But there is a concordat and there is something to hide. The best the Empire can do to prevent the Thalmor from founding out is to convince the Nords to worship in private, the rest is the responsibility of the Nords.

After the duel, the reason why ulfric fled was because that the queen and the empire officials said that ulfric did the moot wrong and that he was a murderer. Remember this is the city thats always housed empiral officials, its the empires crown jewel of skyrim. He didnt leave to start a rebellion, he fled because they were trying to arrest him and kill him for not doing the duel right on the sole fact they believed the high king to young to go against him. He rebeled when they wouldnt accept the winner of the duel and banned it.

Also the court mage that tells you that if ulfric asked the king MIGHT have followed ulfrics beliefs of skyrim, bit if u listen to what shes says afterwards, its ALOT of reasons why the high king wouldnt ever do that. Ulfric and pratically even the citizens of the city, the very city that the high king lived believed him to be all talk.

It is stated that ulfric brought it up multiple times in session and was quite outspoken on the subject. Id like to see how long the king was king to see how long ulfric waited before he issued the duel.

Also where is it stated that ulfric even tried to go for the moot for the kings position when torygg was nominated and crowned? U
And also again, does anyone have a sourse where it is specifically ulfrics fault the thalmor got wind of the agreement?

What good would that do for the Thalmor when they need to eradicate Talos worship? Do you think they're that stupid?

It's a little hard to kill someone if you don't know where they are.

They had informers. Again, if they had wanted to go door to door in Skyrim, would the empire stop them?

They couldn't find Esbern or Delphine in 30 years, and those were two much higher priority targets than random worshipers.

The legion was there, but Tullius wasn't commanding it at that time. He didn't rebel, they tried to arrest him in Solitude after the duel. Tell me. Is it a good idea to go into a town by yourself, kill the high king in a duel with the expectation to not hold the moot and instead declare war? Seriously, he was by himself. That's a suicide attempt. If he wasn't planning on the moot, killing Torygg would've been a moot point and just gotten him killed. It would've changed nothing. Just put Elisif in charge of solitude.

You'll have to point out where Ulfric was in the running. Just because he was there doesn't mean he was up for high king. We know what his position was, but that's it. And heriditary/family claim is always one of the possible claims to high kingship.

This is an assumption. The entire moot may have voted for Torygg, Ulfric included. Just because there's a vote doesn't mean there was a challenger to the throne. Same as politics today.



Ah of course. Everyone just needs to become spymasters. Simple solutions are the best, aren't they?

They were highly trained members of a military-intelligence organization. Of course they would be much harder to find than random worshipers. They knew how to cover their tracks.

They seemed pretty stupid to me.

Actually, the solution is simple: Don't be overt.

This whole conversation is funny. All this machination so as not to admit that the Thalmor can do whatever they want, whenever they want, and the empire doesn't say boo- and to blame that condition on Ulfric instead of where the responsibility really belongs.

Something people seem to forget is that the Stormcloaks have been around for quite a time. Salof in Falkreath says he was wounded in a Stormcloak skirmish years ago, so he can't take up a blade in Ulfrics name even though he holds his ideals about a free Skyrim.

Not really. One of major Thalmor officials in Skyrim knows that Bard in Markarth is a Talos worshipper, but isn't able to do anything about it because he doesn't have any evidence. They can't seem to find their Most Wanted, and the one Thalmor agent who seems to know where an active Talos cult is is ignored by his superiors and ends up dead.

You can go on and on about how the Thalmor can do whatever they want whenever they want, but at the end of the day they seem pretty dopey and ineffectual. The best of them seems to be Ancano, and he wouldn't even do anything if you hadn't stumbled upon the Eye of Magus, and the only reason he becomes so strong is because you're stupid enough to leave him alone with it.

At the end of the day, the Thalmor threat in Skyrim is about as dangerous and deadly as being assaulted with juniper berries.

Maybe game mechanic..plot, you know...Elenwen and all her pets couldn't identify my Dovahkiin at the reception even though she was an outspoken enemy of the Thalmor, razed an entire Thalmor keep, had numerous agents sent after her, was waving a Talos amulet in front of Elenwen at the party (from a quest, it was not removed) - so she was very well known to the Thalmor.

Just take it as it is. It's Skyrim magic!

I posted my reasons for supporting the Stormcloaks in the Balgruuf thread, and I think someone has a link to a video that goes deeply into in his sig. I reckon that with how many blows the Empire has taken, and further n the DB questline, that their attempt to play the 'long game' with the Dominion is just utterly foolish. I also believe that the Stormcloak questline was given more time and attention. At least one of the Fort quests involves rescuing prisoners from a bloody dungeon. The attack on Whiterun is an actual epic city battle, wheras the Imperial verson is guarding a barricade outside. Atacking Solitude feels much more epic than attacking Windhelm, despite the cities history. This even extends to their final speeches; Tullius talks about pay (woo, the drama ) to a half-dozen cloned troops on a narrow pathway, and hints at coming troubles. With Ulfric you get his usual charisma, to a larger group of mixed gender soldiers in a large courtyard, and you also get the scene with Elisef, and it feels like a calm before a storm.

When it comes to the actual resolutions there is also differences. When Ulfric and Galmar win, you get the interplay wth them trying desperately to talk Rikke out of suicide, and the General who has given up, and Ulfrics point about how its more than a 'rebellion' at this point and how the Empire he knew would never have given up. If the Empire wins, Tullius gloats about slaying Ulfric, you fight them, and thats pretty much it aside from Ulfric wantng you to kill him from what I recall - rebellion put down, all in a days work, and a complete lack of drama.

Ulfric is also, no matter your views on him, a deeper and more realized character than Tullius; backstory, charisma, relevence to the people of Skyrim, backstory and all. I feel that if you are roleplaying and can justify it for the character, then you will get mor e'bang for your buck' for RP fodder as a Stormcloak.

Honestly however, Bethesda like to have a canon-storyline and generally don't make multiple endings after the mess they had to correct via Dragonbreak. BOTH sides of the conflict are correct, depending on your PC, and in the end its not going to MATTER which you pick. Somethign is going to happen on or offscreen that will render the civil war choice moot, whether that is an assassination of Ulfric if he wins, the moot simply selecting Elisef either way or another unseen contender, whether the Empire collapses due to ingame events anyway, whether the Thalmor win anyway, ect. It could be a DLC where we deal a blow to thew Thalmor that they won't recover from, be it by killing an offfcial, or a random deus ex machina.

In the end the above and my post in the previosu thread are my views on why I THINK the Stormcloaks are the better choice, but how in the end it doesn't matter in the least.

I wish people would stop calling the Stormcloaks and supporters stupid and so forth because thats just trollish and inflamatory, and defending the Empire's every choice in the past and current events while with the same breath nitpicking everything they can find about the SC. It comes across as condescending and pointless. It certanly doesn't help the credablity of a point.

The diehard Stormcloak supporters on this forum never miss a shot to criticize the Empire or its Legionaries, so don't act like rude behavior is only on the side of the Empire supporters. A lot of people on both sides spew nothing but vitriol, but there are many others that are objective, collected, and polite.

I for one support the Stormcloak cause and ideals, but those are only as good as the people leading them, and Ulfric Stormcloak is one of the most despicable people in the game. Charismatic yes, but that makes it worse. He's a wolf in sheep's clothing, acting the part of the savior while simultaneously damning the people who follow him. Maven Black-Briar may be corrupt, despicable, and amoral, but she doesn't put on airs and pretend she's someone she's not. She's totally upfront about her character.

Like I said in a different thread, I'd jump on board the S.S. Stormcloak at the drop of a hat if Ulfric's head had rolled on the ground at Helgen, rather than that random soldier.

It must be all preception I dn't find that at all. Both have about thesame to say. If I had to say the game pushes maybe the storncloaks at first but more empire later as you begin to "see below the surface"

I really really wish that as the Dragonborn , I could state my opinion in game about if that was a fair fight and point out if everyone thinks it was then fireballs and lightning bolts are OK also.

Because there has never been a dictator who has made up a good speech, or better yet no one's ever ACTED sincere before.

Although it's a pretty awesome speech it doesn't proove anything

Funny how he mentions comrades dying in his arms but he doesn't so much as look at his followers who were bleeding to death in Helgen.

And I never said that it was a good thing for a Stormcloak supporter to act that way. Kindly don't put words in my mouth. This is just the second thread in a row that i've seen several accusations of stupidity and insults towards not just the Stormcloaks, who are a fictional faction, but those who support them. I haven't actually seen equal vitrol aimed the other way, personally. I only vsit threads such as this occasionally. I think three since Skyrim released. We can't all amass 1,3k posts in just under three months.



Fair enough, and I feel exactly the opposit. I feel he's a genuinly good, if rough, man in a hard situation that in the end can be the High King that Skyrim needs and that he genunly loves his people. My point that he is a much deeper character than Tullius still stands, and doesn't paticularly hinge on him being liked.

If he had been beheaded at the start of the game then, like him or not, we would have lost a very deep character that does add to the game even if only as a villian for some.

I'm not touching the Maven Black-Briar sentence. I can barely even comprehend the comparrison.

The biggest reason why most of my characters tend to become stormcloak is because of the role.
Ulfric his role is alot more better than Tulius his role if you ask me. And i can make up the best story's if i am siding with those who have the best roles.

If i could side with Balgruuf and try to put an end to the civil war i would have done that most times.
But you can't, so i am a rebel most of the times. *sadface*

But if i may be honest, Ulfric is right about the high-king who he defeated/murdered.
The high-king before him was a good leader, no doubt.
But Torygg seemed more interested in entertaining his lady than defending his land.
It is just my thoughts about it though.

Even though this might make me look like a pro-stormcloak, i am not.

The only thing regarding Skyrim's moots that I've seen so far contradicts the "Torygg was elected" idea. Assuming the Pact of Chieftains is still in effect, a moot only convenes to elect a High King if the previous king had no direct heirs. If there is a direct heir, he/she inherits the throne. Torygg died without an heir thus a moot would be necessary to decide his successor.

http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Moot

That's just not factually accurate. Hadvar says far les than Ralof. With Hadvar, you basically head right inside and when he's asked about the dragon, he more-or-less says "There isn't much else to tell". With Ralof, you get a much longer conversation standing in the outskirts of town, where Ralof interacts with a kid and then is asked about the fate of Ulfric, in which he gives an impassioned speech about how the Empire didn't have the courage to get Ulfric a trial. Hadvar makes no such speech about the Empire. As has been said many times over the course of this debate, the Empire just doesn't inspire the same passion as Ulfric does.

And as you note by adding another example, the Imperial path is less grandiose. Not by much, though it is enough to be noticed. Doing a Nordic rite of passage to join. Extra little touches on the Fort assaults, like rescuing prisoners. Attacking Whiterun, rather than defending a gate outside against waves. Ulfrics speeches. Getting the crown for him, rather than getting it so he can't have it. Solitude being the site of the final battle, rather than the narrow passages if Windhelm. The situation with Rikke and a worn-down Tullius. His final speech and Elisef, as opposed to the inspiring 'extra pay' speech by Tullius.

I think it may be down to the fact as a Stormcloak you are 'changing' things. As an Imperial you are just trying to maintain the status quo.

What I want to know is what the Bethesda team were thinking by having Tullius agree with Ulfric's cause in cut dialog. At least they had the sense to cut it, if not remove it from the files.