Tell that to the people in binds being "escorted" around Skyrim. The Thalmor justiciars' relative incompetence is beside the point.

He watches everything pretty closely. You can even see him react to the guy's beheading.

I don't watch Ulfric a lot in that scene or anything.

As far as I know, it wasn't the Legion, but Solitude's guards, the local Nords, that tried to arrest him. Are the Nords of Solitude less equal than the Nords of Windhelm? For that matter, why is it okay for Ulfric to break his oath he made when he joined the Legion and trample over Imperial Law, but it's somehow wrong for other Nords to place Imperial Law above Nordic Law?

Do you really believe Ulfric started the rebellion as a response to the Legion and people of Solitude? That's not only silly, but clearly incorrect.

Perhaps he wasn't. But it seems abundantly clear in the game that Ulfric is determined to be the High King. I presume however that all of the remaining Jarls in the moot are allowed to put themselves up for election. Another thing to think about: he founded the Stormcloaks before the he killed Torygg. You really believe he just killed Torygg hoping someone the current assembly of Jarls would pick someone better and everything would be fine? We both know he killed Torygg to send a message, not simply to vacate the throne so democracy could kick in. We also both know he wouldn't settle for anyone else getting the position, even if they did concur with him on Skyrim's politics.

Ulfric's later actions made it pretty clear that he considered Torygg unworthy to be High King despite the Jarls' votes. And not just because Torygg didn't secede during his reign.

What imperial law or nordic law was broken? I'm still waiting on that one. Because duels are perfectly legal by imperial and nordic standard. The rebellion started when the empire decided to ignore its own laws.

Please point out the part that's incorrect then. Because rushing into solitude by yourself and killing the king to declare rebellion is a ridiculously stupid way to get yourself killed.


Need another source on the original founding of the stormcloaks thing. He did want to make his bid for high king, and since the only way to do that is the moot, then that's what needed to happen. He did it for both reasons.



Oh yeah, it's not like someone can ever change their opinion about someone.

Yeah, the notion of the duel being illegal in and of itself seems really fishy to me. If that were the case, then the fact that it took place at all, regardless of the outcome, would make Ulfric and Torygg equally guilty of breaking the same law - Ulfric for issuing the challenge, Torygg for accepting it, and both of them for actually going through with it. (And in which case Torygg is hardly the poor, innocent victim of some nefarious lawbreaking scoundrel, lol.)

So IMO either the duel was perfectly legal, or else the High King's decision to participate in it made its illegality irrelevant and it only became "relevant" after the fact to those people who didn't like the outcome. That alone would render their opinions on the matter unworthy of further consideration IMO.

also about breaking his oath to the empire..where did he break his oath? Also its not ok for ulfric to break his oath if he did but totally ok for the empire to break their oath to ulfric when he retook the city for him, amd instead of protection they threw him under the bus to not go to war to early? And since this was a few years after the great war which ulfric was still called a empire man. Id say whatever oaths ulfric had were made void when the empire didnt uphold their oath.
Also where is it stated that ulfric specifically is responsible for the thalmor finding out and not something like paperwork?

Also the duel tradition is not just found in skyrim, but u can also find history books about other countrys using the duel system as well, like hammerfell and high rock.

If everyone wanted the moot tp go thru, they shouldnt have stepped in and banned the duel. During the civil war, BOTH sides main objective is replacing the other side loyal jarls to those loyal with their own. Since its esculated to a civil war, it basically ends when whoever wins stormcloak or empire replaces the last opposing jarl with loyal ones to their cause. Both sides are guilty of rigging the moot.

The rule about not murdering people. From what we've seen, according to Imperial law, it was murder. If Torygg had won, he would've been off the hook as he was defending himself and his honor. Aside from Torygg? He also committed treason. It's never actually said what law he broke in killing Torygg, but the Nords of Solitude seem adamant that he broke the law.

I suppose there's always a possibility that General Tullius and Captain Aldis weren't following any law at all and just wanted to get rid of Ulfric. But nowhere does Ulfric or any Stormcloak supporter actually use such as justification for anything more than Ulfric getting away. Please, give me a source your own claims that the Empire started the rebellion for ignoring the legality of the challenge, because frankly, it's a silly notion given everything we know about Ulfric's intentions, no matter how noble a light they're painted in. Even Stormcloak supporters say that he killed Torygg to make a point, and that Ulfric wants to be High King. We both know that he would have rebelled regardless, because we both know the moot wouldn't have made him High King after killing Torygg. That rebellion suits the Thalmor's needs, whom Ulfric has been manipulated by, makes it even more clear.

Here's some of Hadvar's dialogue:

It's pretty simple. Ulfric founded the Stormcloaks years ago, as a sort of private army to advance his ambitions.

He's always used the ban on the worship of Talos to stir people up against the Empire.

He never succeeded in getting much support, so a few months ago he murdered the High King! That got the Empire's attention.

Pretty clear to me.

As for why Ulfric killed Torygg, his own response is as follows:
I killed Torygg to prove our wretched condition. How is the High King supposed to be the defender of Skyrim, if he can't even defend himself?

Not once does he or anyone say that he killed Torygg for the reasons simply to vacate the throne and give himself a chance to be elected by the current assembly of Jarls. Not once does he claim that this war was started by the injustice of people trying to arrest him for it. His other dialogue makes it abundantly clear that he has no intention to let the Jarls sympathetic to the Imperials or even neutral stick around to get the chance to vote against him.

If you desire, I can give you more quotes reinforcing this, both from Ulfric and from various others on both sides of the civil war.

Give me a source saying that Ulfric previously respected Torygg.

Yet they're not the same. In the Empire, duels are not usually for defending one's honor, but determining who gets a position. In cases of duels over a position, we've seen that the higher up sets the terms of the duel, on whether or not it's to the death, and because it's not honor on the line, and when the higher up makes the challenge, there is no shame or dishonor in the lower ranked recipient to decline. In terms of settling property disputes, it need not be to the death, and there's nothing wrong with choosing a champion to fight for you.

Skyrim's challenge system is much closer to the Dunmer's system of dueling: it's always about honor, and there is great shame in declining even a duel to the death that you did not choose the terms of, and from a challenger that is much stronger than you. Even the Dunmer think it's de facto murder to goad someone an order of magnitude weaker than you into a duel to the death.

As for the Markarth Incident, Ulfric demanded Talos worship from the Empire while he controlled the city and while it was in turmoil. The Empire conceded his demands and made the promise in order to save lives and restore order. And don't tell me that it's a lie, because nothing said in Markarth is mutually exclusive with such. We also know that the Thalmor were pulling his strings, and had been in contact with him before said incident.

Yes it was a bad idea in hindsight. But they had no idea, nor do they have any idea now, that Ulfric had been in contact with the Thalmor and that they likely knew ahead of time regarding the whole Talos worship thing. In the meantime Tullius seems to have realized that the civil war is what the Thalmor want, but he's got nothing on what they've actually been doing behind the scenes.


The Empire has little but to depose the Stormcloak aligned Jarls, because they're committing treason and have dedicated their forces to fighting the Empire. On the other hand, Ulfric expresses his disdain for many of the Jarls and seems convinced that they need to be removed in order to have a "true" High King of Skyrim. He planned from the beginning to get rid of the Jarls that didn't support him.

http://www.imperial-library.info/content/war-betony-pro-sentinel
Gothryd was never arrested.
http://www.imperial-library.info/content/orsinium-and-orcs
Orc culture in general
I suppose all the orcish chieftans are being rounded up and executed by the empire?

http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Morrowind:Grandmaster_Duel
Apparently the Nerevarine should've been bound for the axe too.

Not all nords of Solitude believe he murdered Torygg either

"But it was Ulfric. And he did kill the High King, in honorable combat. My brother refused to allow the the Imperials to take revenge for the deed."

Most of them don't think Roggvir deserved execution either.

Thanks never came across that dialogue as I never needed to ask who Ulfric was. Interesting. So Torygg just sat around while Ulfric was doing this? The empire never looked into it? This is the exact same problem they had with the Thalmor when they started up. They ignored it until it became a huge issue. Which isn't a surprise given their poor leadership record.



Hence why I said both reasons are correct.

I'm sure the imperials gave the same sympathies to the stormcloak jarls too.


I never made the claim that he did. But making the claim that he never did is something you need to back up.

I recall plenty of duels to the death that have nothing to do with position. Some even in skyrim in front of imperial guards(Who stay out of it). Blasted mages trying to make a name for themselves.

Wonderful. Decline the duel and arrest Ulfric for treason. Cite this magical imperial law that you just cannot ignore but can't produce.


-warning- claim not supported by evidence in game and is wild speculation.

Interesting again perception is everything. To me it seems Ulfric startred out demanding things and then Tullius (over) reacted to it. Tullius also seemed dubious about the peace conference but agreed to come without too much trouble. Three times now I cannot get the peace conference dialogue with Ulfric unless I agree the empire is scum first. Maybe I'm not doing something right but wow!

Ulfric is some idiot bent on power. Not to say his cause is incorrect, but the message is often very different from the messenger.

The most striking example of this is his misuse of the Tha'uum for petty political power struggles rather than TWOTV. Seriously? Not being able to keep a simple promise like that? Yeah, not the guy I would trust a nation to.

As the Dragonborn aand master of the voice , Personally I don't think it was a fair and honorable duel. How would those same Nords feel if Ulfric and come in and lightning bolted the hiigh king to death. Again as the Dragonborn, I would really like to be able to express my feeling on this to NPCs.

Now I do have Stormcloak characters most straightforward shoot from the hip types. Most really end up with a fair amount of self loathing after taking Whiterun and Balgruuf's reaction to your involvement though. but that's another story.

The Greybeards may be teachers of the Th'uum but Ulfric says it best: "The Way of the Voice is a good ideal but not very effective outside the sanctuary of High Hrothgar." If my people were being killed and I had some superpower, I wouldn't just sit back and do nothing either.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOQFZaBDCrw

That's the pro Stormcloak version and you clearly see Tullius is the one who wants Riften first, not Ulfric for Markarth. He is actually calm as opposed to Tullius who is the raging one now.

This makes no sense. Everyone agrees that Ulfric challenged Torygg to a duel and that Torygg accepted the challenge. If Ulfric winning the duel makes it murder and not the inevitable and expected end result of a lawful act, then it can only be because dueling itself is illegal and therefore there is no special dispensation for having killed someone in the course of a duel. Unless (according to you) you're Torygg, because in his case willfully breaking the law and killing someone else in the process is perfectly fine.

If the duel itself was illegal, then Torygg was guilty of breaking the same law as Ulfric because he willingly agreed to and participated in an unlawful act. That he did so to his own detriment is irrelevant. Yet no one holds Torygg to the same standard of following the dictates of the law in question, assuming it even exists. If Torygg had won that duel, would you still be saying that he broke the law and is therefore a murderer and unfit to be king? Unless the answer is yes, then you can't say the same about Ulfric for winning it. If the duel was illegal and the outcome constitutes murder despite both parties agreeing to fight to the death, then the winner is a murderer no matter who wins.

And you can't use "he was only defending himself" as an excuse... there would have been no need to defend himself had he not accepted the challenge in the first place. It only becomes self-defense if Torygg refuses to duel and Ulfric attacks him anyway.

Even if he felt he had to break the law to defend his honor, that doesn't make the law any less broken. If the duel was illegal, it was illegal regardless of motivation and outcome, and all who took part in it are equally guilty. Saying that Torygg would be "off the hook" if he'd won is tantamount to saying that the law doesn't matter if the Empire has your back and that its laws are enforced selectively depending on who breaks them. Not really helping your case much, IMO.

I'll be honest, I didn't read any of this thread because it's long and a half-trolling thread.

Ulfric is a scumbag; he's the Rebel. That's his shtick. He goes in and kills the King and usurps his throne. Whether Torygg was killed honorably is irrelevant.

Many Rebel-who-become-Kings are remembered in a favorable light (for reasons I'm to tired to come up with right now).

Examples:

Hjalti/Tiber
Shezzar
Cuheclain
Vivec (kinda)
Pelinal

On that note, most Shezzarines would count, because they're Rebels who rebel against mer (as a race, who are Kings). Ulfric definitely fits this mold.

Of course, the former King takes the place of the Rebel after the Rebel usurps him (Aka and Shezzar play like this taking turns in both roles), Ulfric will get his by Torygg somehow (probably Elisif will become some kind of disgraced assassin and will kill him, or at least in my mind; that's a pretty good fanfic idea actually).

http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Morrowind:Grandmaster_Duel that is the imperial legion, so even in the empire army the duels are legal mmmm
http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Wizard_Duel even wizards can duel int he streets without penalty as long as both sides agree to it
http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Oblivion:Arena_(faction) even duels are done at the very capital of the empire on not honor or position but money and gambling
as far as the duel with the high king..yes its for position. its called a duel of honor because both participates agree to it and fight to the death. Also its seems very weird that even if i duel the drunk in windhelm that gives every stormcloak a bad name, even states out the rules for the duel. You dont think that knowing that ulfric could use the thuum, that soemone would say no magic and no shouting? because it is very clear that the nords do not see the thuum as magic seeing how the greybeards are highly respected and feared and the college is talked about with scorn and distaste, unless its resto thats it. Where does it say that ulfric violated the rules of the duel? the only thing i can see is that their reasoning was that torygg was to young to go against a seasoned vet...even though he was the high king and the most powerful man in the country..

And it's not Ulfric's fault that he's a seasoned vet and Torygg isn't. You accept a challenge with the king you have, not the king you wished you had.

If Ulfric had waited until Torygg was a seasoned vet (assuming he ever became one) and he himself was a doddering old man, and Torygg beat him because of that, the people who are calling for Ulfric's head now wouldn't be calling for Torygg's over the "unfairness" and "dishonor" of his willingness to fight someone who was presumed to be less capable. The only real problem they have with the duel is the fact that Ulfric won it. If they had a problem with the legality of the duel itself, the outcome shouldn't matter, but clearly it does because the Empire's man lost and therefore the duel was wrong. Had Torygg won, I'm guessing the same people who call Ulfric a murderer would've been saying "move along, people, nothing to see here."

Also about the bear of markarth, got a quick couple of questions.

1. How is it that ulfric and his men are the ones that killed everyone when the jarl himself as well as the silverblood leader say that it was the jarl himself ordering for the forsworn people to be put to death and the silverblood snuck a few forsworn that the jarl ordered execution for?
2. Why is there nothing about the jarl offering freedom and protection for worship if they retook the city in the book? The jarl clearly states that he offered that to ulfric because he knew ulfric would jump on it? Why is it being stated that ulfric after retaking tje city is just now outta nowhere demanding it?
There were other inconsistency from the very mouth of the jarl that clearly paints that book as throwing ulfric as the scapegoat and making the empire look good.

If I can find it, there was proof that basically ulfric didnt hold the city ransom nor was it it in choas when the emlire came, but I will agree until I can fimd the proof, we can go off that part being true, but u also have to agree that with the jarl there in the siege doing his revenge thing that it wasnt chaoitic at least since they had a control enoigh to execute and sentence the forsworn to the mines.

Yet none of these are remotely relevant to Skyrim's government in the Mede Empire. Not even the orcs, because as far as I've seen, the Empire doesn't bother them at all.

Here is what Tullius says to Ulfric at the climix of the Battle for Windhelm:

You are guilty of insurrection, murder of Imperial citizens, the assassination of King Torygg, and high treason against the Empire.

Seems pretty clear to me that by Imperial standards, it was a crime. Even if it wasn't a crime, he's still guilty of enough to warrant execution and we both know regardless of Solitude's reaction he would've started the civil war.

Most? Not by a long shot. Only a few people consider him to have done nothing wrong. Even those that thought it was unfortunate still supported his execution.

He sat around because he was sympathetic to Ulfric's cause.


If so, do you actually have anything saying that Ulfric wouldn't have rebelled if the Solitude guards tried to stop him? For that matter, do you have anything saying that he would've let the moot be held and proceed with the current Jarls? He has disdain for many of the Jarls, and he knows that with things as they are, Elisef has, by the Nords' customs, the strongest claim to the position of High King/Queen. He can't have that.

Considering they committed treason against the province's and Empire's governments, I can't blame the Empire for it. It should also be pointed out that when one of the holds attempts to remain neutral, it's the Stormcloaks that decide to threaten and/or attack it. Seems pretty clear that Ulfric has every intention to subjugate anyone who isn't allied with him, including a hold that would have otherwise remained neutral.

Nothing he ever says about Torygg is positive. He never says Torygg was good at first, or that he was promising before, or anything of that nature.


He couldn't, lest he be seen as a dishonored coward. There is a huge difference in this case challenging someone to a duel and accepting one. Ulfric's honor and reputation weren't at stake and he'd not be dishonored if he declined to issue a challenge. But once you're challenged, by Skyrim's customs (and Morrowind's, for that manner), it's considered cowardly and dishonorable to decline, which Torygg, being an honorable Nord, would not do. Unless Torygg first approached Ulfric and insulted his or his ancestors' honor, Ulfric had nothing to lose by not challenging Torygg. He did, however, have much to gain and he knew it.

-warning- http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:The_Bear_of_Markarth. And despite what some have said, no dialogue in Markarth actually disproves or is mututally exclusive to it. Nor does the author's Forsworn sympathies mean that he's lying. After all, nobody ever says that Stormcloaks are lying when they state their views and

Im guessing u bypassed my post because I showed duels in the actual empire army, capital, and even in the streets of skyrim.
Also didnt see where I stated that parts of the book are untrue by even the jarls own mouth and the person behimd the forsworn in the prisons?

You still havent responded why ulfric showed alone in the first place when he did the duel. And is u look at my links they clearly show that tje empire itself uses duels to the death for many reasons. Theres nothing stating before hand that ulfric wpuldnt go thru the mootl peacefully. Yes the queen has more right to it which can also explain ulfrics use of the thuum showing hes a superior candiate.

That link of tullius speech again proves that they are ignoring skyrims as well as the empires tradition because the king was strickly a empires man whereas ulfric was not what they considered a worthy addition to the empire. They are stepping in the kingdom politics when it isnt going there way and even doing something as dirty and underhanded as ouylawing a tradition they themselves use in their military all the way down to spectators sport. Basically saying that alllllll the other duels and even tne tradition on how to get the moot going if theres a king alrdy in place legal until it causes a candiate they do not approve of. It seems to me before the empire and the queen stepped in because they didnt like the results, fric was going by the book. Wtf else would he run, how was he expecting a fair and just trial when they straight up changed the rules after he did something legally?

Meh seems like Crimson doesn't want to argue the points.

You can give him all the examples you want and he'll claim they aren't relevant anyways because there's a secret law that makes the imperials right no matter what.

No point trying to argue against that.

Ulfric challenging a young man with no actual combat experience, while he is a highly season war veteran with the ability to throw people across the room with three simple words is kind of cheap.

Ulfric challenging a grown man who is now at the peak of his physicality while Ulfric has become a feeble old man with brittle bone disease is just stupid, and you can't blame that on Torygg.

You're argument is flawed because either way Ulfric's still the aggressor. If Torygg had marched into the Palace of Kings when Ulfric was 90 and bedridden because of cancer and challenged him to mortal combat then, I would have a problem with that. But if Octogenarian Ulfric feels spry enough to challenge a man half his age to a fight that's his business.

If I go challenge a three year old to a kickboxing match and he agrees because he's stupid and I beat the crap out of him, I'm still a bully. If I challenge Saenchai Sinbimuaythai to a kickboxing match and he agrees, I'm an idiot and deserve to get beaten into the ground. You can't demonize the person being challenged because the person throwing the gauntlet is an idiot.

That young man is the High King of Skyrim...even Irileth says that when Proventus mentions that Ulfric just "killed the boy"

In any case, about this whole duel thing...I'm really curious about it. As in some official source that mentions how it works. I mean, what if the High King is actually a High Queen? Hmm?
If the duel stands for everyone...well let's just say I really don't see Elisif fighting one. Maybe she can choose a champion instead...

So, what is the legal frame? Are there any exceptions? Can anyone make the challenge? Is there an amount on how many challenges can be issued in one rule?

All this talk with what citizen X and citizen Y said is pretty pointless to me. Everyone is biased.

*****

Also, why can't Skyrim declare independence like Hammerfell did? If they can, but the Empire (you know scratch that) the GOVERNMENT of the Empire won't allow/recognize it, then all it proves to me is the the Empire's rulers are pretty desperate right now. And are trying so hard to keep this carcass from falling apart. It pretty much won't be an Empire anymore if every nation declares independence. So who needs who?

Something I get the impression that people have missed is that Ulfric killed Torygg to prove a point, and that point is that Torygg was a weak King who couldn't defend himself.
I agree that Ulfric can be seen as the aggressor here, but I also think it is important to understand that Torygg had a choice. He could decline the challenge and Ulfric would still get what he wanted: Dethroning Torygg, making it possible for himself to become High King.
According to Nord customs the duel should be legal and I believe that if the Empire and its supporters stopped with the propaganda(like saying that Ulfric walked up to Torygg and shouted him to death without mentioning anything about a challenge or duel) more nords would agree that Ulfric was in the right, even if it doesn't make him the High King as it is the Moot cho choses him/her.

they are discrediting and banning the duel bc ulfric dosent have a unanimous outcome, but he has a pretty good outcome to win. Pretty much split down the middle. they do not want him on the throne because hes not good for the empire with his talks of succeeding. So they banned and declared the duel was invalid since they didnt like the outcome.

U really got to think because we see during the civil war its split down the middle. I wonder if it would still be split if the duelpart was well known and kept legal? We get the impression through out the game that nords respect strength and power, ulfric uaing the thuum during the duel would have made his case alot stronger to the people.
B
Weither u agree with him or not, the backdrop to the story shows both ulfric and the empire engaged in a brilliant politically battle. Ulfric being a genious in going in thru the legal channels anddoing the duel and using the shout to win the general public to him. The nords woulda saw a powerful candiate for the kings position and someone who had the balls to try to get things to change.
The empire was genious in taking ulfric trump card and turning it against him by exnaying the duel and saying that ulfdic went up to the king and shouted him apart. That would use his trump card against him by portrying him as a murderer and not someone who was honorable.

Also the battle of whiterun. Did anyone pay attention on the legion side? It clearly shows and states tullious wanting rekke to send the jarl imbellished letters that stated that ulfric was getting rdy to attack whiterun, when it turn promted the jarl to send the axe and start the battle.

The problem with that entire line of reasoning is that of the Nordic culture.

The entire point of a Jarl being able to challenge the High King, and him being forced to accept or forfiet his honor, is to make sure that Skyrim has a strong High King both in politics and in BATTLE. You are assuming that Torygg had no battle experiance, which I call out as an assumption, but that is also irrelevant. If true it just makes Ulfric's point all the stronger.

The idea is that the weak King either keeps his life and loses his honor and therefor likely is dethroned when the moot is called, or the weak King loses the fight and dies with honor and the moot is called to elect a new High King. OR the High King is a skilled warrior aswell as leader, trounces his opponent, and remains High King with a stronger claim tot he throne than ever.

That... didn't happen. There is no element of bullying in it. The Nords are a 'primitive' warrior culture. Might does infact make right, as far as they are concerned. And when faced with foreign invaders that you're people have been at war with since you arrived on the shores, you need a King who doesn't only bow to Imperial chests of gold, but also knows which end of a sword to hold. Especially when one province has already proven that its possible to push out the Thalmor without that same Empire. The Court in Solitude is hopelessly corrupt. One is a Vampire, one is a criminal and abuser of women, and so forth. Its implied multiple times they are 'looked after' by the Empire in return for loyalty. Even everyones beloved Balgruuf was bribed to make the 'booboo' better when he was given no voice in the WGC.

This is not our modern world. This is not a state Senator marching into the Whte House and gunning down the President. This is not a Duke walking into Buckingham Palace and shanking the Queen.

This is a warrior culture where if you're High King is too weak to defend himself, he is considered too weak to defend Skyrim. Nords are the warriors of Tamriel. And since (none-Imperial) rulers tend to actually FIGHT in battles in Nordic culture it is a fairly wise policy, because its a fat lot of good having a king who dies to the first goblin that slips past his royal guard.

War is coming again. And i'd personally prefer to fight by the side of the man who wears a chain coat, can use the Thu'um, is well loved by and inspires the warriors around him than... well, a man who will likely sit back at the palace, wooing his pwetty lwady, while devolping a sound potbelly.

Or to put it in a diffeerent way... "Winter is Coming."

=P