So...Ulfric : V - Skyrim

» Thu Oct 11, 2012 9:35 pm

Oh come off it.

The guards certainly don't care when you cut down the guy who challenges you to a fight and calls you a milk drinker, and as mentioned with the Companion hopeful in Whiterun, the guards didn't care that she killed her sparing partner. We have various examples of fights between two people, duals and other forms, that go un-attended by the guards. In the end, I'm not the one ignoring the proof presented, I'm simply refuting your lack of proof.

edit: also, nice generalization there. While I am a stormcloak supporter, as I mentioned various times, I used to be a staunch supporter of the Empire and strive to take a bi-partisan approach to it. I don't deny the Stormcloaks have their issues as well.

I don't really care either way as the legality of the duel is irrelevant to which side I join, but one can easily suggest that the guards have no idea that these mage duels are infact duels. Granted, the guards seem to know when we are in the Dark Brotherhood for some stupid reason but I digress. It's not and never has been (to my knowledge) illegal to defend yourself if attacked, so one can argue that the guards are just letting you do your thing. That there is a mechanical difference between accepting the duel or not, shouldn't be taken as empirical evidence.

» Thu Oct 11, 2012 8:48 pm

Then provide actual evidence. You know, like we have. You asked for examples and we gave you them. The empire's broken its own laws before when it suited them, this is nothing new. How's that Talos ban going by the way? Pretty inconvenient law to uphold isn't it?

Tullius never states duels are illegal, or that the empire will not recognize the duel as legal or that a duel ever took place. They don't mention the duel at all whenever they speak of the event because it would damage their standing with the local populace. They don't mention that it was Igmund's father offering Talos worship in Markarth. Or that the jarl was the one slaughtering the reachmen after they had been captured. They had the one responsible for the incident willing to shove the blame onto someone who didn't agree with the outcome. Made things easier on them. It's simple self preservation. They feel they need skyrim, and they'll do what it takes to keep it. Now if only they had been in this sort of mindset 150 years ago.

I think the best reason we can get for the "murder" accusation is that the death of the High King at the hands of someone with the intention of seceding the Empire is that it started Martial Law where Ulfrics act would no longer be considered legal.

» Thu Oct 11, 2012 6:40 pm

I don't really care either way as the legality of the duel is irrelevant to which side I join, but one can easily suggest that the guards have no idea that these mage duels are infact duels. Granted, the guards seem to know when we are in the Dark Brotherhood for some stupid reason but I digress. It's not and never has been (to my knowledge) illegal to defend yourself if attacked, so one can argue that the guards are just letting you do your thing. That there is a mechanical difference between accepting the duel or not, shouldn't be taken as empirical evidence.

The guards don't interviene when they break out, so assuming they didn't know they were duals wouldn't that mean they should interviene, like they do in all assaults? the fact that if you refuse the dual and that they interviene then but not when you accept really blows that argument out of the water. The same goes for other 'assaults' but not when the player agrees to the confrontation. Acceptance should absoloutly be taken into consideration as Imperial law in the other games clearly states that assaults are against the law, and thus your allowed to defend yourself. Nothing however is explicitly said about agreements, and the examples where there are agreements there is never any legal action.

» Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:06 pm

The guards don't interviene when they break out, so assuming they didn't know they were duals wouldn't that mean they should interviene, like they do in all assaults? the fact that if you refuse the dual and that they interviene then but not when you accept really blows that argument out of the water. The same goes for other 'assaults' but not when the player agrees to the confrontation. Acceptance should absoloutly be taken into consideration as Imperial law in the other games clearly states that assaults are against the law, and thus your allowed to defend yourself. Nothing however is explicitly said about agreements, and the examples where there are agreements there is never any legal action.

It doesn't blow my argument out of the water. I said that the mechanics shouldn't be taken as empircal evidence, because quite frankly, they shouldn't. We might as well say that there's only 20 odd people living in Solitude. :yuck:

As I said, I don't care. The legality of duels is irrelevant (for me) in which side I choose. I do so on a per character basis.

» Thu Oct 11, 2012 8:33 pm

It doesn't blow my argument out of the water. I said that the mechanics shouldn't be taken as empircal evidence, because quite frankly, they shouldn't. We might as well say that there's only 20 odd people living in Solitude. :yuck:

As I said, I don't care. The legality of duels is irrelevant (for me) in which side I choose. I do so on a per character basis.

Mechanics in general are meant to coincide somewhat with lore. Everyone knows that theres not 20 people living in Whiterun, but we can saftly speculate that its not just mechanics that guards only interviene when your assaulted by an agressive combatant and not when there is in game dialouge and agreement between said person and the PC.