Why Ulfric was right to kill the High King

[BrettM]

@Macsuibhne, what makes you think that the high king has absolute authority? As for Nordic law...I hear more about Nordic customs and traditions regarding Nord rule, than 'law'. Ulfric challenged Torygg while he was holding court. According to Nord custom, if he had refused, there would have been a Moot to decide the outcome. Not a likely scenario for someone who holds 'absolute authority I would have thought.

 

None of that is true...

http://www.imperial-library.info/content/skyrims-rule

Actually, according to the statements of Sybile Stentor, the statement you bolded in Breakwind's reply IS true. She clearly describes the challenge custom as giving Ulfric the right to demand a Moot to judge the fitness of the High King if he refused the challenge. We have no reason to doubt her word on that.

 

No feudal authority is truly absolute in practice. A king is bound by custom and tradition, and the bonds of fealty impose obligations on him as well as on his vassals. It isn't a one-way street, and a king violates fealty and tradition at his peril. A king rules because he has the support of the high nobility. The high nobility rules because they have the support of the lower nobility and knights under them. The lower nobility rules because they have the support of the people. If any of them goes too far, their vassals will turn on them.

 

For a Skyrim example of this system, look at why Dengeir stepped down as Jarl of Falkreath: his nobles pressured him into it. Without the support of his nobles, he had no authority and knew it. Perhaps Torygg could have gotten away with jailing Ulfric and using his "absolute authority" to deny Ulfric his established right to call a Moot. But I wouldn't bet on the other jarls sitting still for a High King who arbitrarily obliterates the rights of his nobles for his own benefit, even if they don't like the noble in question. If they do, they're fools.

[MacSuibhne]

 

And we're supposed to take her word for it? Without even considering the fact that she would have a vested interest in portraying Ulfric as an evil bastard regardless of whether there's truth behind it or not?

 

Of course we're supposed to take her word for it. Yes, she's biased. Yes, it's blatant hearsay. Yes, she has an interest in portraying Ulfric as evil. But she's on the "good" side. And everything they say is gospel no matter how irrational, biased, objectively mistaken or misinformed, or even downright stupid. That's the way it goes down in these discussions.

 

Something tells me that more people are getting caught up in the buzzwords and spin more than the actual facts.

 

I've often thought that there's some other factor at work here. I suspect that people who have little or no passion in their own lives tend to dislike those that do. Ulfric's famous speech about "Why I fight" may turn off more people that anything else in the game. It makes people uncomfortable because they have never felt so strongly about anything and cannot believe that such feelings can be genuine.

 

Then too, people don't like confidence in other people. Maybe it is lack of experience, but it looks like arrogance to those not able to tell the difference. Dilbert says experience and being a jerk look the same...to those who don't have experience (yesterday's strip).

 

There's a whole lot of subjective, emotional, almost hysterical jargon being thrown about. It's a signal, a sure sign, that there's no analytical or rational thinking going on.

[breakwind]

@ Macsuibhne, You have brought up books to me before, and I will give you the same kind of advice I did before. Don't treat them as gospel as a large percentage of the are written with bias, depending on whate race and what faction or beliefs the author/authors belong to. As for the power of the Moot, if you do the Stormcloak Quest, you will hear dialogue between Ulfric and his underling...Galmar I think his name is, about the other jarls wanting a Moot against Ulfric. Galmar seems very concerned about this, not the sort of behaviour a wizened old warrior would have towards a 'ceremonial council' with no real power, I would have thought.....or maybe he never read the 'books'? Even Ulfric's comments of choosing to ignore this show a defiance typical of a rebel against an authority

[MacSuibhne]

 

Actually, according to the statements of Sybile Stentor, the statement you bolded in Breakwind's reply IS true. She clearly describes the challenge custom as giving Ulfric the right to demand a Moot to judge the fitness of the High King if he refused the challenge. We have no reason to doubt her word on that.

 

 

Yet, the quotes from the Lore indicate that the Moot is basically a rubber stamp. And more importantly, that since the time of Tiber Septim its only function has been to name a new High King when there is no direct heir. The fact that the Moot is not willing to declare Elysif (or anyone else) High King is significant

 

There is a hierarchy of believability that applies in these situations. I would suggest that the Lore is first or second from the top and hearsay is near the bottom no matter who it comes from (even Ulfric).

 

You're absolutely correct, the King relies on support from his Jarls but as I pointed out in a previous post, in real life feudalism Good King Olaf's son, Mad King Hrolf, will virtually never be removed by a Moot. More likely he would be poisoned by his wife. [surely one of the things,albeit a small thing, that resonates with us in this game is a degree of verisimilitude to balance the fantasy.]

 

So Sybile Stentor's statement is not necessarily gospel either, esp. since she is part of Torygg's court.

 

But it's moot (:laugh:) because Torygg accepted the challenge. And moot again because as vassals to the High King who is a vassal to the Emperor, the Moot is not going to defy the Empire and remove Torygg. That's wishful thinking.

 

And knowing that, Ulfric cannot trust the Moot before or after the duel.

Edited June 27, 2012 by MacSuibhne

[MacSuibhne]

Two quick, related questions...

 

Where is it said and by whom that the duel between Torygg and Ulfric took place immediately after Ulfric entered the Blue Palace?

 

And who said, and where, that there was no body after the duel?

 

Idle speculation alert: if there's no body maybe it never happened. Maybe Torygg was hustled off to Cyrodiil for his own protection?

Edited June 27, 2012 by MacSuibhne

[Archone]

the Jarl is NOT happy about being pushed into a corner like this. He finally chooses to side with the Empire largely because Ulfric literally gave him no alternative.

 

And this is a problem, how?

 

And honestly, he chooses the Empire not only because he was backed into a corner, but also because he was likely to align with the Imperials anyway. I may not remember all of the dialogue, but from what I do remember nothing ever indicated that Balgruff would have taken the side of the Stormcloaks.

 

 

 

That's... actually what I meant. It's not a problem. He chose out of pragmaticism and logic.

 

 

Ulfric makes a point of using fire in his catapults. He's not trying to batter down the walls; he wants the fortifications left intact even as he uses fire on a civilian population.

 

Its strategy. Whiterun City and its hold is a very key location in Skyrim and opens up either side to to the other more easily (to the Stormcloaks advantage more than the Imperials). To break the city walls would be, to put it bluntly, stupid. And I've seen nothing that shows that him using fire with his catapults disenchanted anyone. Do notice that the vast majority of Stormcloak supporters in Whiterun would have either evacuated and/or joined the invading army. Same with much of the rest of the civilian population for that matter.

 

(note that this is looking at it in a realistic way, not in the way that the game portrays. The fact that business goes on as usual in Whiterun while you rush to defend it on the Imperial side (while fire rains down from the sky no less) proves that the game isn't the best witness to the Battle of Whiterun)

 

The strategic merits may be debatable. Ulfric's greatest asset is his popularity with others. Here is a guy willing to actually tell the Thalmer where to stick their "Eight Divines," and even punctuate it with a weapon. That's actually what really wins it for him, if the Dovahkin sides with the Stormcloaks: the fact that he was able to attract people like...the Dovahkin (also known as "walking engine of unstoppable slaughter, who terrifies dragons").

 

 

Three: it's neither sophistry nor false to claim that Torygg would have listened to Ulfric had Ulfric used words other than "fus-rah-do." Elsif specifically states, "my husband idolized Ulfric. He would probably have joined Ulfric's cause had Ulfric come to talk, not fight."

 

And we're supposed to take her word for it? Without even considering the fact that she would have a vested interest in portraying Ulfric as an evil bastard regardless of whether there's truth behind it or not?

 

And even if we presume Torygg would have done that, its still rather terrible. As I've said before, a High-King doesn't wait on the whims of some Jarl's son. He makes up his own damn mind like a man.

 

No, Lex Luthor stealing forty cakes is terrible. Torygg was a young king, nothing more. Not a bootlicker, not a spineless toad. He DID accept Ulfric's challenge, after all (unless this is like the TRADITIONAL sort of Nord duel referenced in one of the books from Oblivion, where you walk up to the other guy, say, "thou art no brother of mine," and chop his head off before he can blink). He wasn't waiting on anyone's whims. He heard "that guy you hero worship is here to see you" and eagerly invited him in to talk.

 

And yes, we are supposed to take Elisif's word for it. If we're to take Ulfric's word for the things he claims, then we can surely extend the same courtesy to Elisif. Otherwise the theory that Ulfric is actually a secret Thalmer double agent becomes a lot more plausible -- and I for one would rather treat the character with more respect than that.

 

And you know, it still begs the question of why Torygg's death is such an issue. Are people actually concerned about the ramifications of his death and what could have been had he not died or are people just getting worked up because they got caught up in the propaganda machine against Ulfric thats thrown in your face from the beginning the game? Hell, from the loading screen if you got the right one?

 

Propaganda machine? When you start the game you're on a cart waiting to be executed by the Empire because of a glitch in paperwork. One of the two people who saves you is a Stormcloak and you walk out of there with the impression that you're now already a fugitive from justice in the eyes of the Empire. And the first of the two sides you get a mission to go join up with is the Stormcloaks. When I first started playing with my first character I didn't know joining the Empire was even an option! And every time I start a new character and am reminded that I'm about to have my head chopped off just because I rode in a cart with a guy who I never met and whom we know nothing about, I feel the urge to kill a few Imperials (especially the torturer and his assistant. They NEVER live when I start a new playthrough :P ).

 

There's a whole lot of subjective, emotional, almost hysterical jargon being thrown about. It's a signal, a sure sign, that there's no analytical or rational thinking going on.

 

Mac... I'm accusing you of trolling at this point. You've insulted everyone here with your posts. You've repeatedly failed to answer my challenge to either show Ulfric denouncing the racism of his supporters, or to showcase where I ever said I was fine with anything the Thalmer have done. You have repeatedly used the word "hearsay" and repeatedly shown a lack of understanding of the definition of that word (insert Inigo Montoya quote: "Why do you keep using that word? I do not think that word thinks what you think it means."). And you have repeatedly made it clear that you idolize Ulfric, that he can do no wrong -- and that the only thing worse in your eyes than claiming that Ulfric is a bad guy is claiming that Ulfric is a nuanced and complex character with strengths as well as flaws. You're using the wrong homophone here. I believe the word you're actually meaning to use is "heresy."

Edited June 27, 2012 by Archone

[MacSuibhne]

I've been called worse by better, cully.

[TheVampireDante]

Let's keep it civil shall we? That's to everyone...

[Moraelin]

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

 

I'll partially agree, but I don't think it's strictly about physical prowess, but about how they're willing to use it and how they're going about getting power. As I keep saying, putting someone at the top because he's willing to kill everyone in his way, should not leave one surprised when they still want to kill everyone standing in their way afterwards. Just about any brutal dictatorship in the last couple of centuries started with putting someone at the top because they're so radical and revolutionary that they want to kill everyone who thinks differently. Roll the forward a decade after they actually got the power, and you find them still wanting to kill everyone who thinks differently. I don't think Ulfric would be any different than, say, Lenin.

 

But as a means of getting power, I'd say it's actually it's just another way to have the Peter Principle in one step. Someone gets promoted for having skill X (in this case one-on-one combat), but his new job requires skills Y and Z (e.g., economics or diplomacy) which he hasn't proven at all.

 

In fact, in Ulfric's case, he actively proves that he's crap at anything else. He alienates even half the population in his own city for not being Nords. Which predictably produces a "why should we help? it's not OUR war" reaction. And has a right hand man who gives you pretty much a "why the heck do you want to join if you're not a Nord" as the first thing when you join. He also makes it clear if you ask that basically he's not sending his own soldiers on such trials likely to result in death, and coming after that questioning as to what you're doing there if you're not a Nord, it comes across as trying to get the non-Skyrim guy killed. It invariably gave me the idea, "Why the heck DO I want to fight for these guys?" I mean, you could be a blond and pale Breton, and you still get the line that you're not a Nord. I mean, even the Nazis gave thousands of Jews certificates of being almost Aryan enough if they looked the part, but for Ulfric and the gang apparently it matters that you're not exactly Nord.

 

And as an illustration of how bad they're at it, in the starting animation they'll spout the "damned elves!" line even if it then turns out you were an elf too, along with that thief from Rorikstead. Way to win hearts and minds, eh? :P

 

Also, unsurprisingly, he's made no allies. Even among the Nords, more than half the population isn't all that thrilled about it. Even when mentioning the Thalmor dragging people off in the middle of the nigths, a lot of people manage to come out as still not supporting Ulfric as the alternative. That's EPIC FAIL right there. It's like being the guy running against Stalin and having people think, "naah, I like Stalin's brutal secret police better." Exactly how bad do you have to be at PR to fail that epically?

 

And he managed to secure the help of exactly ZERO Jarls before you get into the act to do that for him. The only one that's even remotely pro-Ulfric is a senile old buffoon, and even that one not because of any diplomacy on Ulfric's part, but just because of his being delusional about the past and glory on his own.

 

While for example being charming to win a vote or gain the Empire's or Jarls' support doesn't guarantee knowing say, economics, either, it's nevertheless at least ONE skill that's still useful even after getting the power. Whereas being strong in one-on-one combat is of exactly zero importance to a ruler, except maybe to fend off future challengers. There were no wars ever won by a one-on-one duel between kings, and no economy ever was fixed by the king's being really good at swinging an axe.

 

I'm also not convinced he's even that good at leading, or for that matter, recruiting an army. Trials to see if one is fit to fight some great odds alone are good for heroic fiction, but real armies don't win by personal martial prowess. They win by cohesion and acting as a unit. While the Imperials also don't come across as much more organized, never the less, they ARE a bit more more organized than the riff-raff gang that Ulfric is building. Ulfric might win against the few local auxilia the Empire seems to be having there at the moment, but my bet would be that he'll be pwned badly the moment a proper legion marches in from Cyrodiil. And that's not even counting on the Thalmor which will be almost guaranteed to come along for a rematch..

 

And even that doesn't matter all that much, because real wars tend to be won by whoever can throw more soldiers and more economic power at it, not by those with delusions of ancient glory. See WW2 for a bunch of people who got that proven to them the hard way.

 

So basically I don't care if it's a Nord tradition -- and, as was mentioned, using the Thu'um in it was actually disapproved by tradition -- it's a bad tradition.

[imperistan]

That's... actually what I meant. It's not a problem. He chose out of pragmaticism and logic.

 

Doubtful. You spun it as a slight against Ulfric, hence me asking why it was a problem.

 

The strategic merits may be debatable. Ulfric's greatest asset is his popularity with others.

 

Popularity isn't going to win you a war. It may let you get one going, but it won't win it for you unless you're so massively popular your enemies troops defect to you, and thats clearly not the case.

 

That's actually what really wins it for him, if the Dovahkin sides with the Stormcloaks: the fact that he was able to attract people like...the Dovahkin (also known as "walking engine of unstoppable slaughter, who terrifies dragons").

 

Liking Ulfric is only one of the various reasons the Dragonborn (IE, player character) could side with the Stormcloaks. I for one don't like Ulfric at all yet all my non-specifically-Imperial characters have taken up his cause.

 

Torygg was a young king, nothing more. Not a bootlicker, not a spineless toad. He DID accept Ulfric's challenge, after all (unless this is like the TRADITIONAL sort of Nord duel referenced in one of the books from Oblivion, where you walk up to the other guy, say, "thou art no brother of mine," and chop his head off before he can blink). He wasn't waiting on anyone's whims. He heard "that guy you hero worship is here to see you" and eagerly invited him in to talk.

 

Accepting Ulfric's challenge was the only thing really worthy that Torygg did, but thats only because he accepted a duel he was clearly couldn't win. But as I've already explained, he was still stupid for doing it.

 

And he wasn't? I guess we're throwing the Imperials argument that "IF only Ulfric had TALKED INSTEAD OF BLAH-RO-DAH'D HIM WAHHHH!" right out the window then?

 

And yes, we are supposed to take Elisif's word for it. If we're to take Ulfric's word for the things he claims, then we can surely extend the same courtesy to Elisif. Otherwise the theory that Ulfric is actually a secret Thalmer double agent becomes a lot more plausible -- and I for one would rather treat the character with more respect than that.

 

I've never taken Ulfric's word for anything, so I don't see your point here.

 

Propaganda machine? When you start the game you're on a cart waiting to be executed by the Empire because of a glitch in paperwork

 

So I guess you didn't listen to Tullius' speech? Perhaps you don't see how most people who've played the earlier games would have went in on the presumption of the Empire being the general good guys, and thus accepting the Imperials as the general good guys, even though most would not have actually realized that there was a new Empire quite separate and more importantly very different from the old one now, if they even knew there was a new Empire. (not everyone read the books after all) And because of that they would have heard the word "rebellion" (uttered by Lokir not minutes into the fist conversation of the game) and automatically seen it as a bad thing.

 

Many people would have redacted much of those thoughts (being a prisoner I think wasn't going to bother anyone if they played any of the other games, unless you specifically didn't like it, but even then you still weren't likely to be bothered) after having their heads put to the block but they are just as guilty of not looking at the situation objectively as those who automatically supported the Imperials.

 

You've insulted everyone here with your posts

 

I think he's simply hitting the same point I hit before. Where we get so involved in having to repeat arguments and counter arguments, all the while trying to get everyone to debate with the same level of seriousness (and real objectivity for that matter) that he puts into it, that we just start getting fed up and end up teetering on the edge of just telling everyone that their idiots and need to go away if they won't even bother to argue properly. (note that this I'm just being descriptive. I'm not actually calling anyone an idiot)

 

He alienates even half the population in his own city for not being Nords. Which predictably produces a "why should we help? it's not OUR war" reaction

 

They alienate themselves. The Grey Quarter is only bad (and honestly, its not bad at all) because the Dunmer won't do anything to fix it for themselves. They've done literally nothing to deserve a handout.

 

They do have a right to say that it isn't their war, but not for the reason you think. And lets also remember that the Nords who yell at that Dunmer woman are drunken beggars. They are hardly representatives of Ulfric himself. (and please don't make me have to explain why Ulfric has no obligation to be Martin Luther King Jr., the Tamriel Edition.)

 

Remember that these are Dunmer, the former most xenophobic race on Tamriel, and they still largely are anyway. Do we not remember the anthem of the Ordinators and other guards from Morrowind?: "We're watching you........scum." So let's not pretend either that things would be much different if the roles were reversed.

 

And has a right hand man who gives you pretty much a "why the heck do you want to join if you're not a Nord" as the first thing when you join.

 

He asks the same question even to a Nord. He's not asking it because of your race, he's asking because of your motivations. He isn't going to let someone join who isn't going to be dedicated to the cause.

 

And as an illustration of how bad they're at it, in the starting animation they'll spout the "damned elves!" line even if it then turns out you were an elf too, along with that thief from Rorikstead. Way to win hearts and minds, eh?

 

Virtually all Nord's have a bit of racism towards Elves of any kind. The only reason they don't do it to the PC (or regardless of the PC's presence) if the PC is an elf is purely gameplay and the generally poor writing the game has. In Morrowind you were equally hated regardless of your race. In Skyrim, you may as well not have a race for all it matters to anyone in the game.

 

Also, unsurprisingly, he's made no allies. Even among the Nords, more than half the population isn't all that thrilled about it. Even when mentioning the Thalmor dragging people off in the middle of the nigths, a lot of people manage to come out as still not supporting Ulfric as the alternative. That's EPIC FAIL right there. It's like being the guy running against Stalin and having people think, "naah, I like Stalin's brutal secret police better." Exactly how bad do you have to be at PR to fail that epically?

 

1. Half the population lives directly under Imperial rule or Imperial supported rule, and this isn't a world with the wonders of the internet. Not everyone who takes a side is going to be taking it because they actually weighed both sides. Most won't even have the knowledge necessary to weight both sides. They'll have to choose based on what propaganda they're hearing, and in Solitude or Markarth, you're not going to be hearing very many cries for Stormcloak support. Fact of the matter is we're dealing with a population that's comprised of peasants who all carry the exact amount of education and access to information that you'd think a peasant in a medieval setting would have. That is, just about none at all.

 

2. It's been an entire generation since Talos worship was banned. That's long enough to get a good portion of the population to accept that. The only reason Talos worship is still so prevalent in Skyrim is because its Skyrim, where Talos was THE god to worship. After all, you don't get a population to change a commonly used phrase like "By the Nines!" to "By the Eight!", when its been in use since that religion's inception (IE, a long time ago) without at least having one new generation that grows up learning the latter phrase rather than the former. So chances are that most who are looking at the persecution of Talos worship (if they even see it that is, for all most people will believe its only jail time if you get caught. Not torture and eventual execution) and not seeing it as reason to support the Stormcloaks are doing so because they don't see it as an actual issue.

 

There's also the fact that the Thalmor presence in Skyrim isn't exactly like it is down in Cyrodiil, where its probably just as bad as WW2 Germany was for the Jewish. So it may well be that many don't even believe that persecution is really going on, and are just dismissing it as rumors. This would be especially so if they already support the Imperials, as they'll just associate the claims with "Stormcloak lies".

 

And he managed to secure the help of exactly ZERO Jarls before you get into the act to do that for him. The only one that's even remotely pro-Ulfric is a senile old buffoon, and even that one not because of any diplomacy on Ulfric's part, but just because of his being delusional about the past and glory on his own.

 

You do realize that half of Skyrim already supports him right? Including the Jarl's that preside over that half of the population. There's a reason why there's an entire half of the map considered Stormcloak territory, and that isn't so because no other Jarl's support his cause.

 

There were no wars ever won by a one-on-one duel between kings, and no economy ever was fixed by the king's being really good at swinging an axe.

 

No, but being a great warrior tends to lend itself to being a great general as well. If you can be a great general but still a weakling personally then by all means, but this is a medieval setting. Most King's and leaders fought along side their men to some degree. Especially in the Norse cultures that the Nords were based on.

 

And you'd be surprised with a little King-supported raiding can do for an economy. The Norse certainly prospered from raiding, and most king's participated in it during their reigns.

 

I'm also not convinced he's even that good at leading, or for that matter, recruiting an army. Trials to see if one is fit to fight some great odds alone are good for heroic fiction, but real armies don't win by personal martial prowess. They win by cohesion and acting as a unit

 

Right, because the Imperials don't behave the exact same way.

 

but my bet would be that he'll be pwned badly the moment a proper legion marches in from Cyrodiil. And that's not even counting on the Thalmor which will be almost guaranteed to come along for a rematch..

 

You do realize that there is a proper Legion in Skryim right? Legion's make up the Imperial presence in the Empire's provinces, and it was a full Legion that was present in the country when the civil war was started.

 

And don't make me get into how the bolded part is so devastatingly wrong. I don't want to have to type all that crap out. again.

 

And even that doesn't matter all that much, because real wars tend to be won by whoever can throw more soldiers and more economic power at it, not by those with delusions of ancient glory. See WW2 for a bunch of people who got that proven to them the hard way.

 

And yet the Stormcloaks still win if you side with them. You can't use the PC's presence as an excuse because that's just one person that in reality isn't anything that special other than his natural affinity for the Thu'um. Beyond his voice, any man could match his prowess.

 

So its either we're going use the PC as a MacGuffin so we don't have to actually think hard about this or we're going to accept that either A, the Empire can't throw the resources into the war (which lends itself to a point for the Stormcloaks, because they would then clearly have the resources. Or at least, more than the Empire) or B) that the TES universe doesn't work like the real world and that means wars won't work like they do/did in the real world.