrible of the most evil magicks to bear on poor, poor Torygg.

 

Don't fall for the exaggeration of the Nord's and those who were hurt by Torygg's passing.

[Relativelybest]

 

Skyrim isn't the USA.

 

I know, I just though it was funny.

 

Being quaint and proper often gets you killed. That's the difference between fencers and real swordfighters, between taking the advantage when you see it and letting it go because of some inane adherence to stupid rules.

 

Meh. Observing the rules of formal dueling has nothing to do with being stupid or wether or not you are a "real swordfighter." It does have everything to do with not getting tried for murder, however.

 

The vikings were "real swordfighters", with a notoriously pragmatical approach to battle, but they still had formal duels with actual rules - duels that had to be legaly recognized by the things or the local ruler. The samurai of fuedal Japan were "real swordfighters", and they too had formal duels, were observing at least a minimum of protocol was the differance between being an honorble man and being thrown in jail or having to commit seppuku. The knights of medieval Europe were "real swordfighters" but also practiced trials by combat where fairness was the basis of the whole concept - if you couldn't win fair and square, you had failed to prove that your cause was favored by God.

 

In fact, most cultures with some kind of warrior class also practiced some form of dueling where you couldn't just do "whatever it takes to survive." The reason for this is that survivial is not the point of dueling. Dueling is not about defending your life, it's about defending your honor. And unlike today, people back then took honor seriously, or at least were expected to.

 

If your goal is to survive even at the cost of your honor, than you shouldn't be dueling at all. You can just say "no", walk away, and let everyone call you a coward. But by accepting the duel, you also agree to fight according to certain established standards.

 

What you forget is that game mechanics also warp the actual power of Ulfric's own voice. In truth, his voice is just the weak whisper of a frail child for all the power he could muster. He likely couldn't send a man flying if he tried, and even if he could, it'd be all he could do.

 

And besides that, Ulfric never used Fus against Torygg. He used Zun, which was a simple disarm shout. But of course, to frazzled and ignorant bystanders I'm sure Ulfric must've been summoning the power of all the gods and the most terrible of the most evil magicks to bear on poor, poor Torygg.

 

Don't fall for the exaggeration of the Nord's and those who were hurt by Torygg's passing.

 

Dude, I was just commenting that it's not unreasonable to suggest a thu'um would be capable of killing somone. I'm not taking sides or anything. In fact, I don't actually care about this little debate of yours. My character pretty much thinks both sides are being stupid and should focus more on the dragon problem. Ya'll taking this too seriously. It's a video game.

Edited June 7, 2012 by Relativelybest

[MacSuibhne]

 

There is a big differance between killing an enemy on the battlefield and killing an opponent in a legaly recognized duel of honor, is what I'm basically saying. Having rules about what you can and can't do in order to ensure a fair fight is pretty much the whole point of dueling.

 

 

We are not talking about democracies here. It is wrong-headed to impose contemporary values or judge Skyrim/Tamriel based upon modern sensibilities.

 

In Skyrim, the King decides what is legal and what is not. The fact that Torygg accepted Ulfrics challenge made it legal. Any other interpretation is neither consistent with logic nor the facts. An error in judgement certainly (Torygg's) and one with implications for future kings...if only by precedent.

 

Now... a bit of Holmesian reasoning: Do you honestly believe that an active, trained-since-childhood warrior of Ulfric's size and stature could not have defeated a complacent, lap-of-luxury individual such as Torygg without using the shout? Of course he could.

 

So why did he use it? Think about it with an objective, open mind...drawing on what we do know. Ulfric is a romantic. He never intended to become a Greybeard. He trained with them for the same reason he trained with a sword--it is part of the old Nord Tradition. Shouts are also part of the ancient Nord warrior code.

 

Moreover, shouts and the Dragon tongue are themselves martial arts...despite what the old women at High Hrothgar would wish. Dragons are hardly pacifists themselves.

 

Ulfric wants to bring Skyrim back to it's roots. He was making a statement when he challenged Torygg. And another when he used a disarming shout...in much the same way a Navy Seal might use an elbow or a kick to kill an opponent. These are all weapons in a warrior's arsenal. And combat is not tiddly-winks.

 

However delicate your (not you specifically) personal sensibilities, Ulfric's duel with Torygg was neither illegal nor unfair.

 

Nor inconsistent with the world he lives in.

Edited June 7, 2012 by MacSuibhne

[modder3434]

We are not talking about democracies here. It is wrong-headed to impose contemporary values or judge Skyrim/Tamriel based upon modern sensibilities.

 

dueling goes back to the ancient times that inspired this game and the type of culture it shows. thier is nothing "modern" about dueling.

 

So why did he use it? Think about it with an objective, open mind...drawing on what we do know. Ulfric is a romantic. He never intended to become a Greybeard. He trained with them for the same reason he trained with a sword--it is part of the old Nord Tradition. Shouts are also part of the ancient Nord warrior code.

 

Moreover, shouts and the Dragon tongue are themselves martial arts...despite what the old women at High Hrothgar would wish.

 

OK, however having the ability to do something that is a martial art doesn't mean you use it. Ex. you take a martial arts class, the sensei should say this doesn't mean you go out and look for places to use it to your own advantage, because being able to kick someone's ass in a fight is not what taking karate or kung fu is about, the same is true of the Voice.

 

Ulfric challenged Torygg to a duel. In a duel certain perimeters are set, since the fight is not about killing the person its about upholding your beliefs and your honor.

 

also regarding some of the " well he can shout and should use it arguments", just because i can see the top students test in College Algebra doesn't mean i should cheat and look at it. " but you can use it..." yea i can and its wrong to do so. it breaks the rules of test taking, just as using anything other then swords ( or the set upon weapon) in a duel is cheating and breaks the Rules of Engagement, hence why Ulric fled Solitude. zing.

[fraquar]

Was Torygg even a capable warrior?

[Deleted4666244User]

i do not if Ulfric was right, or if he was wrong. i do not have any info on how the duel was set up, what rules or limits they had. so no judgement from me on Ulfric himself. i side with whichever side is better for my character.

[MacSuibhne]

I wonder if there is a blow -by-blow account of the duel? I've not seen one. Which leads me to believe that people are so invested in the internal story they are creating in their own minds to fill in the gap, that they cannot look at any of it with objectivity or any measure of the Presumption of Innocence.

 

Indeed, dueling goes back a long way...although not in the overly refined, almost sissified manner that movies portray.

 

Nord culture is widely believed to be based on Scandinavian culture and at a guess I would have to place their social and technological level about even with 10th century Sweden (although it was called Gotaland then). Duels were known as Holmgana or Holmgang.

 

While the rules varied place to place the major theme running through them was that terms were decided before hand (3-7 days), the duel was conducted at a Thing (ensuring witnesses), and the person being challenged usually was allowed to strike the first blow. Torygg in this instance.

 

So what happened with Ulfric and Torygg? Did Torygg strike an ineffectual first blow and Ulfric ...fundamentally unhurt...disarm him? Perhaps intending to spare his life? Did Torygg, knowing his ability to continue as King, after being so humiliated, was irrevocably damaged, refuse to give up the fight and force Ulfric to kill him?

 

Sure, that's all speculation...fantasy, hyperbole, wishful thinking, even...but in the absence of a credible eye-witness (not an Imperial partisan or a member of Torygg's court), it's as good a story as the one told by people who want so desperately to believe that Ulfric played unfairly.

 

But it fits the cultural milieu very well and if true, its speaks volumes about Ulfric's sense of honour that he isn't talking. Or demeaning Torygg.

Edited June 7, 2012 by MacSuibhne