This happend one year after the Great War, the Empire was in no condition to fight the Thalmor. One year is not enough time to train and equip enough legions to replace those lost in the Battle of Red Ring. Cripes, you need time to rebuild, and if you need to appease your enemy now so that you may destroy them later then so be it.

What moot? The one that would normally be held after the death of a High King? AFAIK that moot is never held, which seems an obvious conclusion since the position of High King/Queen is unfilled and the only reason to have a moot would be to vote on a ruler.

Why is it not held? Because Nord tradition was already thrown out the window when they tried to arrest Ulfric in Solitude. A challenge was issued, accepted, and the duel was fought. Then those who didn't like the outcome declared it murder after the fact and Ulfric had to flee the city and was branded a wanted criminal by the Empire. He can't attend any moot without being arrested, if not killed outright, the minute he walks in the door. The Jarls that support him may not attend either because of that and possibly for fear of being taken into custody themselves.

Nope, if they wanted a moot they should have accepted the outcome of the duel and held it then when it was still possible for all of Skyrim to be represented. There was no guarantee that Ulfric would have been named High King. But once they refused to do that (which was immediately) a real moot became impossible; all you'd get now is a moot sanctioned (if not called outright) by the Empire, at which only Empire-approved Jarls would be welcome (or feel safe), and which would look for all the world like a kangaroo court designed to give a big thumbs up to whatever the Legion and the Empire wants. It would be a joke and the Empire must know that, otherwise they'd go ahead and call it (or have one of "their" Jarls do so) and have Elisif named High Queen. That's the joke of a (possible) moot that I assume Ulfric is damning, and IMO he's right to do so.


Sorry, what "old way"? A duel between Balgruuf and Ulfric? If such a thing is proposed by Balgruuf I must've missed it. If you're talking about the axe Balgruuf sends to Ulfric when you play the Legion side, and saying that meant Balgruuf was willing to fight one on one and Ulfric wasn't, I'm afraid that won't fly. If you play the Stormcloak side Ulfric sends Balgruuf *his* axe and Balgruuf sends it right back to him and then asks for protection from the Legion. Obviously if receiving the axe means you've been challenged to a duel, neither man is willing to accept the challenge when it comes to deciding the fate of Whiterun.

And given what happened the last time there was a supposedly legitimate and tradition-approved duel between Ulfric and one of his peers, I think Ulfric has far more reason to refuse such a challenge anyway. If Balgruuf won, the Empire would say "fair's fair" and tell everybody to move along because there was nothing to see here. If Ulfric won, the outcome would never be accepted and there'd be a Battle for Whiterun anyway. For him, fighting and winning the duel would be a waste of effort and just result in the death of another Jarl, for whom he has already expressed respect and doesn't want to kill. He'd still have to fight to take the city because if recent history is any judge, the Empire does not respect the legitimacy of duels whose outcomes don't fall in line with their plans.


Then his Imperial-approved replacement is ALSO a scumbag and racist, because if you help get him seated on the throne and ask him about it he will also say that Argonians cannot be allowed to live inside the city under his rule either. According to him it's for their own safety, and if you're willing to accept what Brunwulf says at face value then you must accept that it was also a legitimate reason for Ulfric's policy on the matter. If the mere existence of the policy is proof of racism, then both men are guilty.


Torygg was not a boy. He was a grown ass man, the end. He might have been young enough that much older people still refer to him as a "boy," but come on. Older people are like that, especially with someone for whom they have fond or nostalgic feelings. If they are old enough to feel "parental" towards you they look at you and see a "girl" or a "boy" instead of a woman or man. He was not a child, and if he was SO young that it's a valid issue now then IMO it should have been an issue when he took the throne. Apparently no one had any problems with his age or relative lack of experience when he became High King.

Hmmm arrogance or ignorance?

I'ma go ignorance, you can cure it by informing the ignorant. Where arrogance is easily cured with death.

FINALLY!!! Someone finally states this. Glad someone finally speaks facts!!!

Sending the axe was a declaration of war not an issue of a duel. If Balgruuf had accepted the axe it meant he was siding with Ulfric. It was a simple message join me or else. Balgruuf says something akin to "If Ulfric wants to challenge me in the old ways so be it, but I suspect he'll send his stormcloaks instead." I'm guessing you did miss that line. Ulfric didn't have to take Whiterun at all the city refused the Empires offer to garrison troops until Ulfric threatened it with invasion. He simply could have ignored Whiterun and gone after all the other holds.


From Galmar's own words the Jarls are calling for a moot to which Ulfric says damn the Jarls and damn the moot. Ulfric could always hold the moot in Windhelm or hell in the neutral city of Whiterun. They could even vote by courier without ever seeing one another face to face. People talk about Ulfric's honorable duel but there is zero evidence it was legal. Yeah its called an ancient tradition but that doesn't mean Skyrim's own laws still recognize it as legal. He also approached the city under the false pretense of wanting to talk. The fact is Ulfric doesn't even have unifed support of the people of Skyrim the Imperials fighting him are almost exclusively Nords.

His Imperial-approved replacement plans to change things so the Argonians can be welcomed into the City. Ulfric was the one who banned the Argonians from the city to begin with, and its already a matter of record that Ulfric ignores bandits who aren't targeting Nords. His replacement is vocal about his intention to change things thats a huge difference from being the man who put them in place. Ulfric could have spent his decades as Jarl trying to intergrate the city but he didn't [censored]ing about the Empire instead of puting the blame on the Thalmor was more important.

And even after Ulfric takes over the Thalmor Embassy stays standing so does Northwatch Keep if he's so ready to fight the Thalmor why doesn't he strike those locations. Could it be that he's really a coward and knows Skyrim would lose that war? or is it because this is a video game and massive world changes would be incredibly problamatic.

Dark Elves are confined to the Grey Quarter for one. They didn't do anything bad and they're harassed constantly by the Nords.

Ulfric's policy on keeping the Argonians outside the walls is never explained, but it is clear he enacted it, rather than the previous Jarl, his father. It is likely that Brunwulf refers to the fact that the Nords, riled after Ulfric's sound defeat, would be willing to attack a symbol of Imperial intervention and a race they're prejudiced against anyway; he can't change the policy until he has a firmer grip on his station and therefore a more sound means of enforcing it, and until the Windhelm bunch calm down. Ulfrics' policy is implied to be arbitrary, and without explanation.

I believe Ahtar's line is more clearly interpreted as "a thief like him would never have been allowed in the city under the High King; since his death, the city has gone to the dogs".

Ulfric may not be "scum", but he is idealistic, tempermental, somewhat obsessed with the abstract concept of honor, stubborn, and a poor social leader, if well-spoken and charismatic.

Now, Galmar, his second, is prejudiced; there's even a note for one of his dialogue lines that reads "defending his patriotism (and his bigotry)".

So essentially the thalmor castrated the empires balls because they were in such vulnerable position at the time that they weren't able to defend themselves if they showed their authority to the Thalmor by telling them no? I see who's running the show.

It is sad to see that the empire could no longer keep the citizens of Skyrim safe because of the threat of the Thalmor.

Galmar says it best "The day the Empire signed that damn treaty, was the day the Empire died"

You're probably right, but the fact is he does refer to Jaree-Ra as a "lizard like that," and this points to the fact that bad feeling about Khajiit and Argonians is related to their thieving, smuggling ways. It's an undeniable fact that many of them do live down to this reputation and reinforce it.

Racism in Tamriel is different than a lot of the connotations that word carries in RL contexts. All the races are xenophobic towards each other, for one thing, and many times there is good reason for the prejudice. I know old-timey TES players know this, but get the feeling in Stormcloak/empire discussions that newer players don't. Or that those trashing Ulfric like to forget it or make the imperials seem to have sweeter smelling crap, for purposes of argument.

Also the difference between the Stormcloaks and other Nords is exaggerated. Even if Solitude doesn't have an official policy of keeping Argonians out or Dunmer in an enclave (IMO a holdover of the Decree of Monument and something the very xenophobic Dunmer themselves probably insisted on as much as the Nords), there aren't any Argonians or Dunmer there. Strange, isn't it?

Just goes to show must of us here are Imperial all the way!

Do I think Ulfric is a scumbag? Not at all, I think he is a nationalistic idealist.

He did forfil the last part fo the prophecy(or the death of the High King is how I interpret that part of it), but he is not the cause of his return in itself.

The impression I am left with of Ulfric after playing tha gem alot, discussing the merits of the civil war and their leaders is this: He is a potentially great leader who have proven to inspire the people to stand with him against what he proffecess as injustice. I am also left with the impression he is largely in it for himself, as I do think a desire to be the High King is a part of his motivation, but I do not think that it automaticly means he is a bad choice for the throne. I don't like that he forced the Argonians to live on the docks though. As for the Greyquarter I am not sure where to stand, but since the Dunmer, as far as I know, haven't sworn fealty to the Windhelm government I do not think he is under any moral obligation to help them.

As a sidenote I generally think the Empire is the better choice, but it is really not a clearcut situation as I see it.

You'll be happy to know it's this kind of radical irrational view that makes people strongly dislike Ulfric to begin with. It's that unintelligent, "No, WE MUST FIGHT!" type of logic that throws people off. Ulfric is pissy because the Empire sacrificed public worship of Talos in exchange for survival, which given the circumstances, had they not signed the WGC Ulfric AND the Empire would have most likely been steamrolled. For some reason a lot of people don't get that.

You can't fight a war with resources you don't have, so yes, the Empire (Skyrim being a part of that) could not defend itself at the time. Throwing down the gauntlet one year after the devastating conflict would have been suicide. And I am willing to go out on a limb here, and say I don't think Ulfric is that stupid to completely disregard that. He knew what the stakes were, but he seen a chance to take over Skyrim behind the broad thought of fighting an Empire, "Too weak to rule them ..." Fortunately, his subordinates are too ignorant to get the full story down before they hop on the underdog bandwagon that I also believe a lot of players joined for the sole reason of being an underdog.

There are good arguments on both sides, but my conclusion is the Stormcloak philosophy is very skewed and biased. It wasn't a matter of 'Oh the Empire is a bunch of babies for bowing to the Thalmor,' it was a matter of, 'Oh the Empire (including it's province of Skyrim) wants to avoid total annihilation by bowing to the Thalmor in an effort to buy some time.' I weigh the pros versus the cons here, and I'm going to have to roll with the Empire on this one. No one wants to accept that though for some reason, but hey underdogs right?

No, now that you quote it I do remember him saying that. The question I'm asking myself is, why would he even bring that up as a possible option? Is he really that obtuse? The "problem" of Whiterun with regard to the CW requires a military solution. That's as true for Tullius as it is for Ulfric. That is why an actual battle is inevitable. A duel between the Jarls would be one arising from personal animus between them, and if that exists at all (which I don't think it does on Ulfric's part) it's irrelevant here from Ulfric's standpoint.

Both Tullius and Ulfric consider Whiterun vital because of its location and gaining control of it is the next logical step in their respective military campaigns... in fact Tullius is so determined to get troops into Whiterun that he's willing to lie to Balgruuf about the situation before Ulfric has even made a move in that direction. Whiterun cannot simply be ignored because neither side can afford the risk of having Balgruuf suddenly decide to throw his lot in with the enemy, or with the enemy occupying such a strategically important territory by force while they're busy securing other holds.

Whether or not you agree with them, Ulfric had reasons for challenging Torygg to a duel. Those reasons don't apply here. He doesn't want to be Jarl of Whiterun, he doesn't need to make a point about Balgruuf's abilities as a ruler. The goal is to control the territory, and while removing the current Jarl may be necessary to that end, it's only necessary because Balgruuf makes it so.

Why he even brings up the idea of a one on one duel... that just seems to stem from Balgruuf's personal animosity IMO. Clearly he doesn't like Ulfric, and I'm willing to bet that was a fact long before the death of Torygg. Maybe he'd like a chance to duke it out with him personally, but that would have nothing to do with the fate of Whiterun. Why would Ulfric want to challenge him in the old way over Whiterun? It's ridiculous to even think that IMO. He has no reason to, and it would solve nothing. As I've already said, even if Ulfric got control of Whiterun that way, he'd have no reason to expect the Empire and their representatives to accept that, he'd have to fight a battle to occupy the hold anyway. Without the Stormcloak military already controlling the territory, if he dueled Balgruuf and won it would just be Solitude all over again and he'd be branded a murderer by the Empire for the second time. Once they do control it, that's all they need and any personal animosity that exists between them is irrelevant to the situation.


If the duel itself was illegal, then Ulfric should have been arrested for issuing the challenge, and Torygg should have been arrested for accepting it. It should never have been allowed to take place. Obviously it either wasn't illegal, or the decision of the High King to allow it took precedence over any existing law that might forbid it. If it was illegal under the laws of the Empire, then it was a law that Torygg willingly broke to his own detriment and he should not be portrayed as the innocent victim of cold-blooded murder.

If the outcome of the duel is not "legal" in the sense of being a valid claim to the High throne, then that would be a matter for the moot to decide, not the Empire.


I don't think we can assume Ulfric has been Jarl for "decades." It's only been 25 years since the Markarth Incident, and he went to prison after that. I have seen nothing that says how long he was there. He could have been Jarl for two decades or less than one. Either way, like any leader he has priorities. Not everybody agrees with them, such is life. You cannot assume that his reason for keeping the Argonians out of the city was any different than Brunwulf's, nor can you assume that he would not work to change things the same way Brunwulf claims he will once the time, money, and resources are there, because you can't prove a negative.


He doesn't strike those locations because the devs didn't want to deal with players screaming bloody murder because they finished the war for the Stormcloaks first and then found out that other quests, including the Main Quest, were irretrievably broken because the Stormcloaks went to the specified locations and killed all the Thalmor there.

well id also like to point out its been 30 years since the treaty was signed sooo its been a hot min. I think the people of skyrim have been patient enough to let the harrassment and persecution of the thalmor go on for 25 years before taking matters into their own hamds.

Like to throw some things in.

The thalmor place remains open not bc ulfric dosent do anything about it, more along the fact that u cant complete the main quesy with it gone.

The tension the people in windhelm have with the dunmer is not that their elves, its bc they are trying to be nuetral. So that plays on the citizens a bit paranoid who exactly they behind and support.

The reason theirs a civil war is not because of ulfric duel. Its actuallys the empire stepping in and outlawing the action. That was the chain of events.

Also its the empire fault for the thalmor being in skyrim, BC they went back on their word to protect and sacrifised ulfric to advoid going into war early. Then when the thalmor bucked up, the empire let them have the ability and freedom to enact the ban.

No ulfric is not a scumbag and neither is tullious. Forget real life definition of racism and how things are done and immerse urself into tamriel culture. Its a different light and view on things.

Also it all boils down to if u thonk the empire should be responsible for the reprocussions of them signing the treaty.

And lastly, look at my sig, that says who I back and why, I believe it explains everything

Haha, well the prisoner thing could go both ways with the civil war, but that's true. Too bad no one had any apt prisoners to toss into the Great War.

Yes he is. you just haven't caught on yet.

The Empire is a scumbag. you just haven't caught on yet.

Sorry to intrude, but shouldn't that be plural since the Empire is an entity made up of multiple provinces?

The Elder Council are the thralls of the Aldmeri Dominion, if the Empire was serious about fighting the Dominion, the war should have been fought when Hammerfell was starting to turn back the Dominion.
If the Empire had decided to follow the wisest plan of action, We would not be playing this game we love called Skyrim and having these discussions
I think Ulfric is power hungry, but He will make a good High King if He can silence the intellegence leaks in his inner council.

Well technically, the Empire is not a living entity, so it can't be considered a scumbag. It can be made up of scumbags, or ruled by scumbags, but you can't accuse a country of being "a scumbag."

On topic: Where the OP sees Ulfric giving a heartfelt speech, I see a despot using good rhetoric and buzzwords to convince men and women to kill their own kin or die trying so that he can have power beyond his own station. I never see him make a move to help anyone but himself in game.

To me, any ruler who abandons his duties and obligations to the people he is already ruling in pursuit of greater power deserves not the power he seeks, nor does he deserve the power he currently has.

You bring up a lot of good points.

so you're saying that just because a lot of people are racist it's ok to have a racist leader? And High King Torygg had no say on whether the Argonians could enter Windhelm. (source: http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Jarl)

There is only 1 thing to say here, read the "The Bear Of Markath"- that book alone sent me into a rage i kill all stormcloaks even RALOF o_o

Your character will blindly follow Thalmor propaganda, and has no interest in facts and what really happened, and acts to quicken the destruction of Nirn through thier blind stupidity.

A few things first of all.

1) less stormcloaks meas more empire stability making less of a chance for thalmor to strike.
2) is what i read was wrong show me some evidence to prove that the book was incorrect
3) i believe what i wish, ulfric is scumbag, so are the thalmor, the empire isn't any better however to maintain peace, its better for them to be in skyrim rather then ulfric blind rebellion