Why Ulfric was right to kill the High King

[imperistan]

I can agree with that point, yes. What we do know is that Torygg did in fact admire Ulfric, that a lot of people disapproved of Ulfric killing Torygg (including those who might have allied with Ulfric had he not done so), and that the Thu'um is considered "cheating" as the Greybeards emphasized: the Thu'um is not to be used in battle (the Dovahkin being an exception because he's saving Skyrim, not conquering it).

 

1. The Way of the Voice and ancient Nordic dueling customs are not intertwined and never were.

 

2. The Way of the Voice is an irrelevant, irrationally pacifist philosophy created by an arrogant man saving face.

 

3. Only those lacking in strength cry "cheating!" in a battle to the death.

 

And therefore the bias is in favor of the ancient tradition of duels consisting of "tell them why you're mad, and then chop off their head without further adu." It's not like the Argonian Account, where the Imperial author shows a disdain for the Khajiit attackers. This is a book saying "this is what was done - and I approve."

 

And? This still has no relevance to what you were replying to.

 

Yes, it is

 

No, its not. Unless you're clinging to some idea that the Empire is defined by its geographic components. If we're going to cling to that idea then the Roman Empire was just the Greek and Ottoman Empires with a nice shiny boot out to the left.

 

No, the old Empire died when Mede stole the throne. Truly, the old Empire died with Martin Septim, the last of the line of Emperors that Talos put in place.

 

Not realy. The Altmer, Bosmer, and Dunmer always had a bit of a "sibling rivalry" thing going on, even back in Uriel Septim's day. Pretty soon the disagreements are going to involve things like "failure to agree that Altmer are superior to Bosmer and Dunmer," and "failure to agree that Bosmer and Dunmer need to recognize their natural place as subordinate to the Master Race descended from the gods themselves."

 

Not going to happen.

 

Never said it was. I said it was a case of one country introducing the concept of working together, and as a result they got to enjoy the benefits of Orc warriors and smiths in the legion... Breton battlemages and healers... Nord berserkers in the legion... Bosmer archers... The Empire became big in the first place because they were uniting with others through treaties and alliances, not because the emperors were crushing people beneath their heels. That's why Morrowind still had slaves in the time of the Nevarine - the Empire frowned on slavery elsewhere, but Morrowind wasn't a conquered territory, but rather a province through treaty and mutual respect.

 

So, like I said, it was never a case of the Empire introducing fire to peasants. (PSST, that was what that Monty Python vid goes on about. The Romans introducing vast technological innovations to a society still well behind them)

 

Considering you fail to understand where he emphasized the importance of letting your enemy do the work for you (one unit of your enemy's provisions is equal to ten of your own, etc), I'd say you need to read him again.

 

Still irrelevant. Unless you're trying to make that stupid point that the Rebellion is bad just because it happens to benefit the Dominion. You want to know why that logic is stupid? Because then, the Empire is helping the Dominion because it isn't reconciling with the Stormcloaks. Argonia is helping the Dominion because it isn't helping the Empire. The entire continent of Akavir is bad because it isn't helping the Empire.

 

You know, people criticize Galmar for going on about "You're either with us or against us" but this stupid argument is just that same line of thinking hidden in a bunch of crap. You're not helping the Empire! You're helping the Dominion! You're against us!

 

With the exception of Arena, all the game champions were indeed able to become MOATs. In Oblivion you could gain 100s in every skill and (with clever choices and min/maxing) max out your stats. And that's in addition to the use of Restoration and Alchemy. A few seperate spells for cumulative "Fortify Intelligence" and "Fortify Magicka" effects, and then you could fortify... whatever. Strength. Acrobatics. And that's not even touching on the effectivenes of cumulative stacking "weakness to X" effects.

 

Game.Play

 

What mercy?

 

Lets see:

 

1. The Dominion just lost an entire invasion army as well as the massive reinforcements they punted onto that army and a trophy that they worked extremely hard to gain.

 

2. The Dominion was already starting to get stalemated in Hammerfel, as the Lady's army was being pushed back across the Alik'r just as the Imperial City was retaken.

 

3. The Dominion lacked the provinces and quickly multiplying member races to rebuild their forces compared to the Empire. That they couldn't break Hammerfell after 5 years confirms that they wouldn't have been able to break the rest of the Empire, particularly when the Empire has two untapped, untouched provinces to draw resources from compared to the Dominion's one province (that isn't even a province, but a client state) that at best was only going to provide supplies, not troops.

 

Cute. Now copy/paste wherever I said that EMPIRE GOOD, or anything other than "both sides make valid points." And no "fixing" them when you do.

 

Cute. Now copy/paste wherever I said that you said that.

 

Then why ARE they fighting?

 

Because this is what men who are told their homeland is being threatened (and see it everyday with worshipers of the Nords patron god being persecuted by a bunch of goddamned foreign elves that got beaten 30 years ago yet were still given all of their demands) do. Remember that we are not dealing with educated people. Mob mentality is omnipresent on both sides of the war. This is why we don't see many Imperial supporters in Stormcloak territory and vice versa. People chose their allegiances based on where they were, what they were hearing, and what they were raised to believe.

 

We also have to remember that the vast majority of people fighting were born in the last 30 years. Most will not have actually been in the Great War, so its unlikely that they'll understand the ramifications of what they're doing and why its happening.

[Moraelin]

3. Only those lacking in strength cry "cheating!" in a battle to the death.

 

You'd think so, but DUELS were always a formalized affair, designed to ensure a fair fight. Pretty much for as long as we have a recorded history, that's been the case.

 

For example for the Norse, the RL equivalent of the Nords, it was even regulated how many shields you can bring (three), and you were not allowed to step out of the duel area, etc.

 

By renaissance times, in Germany it even got to such ridiculous extremes as allowing only a weird oversized spiked shield as the only allowed weapon in judicial duels. Some guess it was because it was such an unusual weapon that nobody was trained with, thus being the ultimate equalizer.

 

Other strange rules, and we even have the illustrations for them in manuscripts, are such stuff as that if it came to a judicial duel between a man and a woman, the guy got to stand in a hole in the ground. Or who gets to shoot first. And stuff like that.

 

But anyway, another constant of duels all across human history was that both had to use the same weapons, unless otherwise agreed in advance (though that was are in duels, as opposed to tourneys,) so only the skill matters. That was what a duel was supposed to be all about.

 

And it was the rules that made duel a honourable affair, as opposed to just running someone through in a back alley.

 

I assure you that if you did something like pull a pistol and shoot the guy in a duel with rapiers, it would be considered a common murder. You could moan and fuss all you want about how "Only those lacking in strength cry "cheating!" in a battle to the death. ", but it would be considered a common murder anyway.

 

You can use whatever aces you have up your sleeves, if someone tries to mug you in an alley. Shoot them, or shout at them, or whatever works. But duels were a very different affair. The whole point was that there were no aces up the sleeves allowed. You fight by the rules, and if you win, you get honour. Pull some dirty trick, and you'd be no more than a dishonourable murderer.

 

It'd be easier if you just admit that you just don't like the Stormcloaks rather than trying to make it sound like you have an objective point to make.

 

It'd also be easier if you stopped having the... strange mis-conception that everyone who disagrees with you has something else to admit.

 

I mean, think about it for a moment. What reason would anyone have to hate some fictive characters, or joining them, if not for something they actually say or do? I assume that's what you meant, because otherwise they're not mutually exclusive, and the above is just fully irrelevant. Maybe not objective, but you don't start just liking or hating some character until, you know, you actually see what they do or say. Dismissing an objection to a character as "just admit that you just don't like X", as if that could possibly be a completely random and utterly unfounded thing, is as illogical as it gets.

 

But anyway, the appeal to motive is a standard fallacy -- i.e., broken logic -- for a reason. If you have objections to what I've said, state them. Or ignore the post. But fantasies about to what I want or don't want to admit are lame and irrelevant.

[fraquar]

Where in any of the game was there any mention of "no Thu'um" in the terms of the duel? Seriously? If this thing is as formal as everybody wants to make it seem to be, that would be the FIRST thing agreed upon since Torygg and all of Skyrim knew Ulfric possessed the capability. He'd be an absolute idiot not to have that on record as a pre-condition of any duel.

 

Where is the record?

[Deleted4666244User]

Drop the Duel and this Topic, it is too biased in the game and on the forums. there is no details about what the rules are for Duels and there is also no recording other than the biased opinion of both sides.

[Archone]

You'd think so, but DUELS were always a formalized affair, designed to ensure a fair fight. Pretty much for as long as we have a recorded history, that's been the case.

 

I'm probably going to draw immediate cries of "internet tough guy" or "liar" or whatnot (even though I'll post some pics from the last match http://imgur.com/m4GY8 http://imgur.com/jrUcJ http://imgur.com/fVpJl . I was the shorter one), but... I'm a kickboxer. And I also know how to defend myself in a real fight...and the two are not the same. In a real fight I can (and have) used the environment as a weapon, used my teeth as a weapon, and done whatever I had to. In the ring... I strut in, wiggle my hips, show off for the crowd, then restrict myself to the padded gloves not only laced but also taped onto my hands, the other legally permitted weapons on my body. There is a referee wearing medical latex gloves who is constantly jumping in to break us up to put a stop to deadlocks and keep things exciting and relatively safe (and they get knocked around a bit by flailing limbs. I've got a lot of respect for those guys).

 

The use of the Thu'um was frowned upon by all sides in this conflict. The Stormcloaks tried to rationalize its use. Ulfric himself insisted he used his sword to strike the deathblow, not his voice. The Empire says "you don't use a powerful gift taught to you by a peaceful monastic order to kill someone." Everyone else just says, "cheating!" It's just like if a boxer were to step into the ring with some metal hidden in his glove. Boxers can and do get disqualified for that sort of thing, because it is... cheating. Dueling is applying the rules of sport to a conflict. When you break the rules, you muddy the decision. You can bite someone's ear in self defense, but not in the ring.

 

2. The Way of the Voice is an irrelevant, irrationally pacifist philosophy created by an arrogant man saving face.

The Way of the Voice is the ONLY way for anyone to learn to use a Thu'um, aside from being the Dovahkin. Whether or not the philosophy is rational or whatnot is less important than the fact that they taught Ulfric something which was sacred to them, and Ulfric misused it in their eyes. It would be like a pop musician taking Gregorian chants and creating a remix for a video involving scantily clad dancing girls. Is it illegal? No. Are there people who are going to admire it? Probably. Is it going to offend the originators of the vocalizations in question? Most certainly.

 

Cute. Now copy/paste wherever I said that EMPIRE GOOD, or anything other than "both sides make valid points." And no "fixing" them when you do.

Cute. Now copy/paste wherever I said that you said that.

 

"Denying it is denying the reality of the situation for no other reason than to cling to the idea that EMPIRE GOOD. EEMPIRE BIG, BIG IS GOOD HURRP DURRP." Posted Yesterday, 04:12 PM.

Game.Play

Yes - like the cutscenes, the lore, and the dialogue. Translation: if it's part of the gameplay, it's probably canonical. Otherwise you're attempting to pick and choose what's valid and what's not based solely on what supports your opinions.

 

It'd be easier if you just admit that you just don't like the Stormcloaks rather than trying to make it sound like you have an objective point to make.

You might want to read up in the thread. Not only did I not say I dislike the Stormcloaks, but I also mentioned that I'm Jewish. People fighting for their religious freedom in the face of oppression by social darwinists are automatically going to appeal to me. I simply feel that both sides have.... and here I repeat myself yet again. "Both sides make valid points." The only ones that are undeniably and unrepentantly vile and evil are the Thalmor, and Alduin.

 

Not realy. The Altmer, Bosmer, and Dunmer always had a bit of a "sibling rivalry" thing going on, even back in Uriel Septim's day. Pretty soon the disagreements are going to involve things like "failure to agree that Altmer are superior to Bosmer and Dunmer," and "failure to agree that Bosmer and Dunmer need to recognize their natural place as subordinate to the Master Race descended from the gods themselves."

 

Not going to happen.

It's been happening already. They already started with the Bosmer in Valenwood. Delphine (http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Thalmor_Dossier:_Delphine ) explicitly states that the purges have already begun.

 

(Please, no jumping on me for the pics. That would simply be rude and childish. And yes, I did strut my hips and dance into the ring. It's a show - we're there to entertain the crowd, after all)

[Moraelin]

Ayup. Duels and tournaments were really full contact sport.

 

To that I'd add that in the game

 

1. The Nords had pretty complex rules, like the thing about bringing someone's axe to another guy as a peace proposal. Or weapons being forbidden in brawls. Or Ulfric being allowed to call for an impeachment if the High King did the dishonourable thing and refused the duel. While we're not exactly in the clear what were their rules for duels, it's clear that they're not chimps, and they do have SOME rules for what's honourable and what is not.

 

2. As you mentioned, they do have a religious commandment against using the Thu'um for anything but praising the gods. I mean, they're not even allowed to use it in war. I can't imagine how it would be allowed in duels.

 

3. Whatever the rules and traditions may have been for wars and succession, it seems clear to me that the other Jarls do not consider what Ulfric did as counting as having earned the throne. In fact, the only thing he has going for him seems to be more like everyone not being convinced that Elisif has a rightful claim by just screwing the old king either.

 

So either he did something wrong in applying that tradition (e.g., it qualifying as a murder rather than duel), OR it's not a tradition to earn the throne that way after all. It may have been a tradition some thousands of years ago, maybe, but at the moment no Jarl in the game seems to think that Ulfric's killing the king automatically makes him king. I.e., it's not a tradition any more. It's only a tradition when enough people agree upon that, not when one guy unilaterally decides to do thing like they were done 5000 years ago.

 

I mean, as a comparison, it also was a tradition on Earth 2000 years ago to take the prisoners of war into slavery. Or from among natives and barbarians, it continued all the way into the 1800's. But if someone decided to pull that crap these days in the name of "but it's been traditional", he'd have the nasty revelation that it's no longer a tradition if the rest of society doesn't see it that way.

[BrettM]

3. Whatever the rules and traditions may have been for wars and succession, it seems clear to me that the other Jarls do not consider what Ulfric did as counting as having earned the throne. In fact, the only thing he has going for him seems to be more like everyone not being convinced that Elisif has a rightful claim by just screwing the old king either.

 

So either he did something wrong in applying that tradition (e.g., it qualifying as a murder rather than duel), OR it's not a tradition to earn the throne that way after all.

I would say the second of these is the case. Even Ulfric says that it wouldn't be proper for him to just proclaim himself High King, but that tradition requires the Moot to give him the title. The duel wasn't about directly earning the throne, but about throwing the throne into contention and forcing the calling of a Moot to decide the issue.

 

This was only possible, as near as I can tell, because Torygg did not have a direct heir. If he had, then his death would have placed that heir on the throne according to the law of succession established by the Pact of Chieftains. I don't think it would have mattered if Ulfric killed him or if he fell down the stairs while drunk, no Moot could have been called as long as a direct heir existed. Without a direct heir, however, a challenge would open the throne to all claimants regardless of whether Torygg lost or whether he refused the challenge. Torygg was screwed either way, and his only hope of keeping the throne was to kill Ulfric once the challenge had been issued.

 

However, if a Moot had been called immediately after Torygg's death, it would have almost certainly honored Elisif's claim to being the heir by marriage. Ulfric's strategy was to delay the calling of the Moot he had forced until he had enough jarls backing him to be assured of being named High King. (I'm almost certain Ulfric or Galmar have some dialog explaining this if you join the Stormcloak side, but I don't have a transcript handy.)

[imperistan]

You'd think so, but DUELS were always a formalized affair, designed to ensure a fair fight. Pretty much for as long as we have a recorded history, that's been the case.

 

For example for the Norse, the RL equivalent of the Nords, it was even regulated how many shields you can bring (three), and you were not allowed to step out of the duel area, etc.

 

And there were no rules for the Norse on how you fought or what you fought with (every weapon available to the Norse was available in a duel). And it is in all likelihood the same with Nords. Every weapon available to them that was acceptable in their culture would have been available in a duel. And that included the Thu'um, as back in the time when High Kings were regularly challenged like this, the Thu'um was as much an everyday weapon as the sword or the axe.

 

And before you say it, no, the Way of the Voice isn't a part of greater Nordic culture. Its an extremely secluded philosophy that the vast majority of Nords will not and would not even know of in their entire lifetimes, and was actually created sometime after the use of the Thu'um had already started to wane.

 

We should also remember that in the Norse culture of old, it was legal to kill a man on the spot if he insulted your honor. Vengeance was commonplace and encouraged, and most of these duels were not very formal. So that makes me wonder why the duel between Torygg and Ulfric had to be an actual "formal" affair.

 

Or are people getting hung up on the word "duel" and presuming that it it must perpetually refer to a restricted, rule-bound affair?

 

The Way of the Voice is the ONLY way for anyone to learn to use a Thu'um, aside from being the Dovahkin. Whether or not the philosophy is rational or whatnot is less important than the fact that they taught Ulfric something which was sacred to them, and Ulfric misused it in their eyes. It would be like a pop musician taking Gregorian chants and creating a remix for a video involving scantily clad dancing girls. Is it illegal? No. Are there people who are going to admire it? Probably. Is it going to offend the originators of the vocalizations in question? Most certainly.

 

Okay. Tell me what exactly is hurting the Greybeards by Ulfric using the Thu'um? Are their feelings hurt? Do they want to cut themselves now in an emo-fit?

 

"Denying it is denying the reality of the situation for no other reason than to cling to the idea that EMPIRE GOOD. EEMPIRE BIG, BIG IS GOOD HURRP DURRP." Posted Yesterday, 04:12 PM.

 

Now tell me how I was referring to you.

 

Yes - like the cutscenes, the lore, and the dialogue. Translation: if it's part of the gameplay, it's probably canonical. Otherwise you're attempting to pick and choose what's valid and what's not based solely on what supports your opinions.

 

Then I guess Ulfric's entire army is truly composed of only ~100 men and women. There really ARE dozens of immortal people running around that can never die. Children don't die and never grow up!

 

Fact of the matter is, there is a real distinction between what goes on in the game and what would be going on in the lore.

 

It's been happening already. They already started with the Bosmer in Valenwood. Delphine (http://www.uesp.net/...ssier:_Delphine ) explicitly states that the purges have already begun.

 

Because those Bosmer don't agree with them. There's a big difference between not agreeing with how the government is and not agreeing that one race is superior to the other, and thats what the purges are about. The purges are political, not racial.

 

2. As you mentioned, they do have a religious commandment against using the Thu'um for anything but praising the gods. I mean, they're not even allowed to use it in war. I can't imagine how it would be allowed in duels.

 

Except they don't. The reason no one uses it is because no one can learn it without agreeing to some irrationally pacifist philosophy and giving up their normal lives to live as hermits on top of a mountain.

[Kraeten]

And it is in all likelihood the same with Nords.

 

And how exactly did you arrive at that conclusion? In case you need reminding, you can challenge quite a few Nords to a fight in Skyrim. They make it a point, before the fight begins that there's to be no magic or weapons etc just fists. If Nords were as violent as the Norse, there would be no such formality.

[imperistan]

And it is in all likelihood the same with Nords.

 

And how exactly did you arrive at that conclusion? In case you need reminding, you can challenge quite a few Nords to a fight in Skyrim. They make it a point, before the fight begins that there's to be no magic or weapons etc just fists. If Nords were as violent as the Norse, there would be no such formality.

 

1. Because the Nords are essential direct copies of the Norse.

 

2. Those aren't fights to the death. Big, big difference.