Why Ulfric was right to kill the High King

[imperistan]

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.

 

Huh, and to think just yesterday I was looking for a post like this to show Mac. Its these sorts of people that I don't like responding to. Those that come in here, insert themselves into the debate, and then cop out by pulling ^ that card.

 

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.

 

He actually did intend on becoming a Greybeard, but he was driven more by his love for his homeland.

 

And as for the Norse, things are a bit muddied. I haven't looked that hard, but just from what I know of Scandinavian history in the viking era you could legally gain the right to cut someone's head off if they so much as called you a pansy and you took offense. And duels at this time would have been started over pretty much the same sort of issues, so whether there was any real distinction between formal duels and a common brawl is rather unknown (as far as I know).

[Michio2013]

It does not speak at all of Ulfric's sense of honor that he isn't talking. Due to our lack of knowledge on the subject, he could be mumming up to preserve Torygg's memory, which is commendable, but he it is just as likely that he is saying nothing because it speaks ill of him because, let's say, he killed a man in a duel, where protocol usually dictates besting, not killing an opponent, or because he broke some other rule of engagement or tradition. It says nothing of his sense of honor.

[MacSuibhne]

As I understand it "protocol" in Holmganga was to the death.

 

So we don't know why Ulfric isn't talking. We don't know how it all fell out. And we can't muster the Presumption of Innocence to at the very least take all the hearsay and disgruntled slander by third parties with a grain of salt. We substitute mean-spirited imaginings for actually judging the man by his own words and his actions.

 

I don't know what it says about Ulfric but that right there says a lot about us...

 

Apply that standard to any Imperial official or Thalmor agent and you've got a reason to disassociate yourself from the Empire as fast as you can, in a nutshell.

[Michio2013]

Typically, according to things like the rules of duels. The principle is known as first blood, when one man is wounded, the duel is over. It's been this way since medieval times, and applies to skyrim. Based on this, you can actually say that Ulfric was dishonorable because he went past the requirements set down by the traditional codes of honor.

[BrettM]

The one eye-witness I've found is Sybille Stentor, the court wizard in Solitude. According to her, Ulfric had asked for an audience and everyone assumed he was going to use it to ask for a rebellion. When he got to court, though, he issued a challenge. According to Sybille, Nord custom says that a challenge issued in court can be accepted or rejected. However, if rejected, Ulfric would then have the right to call a Moot that would determine the fitness of the High King and could replace him. (Of course, Sybille also ends her description by saying that Ulfric then Shouted Torygg apart, so one has to wonder at her credibility.)

 

Did Torygg really have anything to fear if he had rejected the challenge? We know Ulfric wants to win the rebellion before any Moot because he feels that it would certainly confirm Elisif under the existing circumstances. But would the Moot have stood behind Torygg if he had rejected the challenge, or would they have regarded this as a sign of cowardice unbecoming a High King and turned against him? I can see where Torygg might have felt trapped in a situation where he would lose either way, so he elected to go down fighting to maintain his honor.

 

It certainly seems to me that Ulfric lost honor by using a Shout, whether it tore Torygg apart or just disarmed him. The Graybeards don't talk about Ulfric specifically, but they do tell you that they accept very few candidates for training. When you ask why they are willing to train YOU, since you do not follow the Way of the Voice, they tell you that dragonborn are not bound by the rules of ordinary mortals. It seems pretty obvious that they do not accept others for training unless the candidate pledges himself to follow the Way. Ulfric must have taken that vow, and he broke it by using a thu'um against Torygg, which certainly doesn't speak well for his honor.

Edited June 8, 2012 by BrettM

[breakwind]

Ulfric may have been a more honourable person before the Thalmor captured and tortured him

[MacSuibhne]

Typically, according to things like the rules of duels. The principle is known as first blood, when one man is wounded, the duel is over. It's been this way since medieval times, and applies to skyrim. Based on this, you can actually say that Ulfric was dishonorable because he went past the requirements set down by the traditional codes of honor.

 

 

I don't believe the issue of "first blood" entered into early Viking/Scandinavian Holmganga. I think Imperistan has the right of it.

 

But even if it did, we don't know what Torygg did--so my "story" is just as good as yours...maybe better if only because it Presumes Innocence until solid evidence proves otherwise.

[MacSuibhne]

It certainly seems to me that Ulfric lost honor by using a Shout, whether it tore Torygg apart or just disarmed him.

 

 

I don't see it the same way. When you strip Torygg and Ulfric down to their night shirts, Ulfric still has the shout, Just as he still has massive wrists and wide shoulders.

 

I've been writing philosophical essays and technical manuals, and so forth, for over forty years. Am I dishonourable because I use my "shouts" to disarm people less literate on this forum?

 

I come back around to the idea of dual standards here. The greybeards are being disingenuous...to make you feel justified.

 

Because if you want to disallow Ulfric's shout, you have to disallow magic. What if Ulfric had been a mage instead of a warrior?

 

And you have to disallow the Dragonborn from exercising his Thuum against those not similarly endowed as well. The whole red herring, and self-congratulatory excuse, that it is alright to use shouts on bandits and other folks we don't like is just that--an excuse.

 

If it's fair for the Dragonborn, it's got to be fair for anyone else who has the dedication, perseverance and strength to master the skill. From where I stand, anything else is hypocritical and self-serving.

[jordanLoL]

Under Nord tradition, Ulfric did not commit a crime. So naturally those that do not fully understand old Nord traditions would cry foul on the spot, especially when The High King is involved. Ulfric may lust for the Throne but who else in Skyrim is better fit to lead? Torygg, who failed in defending himself? The young and inexperienced Elisif? The indecisive and fearful Balgruuf? Ulfric is the only Jarl in Skyrim that is fit to lead, and does not seem to fear the current events.

 

Meanwhile, The Thalmor are openly killing and torturing believed worshipers of Talos, The Empire is rotting from the inside out, and the Dragons along with The World Eater have returned. Based on the current situation in Skyrim, Ulfric's actions are not condemning. He did use a shout in combat though, which is considered to be naughty, unless you're Dragonborn. However, speaking to Ulfric about the incident reveals that he still believes the Thu'um should not be used lightly.

 

Skyrim needs a true leader, not someone that just makes educated decisions. A true leader that will act, will ultimately be the best solution for Skyrim.

Edited June 8, 2012 by jordanLoL

[modder3434]

Under Nord tradition, Ulfric did not commit a crime. So naturally those that do not fully understand old Nord traditions would cry foul on the spot, especially when The High King is involved. Ulfric may lust for the Throne but who else in Skyrim is better fit to lead? Torygg, who failed in defending himself? The young and inexperienced Elisif? The indecisive and fearful Balgruuf? Ulfric is the only Jarl in Skyrim that is fit to lead, and does not seem to fear the current events.

 

Meanwhile, The Thalmor are openly killing and torturing believed worshipers of Talos, The Empire is rotting from the inside out, and the Dragons along with The World Eater have returned. Based on the current situation in Skyrim, Ulfric's actions are not condemning. He did use a shout in combat though, which is considered to be naughty, unless you're Dragonborn. However, speaking to Ulfric about the incident reveals that he still believes the Thu'um should not be used lightly.

 

Skyrim needs a true leader, not someone that just makes educated decisions. A true leader that will act, will ultimately be the best solution for Skyrim.

 

i disagree, i think Balgruuf would be a better high king then Ulric, he's not indecisive (he justs likes to look at the possibility and their consequences before doing something hasty.) As for being fearful (i call it paroinia) it keeps a jarl alive and alert.