After nice conversation with Forsworn king I couldn't help but laugh at the hypocrisy of all the pro-Stormcloakers and their preaching for freedom of religion and what not.

Quite a lot of people in the forum were throwing stones on Imperials and vowing "death to Empire" because to them freedom of religion is more sacred than any actual religion.



And then it turns out that Nords forbade the worship of the "Old Gods".

Oh the irony.

Who were these people? I want NAMES. Or else I shall name them straw.

There's got to be at least 10 threads made every single day of the same issue. Look, we get it, you guys don't like Stormcloaks.

And you shouldn't either.

Your right, they never should have put a stop to worshipping in the way of killing and sacrificing people, just like they shouldn't put a stop to worshipping and making deals with Daedra, it never causes any harm and bites you in the behind.

I read this as "To those who joined the Stormcloaks because of Taliban".

yup, after hearing that i was fully convinced that imperials must win no matter what

A lot of the folk that support Stormcloaks usually haven't read any of the in game books, The Bear of Markarth being a key one.

Most are like "RWAR REBELS!! REBELLION!!!"

It's called a video game. I'm not going to hell because I choose the stormcloaks simply because I like Ulfric or I like the uniforms.

This just in!

To invalidate your trolling the forsworn worship daedra.

Edit: And I am an Imperialist

There's a difference between worshiping a guy who saved Tamrial and people who kill eachother simply because.


America has freedom of religion. That doesn't mean we're going to let people go all Charles Manson on eachother.

I initially joined the Stormcloaks because the Imperials were trying to cut off my head simply because they couldn't think of anything better to do with me. That's just plain evil.
I wasn't a criminal and wasn't on any of their "lists." But as I learned more about Ulfric, I started to hate him, as well.

I thought he was a jerk too. I actually understood why the imperials did that at the beginning, and joined up with them. Ulfric's not that bad, to be honest. He rubs people off the wrong way, but when you get to the end, he's alright. I mean, he cares about his men, anyway. He's still a "macho viking" though. I don't choose either sides really.

Huzzzah! Another because-I-hate-Stormcloaks-you-have-to-also! shortly followed by post read-the-books-and-act-rationally-because-its-what-people-do-in-real-life!

I think just because of these threads I'll skip imperial storyline Too many fanatics.

I like how over zealous and radical the Imperial players are. You think it would be the Storm cloak players barging into every thread claiming their views are the one and only true answer to Tamriels problems. But hey its kinda like that saying about crabs in a bucket, when one tries to escape to its freedom the other crabs drag it back down.

And the banning of Talos is far different then the banning of Daedra worship that reveres Hagraven's and commonly sacrifices people. I would be more sympathetic to the Forsworn's plight if they weren't murdering every Nord possible just because they are Nords. The Bear of Markarth is a biased report by an Imperial scholar while the Civil war was being fought. Why would an Imperial write a book about a man who started a rebellion against your Empire? From what I remember we never got Ulfric's side of the story.

You all have to stop looking at this whole thing as a black and white issue.

If you are going to make fun and criticize anyone for the way they play the game then you are an idiot on all levels. Yes, this is a fact. So many people preach about playing the game the way they want to play then they think they can tell other people how to play and influence other people if the game isn't played to their "approval". What idiots some people on this forum are.

Yeah, I feel pretty bad about posting in threads with titles like "Stormcloaks or Imperials?", "Why hate Ulfric?" and so forth. Just awful. I feel terrible about having an opinion in those threads, and I feel just awful about using evidence, logic and deduction to back it up. I heartily apologise for having engaged in a lively, yet civil, debate on these forums with people of an opposing view, and for having used evidence, logic and deduction to to express that view.

I'm just so sorry, you guise.

If that was in response to me you completely and totally took my post out of context. I have no problem with any of the things you mentioned above. Re-read it and you will see I meant the people trying to FORCE their game choices on others which does happen on these forums.

It's in response to most comments in this thread, to be honest. I enjoy debating things, and at least in this instance, I consider myself "convince-able". I really wanted to support the Stormcloaks when I bought the game, but the more I've read, the more I feel that logic and strategy are on the Empire's side. I've also tried to limit myself to threads where it's actually relevant to argue about it. I kind of want someone to post something amazing that makes me go, "Yeah! Stormcloaks!" because their platform appeals to me on an emotional level. Unfortunately, I feel like most of their supporters are matching reasons to that emotional appeal, rather than deciding based on reason.

And yes, it's completely their prerogative to do so. But I don't appreciate being called "over zealous", "fanatical", or "an idiot" for debating the point. While I'll take you at your word that you're not trying to offend me, I've debated MacBeth about this topic in the past. You can understand I might be a little paranoid as to whether or not I'm being targeted for criticism here.

This is what is really destructive about the discussions. Keeping a civil tone and abstaining from putting labels on those you discuss with seems to be a difficult task for many. Hopefully, people on either side calling the other "fanatical" or "an idiot" learn eventually that they won't convince the person they are addressing and that others reading their posts will consider them rude and immature.

I think Bethesda certainly deserves some applause for their ability to elicit such strong emotional and rational responses in us players.

At the end of the day, no one's right and no one's wrong, the Stormcloaks and Imperials both have admirable goals and attributes as well as not-so-admirable goals and attributes. It's subjective based on your outlook and personal dispositions meshing with in-game lore.

Yes, sometimes people go a little overboard, but many of the posts I've seen and debates I've taken part in have been civil. It's amazing how, through their writing, Bethesda has produced engaging debates among it's fanbase discussing political and policy arguments in a completely fictional world. It's genius really, and it's a sign of quality writing.

Yep, and in the end Bethesda will write around our choice in the Civil War.

Hehe, pretty much.

Unless we get some DLC to shift the situation some more, I'm seeing more Thalmor victories in the future, unfortunately for most of my characters.

"And just as the Moot convened, Akiviri warriors appeared and killed everyone."

Yup.

One of the most common arguments I've read is that you shouldn't join the Imperials because they wanted to behead you.

But something I just thought of - the Stormcloak rebels on that carriage did nothing to tell the guards that you and the thief weren't part of the Rebellion. If the Stormcloaks were as noble as they act, they would speak up and say that the 2 other prisoners weren't rebels. Instead, they remain quiet and tell you to face your (wrongful) death like a man, leading to the death of the thief, and would have led to your death if not for Alduin's interference.