Janus3003
Skyrim Marriage Counselor
I'm still not understanding how the Thu'um proves the "righteousness of the cause."
Would it have been the same if Ulfric had somehow brought a cannon with him into the Blue Palace?
Is it just me or is it difficult making a character to side with the Stormcloaks?
- Thread starter Somohexual
- Start date
Would it have been the same if Ulfric had somehow brought a cannon with him into the Blue Palace?
El Fonz0
Active Member
All right, now for my opinions:
Personally, I support the Stormcloaks, as I believe Skyrim should be free. That, and mostly, I tend to like the rebels.
Let's face it. A lot of people who oppose Ulfric call him racist, covets the throne, a barbarian, traitor, etc. Some of that may be true, like going against the Way of the Voice, which should only be used for worship(except for the Dragonborn), and the poor treatment of Dunmer and Argonians in Windhelm can be seen as racism. But none of us truly know what these virtual people are thinking or why they do these things.
Like the Ulfric vs Torygg deal. We don't really know if Ulfric shouted Torygg apart, shouted him to the floor, then killed him with his sword, or whatever. All we know is Ulfric used the Thu'um in combat and killed Torygg.
We don't know if Ulfric hates anyone who isn't a Nord, or will accept anyone who fights for him. He does have Redguards in the Stormcloaks, so maybe he hates/is distrustful of anyone who's not human? Who knows. But none of us can say that Ulfric is for sure racist, or only covets the throne.
Let's look at the facts: Ulfric killed Torygg. He used the Thu'um in his fight with Torygg. The Dunmer and Argonians have poor living conditions. The Stormcloaks mainly have Nords.
I will say the Civil War is Ulfric's fault, both in the sense he killed the High King, and didn't seem to think about just asking Torygg to declare independence from the Empire.
Well, my brain is tired of this, and you guys have too much time on your hands.
Also, I must say, when having a debate like this, it's important to see both sides of the argument. Or not. I don't know. I suck at debates.
Personally, I support the Stormcloaks, as I believe Skyrim should be free. That, and mostly, I tend to like the rebels.
Let's face it. A lot of people who oppose Ulfric call him racist, covets the throne, a barbarian, traitor, etc. Some of that may be true, like going against the Way of the Voice, which should only be used for worship(except for the Dragonborn), and the poor treatment of Dunmer and Argonians in Windhelm can be seen as racism. But none of us truly know what these virtual people are thinking or why they do these things.
Like the Ulfric vs Torygg deal. We don't really know if Ulfric shouted Torygg apart, shouted him to the floor, then killed him with his sword, or whatever. All we know is Ulfric used the Thu'um in combat and killed Torygg.
We don't know if Ulfric hates anyone who isn't a Nord, or will accept anyone who fights for him. He does have Redguards in the Stormcloaks, so maybe he hates/is distrustful of anyone who's not human? Who knows. But none of us can say that Ulfric is for sure racist, or only covets the throne.
Let's look at the facts: Ulfric killed Torygg. He used the Thu'um in his fight with Torygg. The Dunmer and Argonians have poor living conditions. The Stormcloaks mainly have Nords.
I will say the Civil War is Ulfric's fault, both in the sense he killed the High King, and didn't seem to think about just asking Torygg to declare independence from the Empire.
Well, my brain is tired of this, and you guys have too much time on your hands.
Also, I must say, when having a debate like this, it's important to see both sides of the argument. Or not. I don't know. I suck at debates.
ah, i see your point.
the challenge victory inherently proved ulfric's righteousness according to the old ways. the thu'um added to the display for all to see, thereby, lending credence to his cause of the treachery against skyrim and the restoration of her glory.
and, to answer the question of what crimes torygg committed i will preempt and state that any high king of skyrim that allows the concordant blasphemy to be enacted is unfit for their title.
the wisdom of ulfric's thu'um use is unquestionable within his cause and valid within nord customs.
El Fonz0
Active Member
I don't think so. Ulfric seems pretty intelligent.
i'll need to go ask Owyn's ghost.
LoneShadow_68
Member
StormCloaks forever
Click teh egg it helps
Click teh egg it helps
Serebro Moniker
He who moves it moves it
Your sources and arguments have convinced me.StormCloaks forever
lonewolf
Member
my first character i played i joined the stormcloaks got about halfway though the main quest did the civil war and then was like what the hell did i do. after reading alot of threads about it i changed my mind the storm cloaks are nationalistic so there going to be racist its understandable but still not right, ulfric is definitly in it for himself no doubt about that. His whole rebellion has actually made worshiping talos the supposed main reason hes fighting harder. hes doing it to become king because being yarl isnt grand enough for him thats the only reason hes doing this besides the fact that by fighting the empire your weakening the overall resistance against the dominion. ive been a legionnaire ever sinc that first playthrough
samgurl775
Cerberus Officer
I think I'm one of the only die hard Empire supporters that's played through the entire Stormcloak quest line. What I've learned is that most people in Skyrim just want things to get back to normal and get on with their lives. I think the Stormcloaks are a good example of the 80/20 rule - 20% of the population is causing 80% of the problems.
I'm fine with the idea of an independant Skyrim (I disagree with it, but I understand it), but I can't believe there are people that actually think Ulfric should be king after visting Windhelm and reading The Bear of Markarth.
I'm fine with the idea of an independant Skyrim (I disagree with it, but I understand it), but I can't believe there are people that actually think Ulfric should be king after visting Windhelm and reading The Bear of Markarth.
it would be utterly ridiculous to go through a racial profile at that time.
you know, i hear a lot of you people and your need for consistency and good story writing. but, mass effect and bioware story writing isn't much better, yet, lauded.
i want my TES to be racially vibrant, and, full of turmoil.
not the sensitive, crybabies of today that whine when they lose their phone.
you know, i hear a lot of you people and your need for consistency and good story writing. but, mass effect and bioware story writing isn't much better, yet, lauded.
i want my TES to be racially vibrant, and, full of turmoil.
not the sensitive, crybabies of today that whine when they lose their phone.
Panda Rawrlord
Herald of Panda-Monium
I've never been fond of Nords but have been wanting to take the Stormcloaks side just for the heck of it. Meh, maybe I'll just make a non-Nord and pretend they have multiple personalities, one of which is a nationalistic "Nord"...
Serebro Moniker
He who moves it moves it
You are really starting to bore me now. I tire of this discussion.
Gentlemen, I bid to you goodbye, and leave you a parting gift of circus afro
I've never been fond of Nords but have been wanting to take the Stormcloaks side just for the heck of it. Meh, maybe I'll just make a non-Nord and pretend they have multiple personalities, one of which is a nationalistic Nord...
it doesn't matter any which way you choose. it's all in your head. there is no difference that can me made between one character and the next.
it all must happen in your mind.
Svarnor
Shadowcloak of Nocturnal
Well, I can't get into a long, drawn out argument, but here's my input:
It seems to me that throughout the game, Ulfric is not necessarily as racist as some of his followers. I know he created the Gray Quarter, but if he hadn't, his citizens would have gotten angry with him. As far a stage line about the 'better song' goes, I justify that in this sense: the one thug that matters most to Nords, above even Tradition and Loyalty, is death in battle, and the glory that comes from it.
For example, Dying by executioner in Helgen would not be a Nord's preferred end, but being killed by the Dragonborn, the master of Thu'um, has a decidedly better ring to it.
There's also the fact that, at heart, I am a storyteller, and the Stormcloaks winning makes for a much better sequel. I wonder how Bethesda will handle that...
Anyway, I agree that the Legion is fighting for what might be considered the Smart Side, Bowing down to the Thalmor and (Hopefully) Rising again. On the other hand, I feel that morally I side with Ulfric as, despite his actions what may be considered cruel, he is fighting for what I consider the morally right cause. Honour. Glory. Tradition.
I feel like I'm rambling. Does this make sense to anyone?
It seems to me that throughout the game, Ulfric is not necessarily as racist as some of his followers. I know he created the Gray Quarter, but if he hadn't, his citizens would have gotten angry with him. As far a stage line about the 'better song' goes, I justify that in this sense: the one thug that matters most to Nords, above even Tradition and Loyalty, is death in battle, and the glory that comes from it.
For example, Dying by executioner in Helgen would not be a Nord's preferred end, but being killed by the Dragonborn, the master of Thu'um, has a decidedly better ring to it.
There's also the fact that, at heart, I am a storyteller, and the Stormcloaks winning makes for a much better sequel. I wonder how Bethesda will handle that...
Anyway, I agree that the Legion is fighting for what might be considered the Smart Side, Bowing down to the Thalmor and (Hopefully) Rising again. On the other hand, I feel that morally I side with Ulfric as, despite his actions what may be considered cruel, he is fighting for what I consider the morally right cause. Honour. Glory. Tradition.
I feel like I'm rambling. Does this make sense to anyone?
