Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  Grimnir on Thu Apr 04, 2013 7:40 am



I get so tired of the whole "Ulfric murdered a child!" excuse. Or that he cheated. Or any of that. Torygg was High King of Skyrim, and he was a puppet of the Empire, who are in turn puppets of the Thalmor. Torygg was the head badass in charge of Skyrim, and did nothing to stand up to the White-Gold Concordat or the Aldmeri Dominion. He sat on his throne and doted over his pretty little wife. Ulfric challenged him, as is Nord custom, he accepted, and he lost. That is not murder. That is how things work in Skyrim. As for Ulfric using the Thu'um, do you think Torygg didn't know that Ulfric studied with the Greybeards? Was it a secret that Ulfric left High Hrothgar to join the Legion and fight the Thalmor? Was it some mystery that Ulfric used the Thu'um to retake Markarth from the Forsworn? Torygg knew. Torygg knew the risks of fighting Ulfric, and still he accepted the challenge. Those who use it as an excuse to hate on Ulfric, to me, sound like nothing more than sore, whiny losers. Even in Sovngarde, Torygg has more honor and dignity than those who use his death as an excuse to fight against the Stormcloaks. Dead King Torygg was weak, and even in his weakness, he's a better man than all the Legion. Deal with it.
avatar
Grimnir
Admin
Admin

Posts : 92
Join date : 2013-03-24
Age : 36
Location : Whiterun

http://stormcloaksoldier.rpg-board.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  The Rebel on Thu Apr 04, 2013 8:27 am



I get so tired of the whole "Ulfric murdered a child!" excuse. Or that he cheated. Or any of that. Torygg was High King of Skyrim, and he was a puppet of the Empire, who are in turn puppets of the Thalmor.
The high king has more responsibilities than fighting Ulfric. He wasn't prepared and while Ulfric spent his ime in High Hrothgar he had to spend time doing his High King duties.

Torygg was the head badass in charge of Skyrim, and did nothing to stand up to the White-Gold Concordat or the Aldmeri Dominion. He sat on his throne and doted over his pretty little wife. Ulfric challenged him, as is Nord custom, he accepted, and he lost. That is not murder. That is how things work in Skyrim. As for Ulfric using the Thu'um, do you think Torygg didn't know that Ulfric studied with the Greybeards? Was it a secret that Ulfric left High Hrothgar to join the Legion and fight the Thalmor? Was it some mystery that Ulfric used the Thu'um to retake Markarth from the Forsworn? Torygg knew. Torygg knew the risks of fighting Ulfric, and still he accepted the challenge.
He knew the risks yes, but he had no choice. He had to fight with Ulfric or else he would loose his position and be disgraced, a punishment worse than death.

Those who use it as an excuse to hate on Ulfric, to me, sound like nothing more than sore, whiny losers. Even in Sovngarde, Torygg has more honor and dignity than those who use his death as an excuse to fight against the Stormcloaks. Dead King Torygg was weak, and even in his weakness, he's a better man than all the Legion. Deal with it.

_________________
Sometimes I miss drugs.Then I read gamefaqs.
avatar
The Rebel
Filthy Grey Skin

Posts : 379
Join date : 2013-03-25

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  Grimnir on Thu Apr 04, 2013 10:17 am

I disagree with pretty much everything you said, but props for the Dude. Very Happy
avatar
Grimnir
Admin
Admin

Posts : 92
Join date : 2013-03-24
Age : 36
Location : Whiterun

http://stormcloaksoldier.rpg-board.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  The Rebel on Thu Apr 04, 2013 10:32 am

Grimnir wrote:I disagree with pretty much everything you said, but props for the Dude. Very Happy
'S Okay man, the truth hurts for a while but soon you'll realise it's pointless and that The Temple is the best option.


_________________
Sometimes I miss drugs.Then I read gamefaqs.
avatar
The Rebel
Filthy Grey Skin

Posts : 379
Join date : 2013-03-25

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  Vulgruff on Thu Apr 04, 2013 10:10 pm

Torygg had 2 choices.

1. Live without honor.
2. Die with it.

The fact is Grimir is right, people use this "murder" as a false excuse. In reality the death of the High King is one of the very few things problems with Ulfric, but not because he "murdered" him, that's bullshit.

The bad thing about Torygg's death isn't how it happened, but why. If you talk to his advisers they say Torygg had the utmost respect for Ulfric, and would've stood up to the Empire if he asked. He didn't though. Who knows why, could be Ulfric didn't know this, or it was lust for power. The battle itself though was fair.

You always have a choice. Torygg chose death, he chose Sovngarde.
End of story.
avatar
Vulgruff
Ice-Veins
Ice-Veins

Posts : 181
Join date : 2013-03-29
Age : 21
Location : Michigan, United States

http://www.Facebook.com/HumbleUlfric

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  Arnier the fallen on Fri Apr 05, 2013 2:01 am

Vulgruff wrote:Torygg had 2 choices.

1. Live without honor.
2. Die with it.

The fact is Grimir is right, people use this "murder" as a false excuse. In reality the death of the High King is one of the very few things problems with Ulfric, but not because he "murdered" him, that's bullshit.

The bad thing about Torygg's death isn't how it happened, but why. If you talk to his advisers they say Torygg had the utmost respect for Ulfric, and would've stood up to the Empire if he asked. He didn't though. Who knows why, could be Ulfric didn't know this, or it was lust for power. The battle itself though was fair.

You always have a choice. Torygg chose death, he chose Sovngarde.
End of story.


this I sprobably the best answer I've ever seen, it's true and impartial I do often wonder though if Ulfric knew that Toryg felt that way, I think I remember them saying that Ulfric entered sloitude under the guise of discussing it with him
avatar
Arnier the fallen
Filthy Grey Skin

Posts : 181
Join date : 2013-03-25
Age : 28
Location : Wales uk

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  james.steelhaven on Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:36 am

The Rebel wrote:


I get so tired of the whole "Ulfric murdered a child!" excuse. Or that he cheated. Or any of that. Torygg was High King of Skyrim, and he was a puppet of the Empire, who are in turn puppets of the Thalmor.
The high king has more responsibilities than fighting Ulfric. He wasn't prepared and while Ulfric spent his ime in High Hrothgar he had to spend time doing his High King duties.

Torygg was the head badass in charge of Skyrim, and did nothing to stand up to the White-Gold Concordat or the Aldmeri Dominion. He sat on his throne and doted over his pretty little wife. Ulfric challenged him, as is Nord custom, he accepted, and he lost. That is not murder. That is how things work in Skyrim. As for Ulfric using the Thu'um, do you think Torygg didn't know that Ulfric studied with the Greybeards? Was it a secret that Ulfric left High Hrothgar to join the Legion and fight the Thalmor? Was it some mystery that Ulfric used the Thu'um to retake Markarth from the Forsworn? Torygg knew. Torygg knew the risks of fighting Ulfric, and still he accepted the challenge.
He knew the risks yes, but he had no choice. He had to fight with Ulfric or else he would loose his position and be disgraced, a punishment worse than death.

Those who use it as an excuse to hate on Ulfric, to me, sound like nothing more than sore, whiny losers. Even in Sovngarde, Torygg has more honor and dignity than those who use his death as an excuse to fight against the Stormcloaks. Dead King Torygg was weak, and even in his weakness, he's a better man than all the Legion. Deal with it.

Torygg was under 0 obligation to accept a duel with a mere 'Jarl'. He has Housecarls and Thanes for that very reason. The four Jarls that supported him wouldn't have changed their minds just because he chose a second to fight for him, as is his right. Ulfric challenged, Torygg accepted, and died for his foolishness. But, he died as a Nord, and that alone is worth respect.
avatar
james.steelhaven
Bone-Breaker
Bone-Breaker

Posts : 275
Join date : 2013-04-05

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  The Rebel on Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:48 am

james.steelhaven wrote:
The Rebel wrote:


I get so tired of the whole "Ulfric murdered a child!" excuse. Or that he cheated. Or any of that. Torygg was High King of Skyrim, and he was a puppet of the Empire, who are in turn puppets of the Thalmor.
The high king has more responsibilities than fighting Ulfric. He wasn't prepared and while Ulfric spent his ime in High Hrothgar he had to spend time doing his High King duties.

Torygg was the head badass in charge of Skyrim, and did nothing to stand up to the White-Gold Concordat or the Aldmeri Dominion. He sat on his throne and doted over his pretty little wife. Ulfric challenged him, as is Nord custom, he accepted, and he lost. That is not murder. That is how things work in Skyrim. As for Ulfric using the Thu'um, do you think Torygg didn't know that Ulfric studied with the Greybeards? Was it a secret that Ulfric left High Hrothgar to join the Legion and fight the Thalmor? Was it some mystery that Ulfric used the Thu'um to retake Markarth from the Forsworn? Torygg knew. Torygg knew the risks of fighting Ulfric, and still he accepted the challenge.
He knew the risks yes, but he had no choice. He had to fight with Ulfric or else he would loose his position and be disgraced, a punishment worse than death.

Those who use it as an excuse to hate on Ulfric, to me, sound like nothing more than sore, whiny losers. Even in Sovngarde, Torygg has more honor and dignity than those who use his death as an excuse to fight against the Stormcloaks. Dead King Torygg was weak, and even in his weakness, he's a better man than all the Legion. Deal with it.

Torygg was under 0 obligation to accept a duel with a mere 'Jarl'. He has Housecarls and Thanes for that very reason. The four Jarls that supported him wouldn't have changed their minds just because he chose a second to fight for him, as is his right. Ulfric challenged, Torygg accepted, and died for his foolishness. But, he died as a Nord, and that alone is worth respect.
Torygg HAD to acceot though. As you say, he died as a True Nord with honour. If he didn't accept he would be looked down upon by people and seem less honorable by Nordic views.

You don't have to do it but if you don't, you're f***** still.

_________________
Sometimes I miss drugs.Then I read gamefaqs.
avatar
The Rebel
Filthy Grey Skin

Posts : 379
Join date : 2013-03-25

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  james.steelhaven on Tue Apr 09, 2013 12:08 pm

Torygg was under 0 obligation to accept a duel with a mere 'Jarl'. He has Housecarls and Thanes for that very reason. The four Jarls that supported him wouldn't have changed their minds just because he chose a second to fight for him, as is his right. Ulfric challenged, Torygg accepted, and died for his foolishness. But, he died as a Nord, and that alone is worth respect.

Torygg HAD to accept though. As you say, he died as a True Nord with honor. If he didn't accept he would be looked down upon by people and seem less honorable by Nordic views. You don't have to do it but if you don't, you're f***** still.

Now we are getting into real world history vs. video game history, but a King does not have to accept a challenge; otherwise he would be challenged all day long! If being a Jarl lent weight to his challenge, then any Jarl could challenge for the 'right' to challenge the king. That chick from Riften or the dude from Dawnstar had just as much claim to challenge Torygg as Ulfric did. So, I don't think the King has to accept every challenge that comes his way.

More likely, Ulfric got close to the King somehow then said something insulting to his face (or perhaps to Elisif?), then challenged him when he was pissed off. Once uttered, a challenge can not be rescinded when cooler head prevail. Either way, Torygg was under 0 obligation to accept that challenge. I think, but cannot prove, that Torygg got hot under the collar when Ulfric challenged him and jumped at the chance for a Holmgang.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holmgang

Riddick was right; don't step up if you can't keep up.
avatar
james.steelhaven
Bone-Breaker
Bone-Breaker

Posts : 275
Join date : 2013-04-05

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  The Rebel on Tue Apr 09, 2013 12:19 pm

james.steelhaven wrote:
Torygg was under 0 obligation to accept a duel with a mere 'Jarl'. He has Housecarls and Thanes for that very reason. The four Jarls that supported him wouldn't have changed their minds just because he chose a second to fight for him, as is his right. Ulfric challenged, Torygg accepted, and died for his foolishness. But, he died as a Nord, and that alone is worth respect.

Torygg HAD to accept though. As you say, he died as a True Nord with honor. If he didn't accept he would be looked down upon by people and seem less honorable by Nordic views. You don't have to do it but if you don't, you're f***** still.

Now we are getting into real world history vs. video game history, but a King does not have to accept a challenge; otherwise he would be challenged all day long! If being a Jarl lent weight to his challenge, then any Jarl could challenge for the 'right' to challenge the king. That chick from Riften or the dude from Dawnstar had just as much claim to challenge Torygg as Ulfric did. So, I don't think the King has to accept every challenge that comes his way.

More likely, Ulfric got close to the King somehow then said something insulting to his face (or perhaps to Elisif?), then challenged him when he was pissed off. Once uttered, a challenge can not be rescinded when cooler head prevail. Either way, Torygg was under 0 obligation to accept that challenge. I think, but cannot prove, that Torygg got hot under the collar when Ulfric challenged him and jumped at the chance for a Holmgang.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holmgang

Riddick was right; don't step up if you can't keep up.
Nordic =/= Norse here.

And actually, Ulfric went there to discuss something (forgot what it was) peacefully. Then he challenged Torygg.

Nords culture is based around honor and the like and any Jarl COULD challenge Torygg but they didn't in risk of a civil war and because they elected him, if I remember correctly.

Have you got any evidence or sources for the pissed off theory because I would LOVE to see them, no sarcasm or aggressiveness intended.

_________________
Sometimes I miss drugs.Then I read gamefaqs.
avatar
The Rebel
Filthy Grey Skin

Posts : 379
Join date : 2013-03-25

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  james.steelhaven on Tue Apr 09, 2013 12:29 pm

The Rebel wrote:
james.steelhaven wrote:
Torygg was under 0 obligation to accept a duel with a mere 'Jarl'. He has Housecarls and Thanes for that very reason. The four Jarls that supported him wouldn't have changed their minds just because he chose a second to fight for him, as is his right. Ulfric challenged, Torygg accepted, and died for his foolishness. But, he died as a Nord, and that alone is worth respect.

Torygg HAD to accept though. As you say, he died as a True Nord with honor. If he didn't accept he would be looked down upon by people and seem less honorable by Nordic views. You don't have to do it but if you don't, you're f***** still.

Now we are getting into real world history vs. video game history, but a King does not have to accept a challenge; otherwise he would be challenged all day long! If being a Jarl lent weight to his challenge, then any Jarl could challenge for the 'right' to challenge the king. That chick from Riften or the dude from Dawnstar had just as much claim to challenge Torygg as Ulfric did. So, I don't think the King has to accept every challenge that comes his way.

More likely, Ulfric got close to the King somehow then said something insulting to his face (or perhaps to Elisif?), then challenged him when he was pissed off. Once uttered, a challenge can not be rescinded when cooler head prevail. Either way, Torygg was under 0 obligation to accept that challenge. I think, but cannot prove, that Torygg got hot under the collar when Ulfric challenged him and jumped at the chance for a Holmgang.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holmgang

Riddick was right; don't step up if you can't keep up.
Nordic =/= Norse here.

And actually, Ulfric went there to discuss something (forgot what it was) peacefully. Then he challenged Torygg.

Nords culture is based around honor and the like and any Jarl COULD challenge Torygg but they didn't in risk of a civil war and because they elected him, if I remember correctly.

Have you got any evidence or sources for the pissed off theory because I would LOVE to see them, no sarcasm or aggressiveness intended.

Sadly, no, that's why I mentioned the cannot prove part. I was working off my knowledge of Nordic/Anglo-Saxon culture and simple human nature with some logic thrown in. Everyone you meet in game has a biased opinion of the incident.

Did any Jarl have the right to challenge? I missed that somewhere in the game.
avatar
james.steelhaven
Bone-Breaker
Bone-Breaker

Posts : 275
Join date : 2013-04-05

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  The Rebel on Tue Apr 09, 2013 12:36 pm

james.steelhaven wrote:
The Rebel wrote:
james.steelhaven wrote:
Torygg was under 0 obligation to accept a duel with a mere 'Jarl'. He has Housecarls and Thanes for that very reason. The four Jarls that supported him wouldn't have changed their minds just because he chose a second to fight for him, as is his right. Ulfric challenged, Torygg accepted, and died for his foolishness. But, he died as a Nord, and that alone is worth respect.

Torygg HAD to accept though. As you say, he died as a True Nord with honor. If he didn't accept he would be looked down upon by people and seem less honorable by Nordic views. You don't have to do it but if you don't, you're f***** still.

Now we are getting into real world history vs. video game history, but a King does not have to accept a challenge; otherwise he would be challenged all day long! If being a Jarl lent weight to his challenge, then any Jarl could challenge for the 'right' to challenge the king. That chick from Riften or the dude from Dawnstar had just as much claim to challenge Torygg as Ulfric did. So, I don't think the King has to accept every challenge that comes his way.

More likely, Ulfric got close to the King somehow then said something insulting to his face (or perhaps to Elisif?), then challenged him when he was pissed off. Once uttered, a challenge can not be rescinded when cooler head prevail. Either way, Torygg was under 0 obligation to accept that challenge. I think, but cannot prove, that Torygg got hot under the collar when Ulfric challenged him and jumped at the chance for a Holmgang.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holmgang

Riddick was right; don't step up if you can't keep up.
Nordic =/= Norse here.

And actually, Ulfric went there to discuss something (forgot what it was) peacefully. Then he challenged Torygg.

Nords culture is based around honor and the like and any Jarl COULD challenge Torygg but they didn't in risk of a civil war and because they elected him, if I remember correctly.

Have you got any evidence or sources for the pissed off theory because I would LOVE to see them, no sarcasm or aggressiveness intended.

Sadly, no, that's why I mentioned the cannot prove part. I was working off my knowledge of Nordic/Anglo-Saxon culture and simple human nature with some logic thrown in. Everyone you meet in game has a biased opinion of the incident.

Did any Jarl have the right to challenge? I missed that somewhere in the game.
I assumed it was inferred, it didn't have to be Ulfric but only Ulfric would have that effect what with the Markarth Incident and the whole Thalmor Torture, make him start a rebellion by making him think its his idea thing.

_________________
Sometimes I miss drugs.Then I read gamefaqs.
avatar
The Rebel
Filthy Grey Skin

Posts : 379
Join date : 2013-03-25

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  Lord Nerevar on Fri Apr 12, 2013 9:58 am

avatar
Lord Nerevar
Filthy Grey Skin

Posts : 198
Join date : 2013-03-25
Location : Red Mountain, Resdayn.

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  james.steelhaven on Fri Apr 12, 2013 10:09 am


OH damn, my sides. My chest. Hell, my whole body.
avatar
james.steelhaven
Bone-Breaker
Bone-Breaker

Posts : 275
Join date : 2013-04-05

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  james.steelhaven on Fri Apr 12, 2013 10:09 am

james.steelhaven wrote:

OH damn, my sides. My chest. Hell, my whole body.

And before I forget:

CITATION NEEDED!
avatar
james.steelhaven
Bone-Breaker
Bone-Breaker

Posts : 275
Join date : 2013-04-05

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  Lord Nerevar on Fri Apr 12, 2013 10:38 am

While I can see why people would view Ulfric challenging Torygg as justified, I have a problem with him using the Thu'um in a duel. I think that in a duel both combatants should have access to the same weapons and armour, and I think that Ulfric seemed a bit cowardly using the Voice rather than settling the matter in a normal duel. I think that if he had beaten him in a 'fair' duel, then I could understand people thinking the duel was acceptable, but I see using Shouts, while it revered by the Nords, as murder, not an honourable duel. That's just my opinion though, I can understand why some people who disagree. However, we must also remember that Skyrim is a province of the Empire, and rules set by the Empire can override local laws and customs. This is suggested by the Treaty of the Armistice, as one of Morrowind's terms was that they kept the ability to preserve their local laws and customs, unlike other Provinces in the Empire, and so Imperial and Great House Laws are both in effect, the former only when there is not a confliction with the latter. This does not happen in the other Provinces, where the word of the Empire is law. Therefore, the Empire can claim that Ulfric's actions were illegal as their laws take precedence over local laws and customs. Morrowind would be the only exception to the laws of the Empire, such as in the case of the Levitation Act, and so as Skyrim does not have this privilege, Ulfric's actions were illegal as any harmful actions towards a Monarch in the Empire are illegal. It doesn't matter if it was a Nordic custom, the laws of the Empire come first. Local laws and customs only exist if they do not conflict with the laws of the Empire, which in this case they do, except it being the opposite case in Morrowind, the laws of the Empire only exist when they do not conflict with Great House Laws.
avatar
Lord Nerevar
Filthy Grey Skin

Posts : 198
Join date : 2013-03-25
Location : Red Mountain, Resdayn.

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  james.steelhaven on Fri Apr 12, 2013 11:36 am

And in one sentence you justified his rebellion. I am on a smartphone atm, and can't explain in details right now.
I'll edit this once I get back to a real keyboard.

Big fingers and tiny keys... what I would give for a real keyboard.

EDIT: Answered, see below.


Last edited by james.steelhaven on Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:36 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
james.steelhaven
Bone-Breaker
Bone-Breaker

Posts : 275
Join date : 2013-04-05

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  Lord Nerevar on Fri Apr 12, 2013 12:34 pm


If you're talking about how the Empire's laws come first, the same happens in the real world. Here in the UK, Parliamentary Acts are above any other authority within the United Kingdom. However, these Acts cannot oppose European Union Laws, though this example is not exactly the same as we can withdraw when we like. Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own laws in certain cases, but a Parliamebtary Act can extend all the way across the United Kingdom. The way the Empire runs, in legal terms, is the same as the United Kingdom. It is a coalition of nations that can have their rules in certain cases, but have a legal authority above all of these. It's not an Imperial dictatorship, but as Skyrim joined the Empire, it fully well knew what was going to happen. The Imperials don't just decide run every province how they like, much like the English don't do that to the other nations, they are more commonly agreed upon laws, and when you accept these laws into your nation, as the Nords did, you have to abide by them. Every organisation has it's rules, and if you join, you cannot complain if you knew the rules beforehand. They aren't even dictatorial laws, either, they are for the common good, opposing acts like slavery, theft, murder assault etc. This point justifying the Rebellion is about as justified as us tearing up the Human Rights Act of 1998.
avatar
Lord Nerevar
Filthy Grey Skin

Posts : 198
Join date : 2013-03-25
Location : Red Mountain, Resdayn.

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  james.steelhaven on Fri Apr 12, 2013 1:00 pm

your dang close, but not quite. still mobile, give me a few hours.

EDIT: This post not important, can a mod delete this post? It's just wasting space.
I don't have a delete option, for some reason.


Last edited by james.steelhaven on Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:37 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
james.steelhaven
Bone-Breaker
Bone-Breaker

Posts : 275
Join date : 2013-04-05

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  Lord Nerevar on Fri Apr 12, 2013 1:28 pm

Sorry. I starting typing that out, then I realised I should probably give you a chance to post your bit first. However, I decided to post that anyway seeing as I had already written most of it out.
avatar
Lord Nerevar
Filthy Grey Skin

Posts : 198
Join date : 2013-03-25
Location : Red Mountain, Resdayn.

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  james.steelhaven on Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:25 pm

Spoiler:
Lord Nerevar wrote:While I can see why people would view Ulfric challenging Torygg as justified, I have a problem with him using the Thu'um in a duel. I think that in a duel both combatants should have access to the same weapons and armour, and I think that Ulfric seemed a bit cowardly using the Voice rather than settling the matter in a normal duel. I think that if he had beaten him in a 'fair' duel, then I could understand people thinking the duel was acceptable, but I see using Shouts, while it revered by the Nords, as murder, not an honourable duel. That's just my opinion though, I can understand why some people who disagree. However, we must also remember that Skyrim is a province of the Empire, and rules set by the Empire can override local laws and customs. This is suggested by the Treaty of the Armistice, as one of Morrowind's terms was that they kept the ability to preserve their local laws and customs, unlike other Provinces in the Empire, and so Imperial and Great House Laws are both in effect, the former only when there is not a confliction with the latter. This does not happen in the other Provinces, where the word of the Empire is law. Therefore, the Empire can claim that Ulfric's actions were illegal as their laws take precedence over local laws and customs. Morrowind would be the only exception to the laws of the Empire, such as in the case of the Levitation Act, and so as Skyrim does not have this privilege, Ulfric's actions were illegal as any harmful actions towards a Monarch in the Empire are illegal. It doesn't matter if it was a Nordic custom, the laws of the Empire come first. Local laws and customs only exist if they do not conflict with the laws of the Empire, which in this case they do, except it being the opposite case in Morrowind, the laws of the Empire only exist when they do not conflict with Great House Laws.

EDIT: Alright, now I'm back on a real keyboard, and I will explain my reasoning better. Tiny keyboard, big hands, not a good match. With out further ado....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With a few sentences you justified (in Ulfric's eyes) the entire rebellion:

rules set by the Empire can override local laws and customs, || they kept the ability to preserve their local laws and customs || the laws of the Empire come first"

When those laws no longer are beneficial to those governed by them, we have a duty to rebel against them. You can debate whether they were beneficial or not, there is a discussion to be had there. However, to those who view them as not, then they do NOT have an obligation to follow them. Free men do not ask Permission. Free men do, and to hell with anyone who has a problem with it. (Within reason, of course.)

So, Dunmer get to keep their customs, but Nords don't? That hardly seems fair. Especially when you consider the following:
WE NORDS BUILT AND FOUNDED THAT EMPIRE. I have no problems with Dunmer keeping their customs, but if they do it, then we Nords do to. After all, that's only 'fair'.

Therefore, the Empire can claim that Ulfric's actions were illegal as their laws take precedence over local laws and customs."

Need I remind you that the tyrant never needs to justify his actions. Yes, Ulfric believed in that empire at a young age, but over the course of his career, he witnessed enough to change his mind such as The White-Gold treaty, Forsworn incident, banning of Talos, Thalmor 'Justicars', etc... He believed it, and enough other Nords did too. Thus, their Rebelion was justified in their eyes.

(Note: this is NOT a discussion of whether the Stormcloaks would have won, that was answered in another thread!)
avatar
james.steelhaven
Bone-Breaker
Bone-Breaker

Posts : 275
Join date : 2013-04-05

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  james.steelhaven on Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:35 pm

And to fairly answer this....

[quote="Lord Nerevar"]
Spoiler:
If you're talking about how the Empire's laws come first, the same happens in the real world. Here in the UK, Parliamentary Acts are above any other authority within the United Kingdom. However, these Acts cannot oppose European Union Laws, though this example is not exactly the same as we can withdraw when we like. Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own laws in certain cases, but a Parliamebtary Act can extend all the way across the United Kingdom. The way the Empire runs, in legal terms, is the same as the United Kingdom. It is a coalition of nations that can have their rules in certain cases, but have a legal authority above all of these. It's not an Imperial dictatorship, but as Skyrim joined the Empire, it fully well knew what was going to happen. The Imperials don't just decide run every province how they like, much like the English don't do that to the other nations, they are more commonly agreed upon laws, and when you accept these laws into your nation, as the Nords did, you have to abide by them. Every organisation has it's rules, and if you join, you cannot complain if you knew the rules beforehand. They aren't even dictatorial laws, either, they are for the common good, opposing acts like slavery, theft, murder assault etc. This point justifying the Rebellion is about as justified as us tearing up the Human Rights Act of 1998.

If you're talking about how the Empire's laws come first, the same happens in the real world.
#1: We are not in the real world. I have already been shouted down for this, so now I'm doing it here.
Evil or Very Mad STOP IT! Evil or Very Mad

#2: Going back on topic, that's real nice that the DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED governing body of the UK agreed to pass a bill. Guess what? If enough of the people governed have a problem with that bill, they elect representatives to get that shit over turned. VIOLA! No bloodshed, no civil war.
But Skyrim is not a DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED governing body are they? No, they are Hereditary Absolute Monarchical Autocratic Feudal society. Guess what? Not a lot of room to foment opposition of the bloodless sort, now is there? Instead, if you don't like the Sovereign's rules, to bad, so sad, no recourse for you. So, you gather up a few (thousand) dudes and kill his ass and take over. Which doesn't really work out in the long run, but hey, were only human(oid).

However, these Acts cannot oppose European Union Laws, though this example is not exactly the same as we can withdraw when we like.

So can Skyrim. They just have to fight tooth and nail for it, first.
avatar
james.steelhaven
Bone-Breaker
Bone-Breaker

Posts : 275
Join date : 2013-04-05

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  Lord Nerevar on Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:24 pm

When those laws no longer are beneficial to those governed by them, we have a duty to rebel against them. You can debate whether they were beneficial or not, there is a discussion to be had there. However, to those who view them as not, then they do NOT have an obligation to follow them. Free men do not ask Permission. Free men do, and to hell with anyone who has a problem with it. (Within reason, of course.)

I doubt you would find many arguing against them being beneficial, because these laws are mostly in place in the provinces if the Empire, mostly dealing with theft, murder, trespassing and crimes like that. People who do not agree them still have to follow them, that's the point of them being laws. Until they are repealed, the people under those laws are obligated to follow them. I can't go out and stab someone if I don't like there being laws against murder. The definition of 'within reason' can vary quite radically from person to person.

So, Dunmer get to keep their customs, but Nords don't? That hardly seems fair. Especially when you consider the following:
WE NORDS BUILT AND FOUNDED THAT EMPIRE. I have no problems with Dunmer keeping their customs, but if they do it, then we Nords do to. After all, that's only 'fair'.

I do agree that Skyrim should have more freedoms, but the way to do it is not murdering the High King and killing Imperial soldiers. If the Nords attempted a peaceful method of achieving this, but were refused for no reason, I would have more sympathy. The point is also that not all Nords support the Stormcloak Rebellion. We aren't given exactly how many people support either side, or are neutral. I wouldn't have thought the majority would support the Stormcloak Rebellion, but that does not mean that I think the majority would support the Empire. I think quite a few people would be more neutral on the matter, even if their local Jarls support one side. Again, it's a different story if the majority of Nords wish to secede, but if the majority do not support secession, the Empire cannot really grant it. You can't give into militant forces killing monarchs and attacking your armies, or other people will get similar ideas, much like how we cannot give into the terrorists in the real world. The thing about Morrowind and Skyrim is that it is fair, in a way. The Nords willingly supported the Empire, and knew what it would mean, whereas the Dunmer resisted much more, ans were incorporated via a treaty giving the Dunmer the protection of local rights. If you don't want it, don't agree with it, the Nords were under no obligation to agree. The Nordsdidn't build the Empire, the Cyrodiils, Moreno the Colovians, built the Third Empire. The Norfs resided at first, until witnessing Tiber Septim's Thu'um at Sancre Tor, and so less credit should go to the Nords for building the Third Empire. If anything, the Treaty of the Armistice helped to build the Third Empire of Man more than the Nords did, due to signing over the Numidium.

Need I remind you that the tyrant never needs to justify his actions. Yes, Ulfric believed in that empire at a young age, but over the course of his career, he witnessed enough to change his mind such as The White-Gold treaty, Forsworn incident, banning of Talos, Thalmor 'Justicars', etc... He believed it, and enough other Nords did too. Thus, their Rebelion was justified in their eyes.

You have no need to remind me, because the Empire isn't tyrannical. As I said, these ore-agreed upon rules that the Nords agreed to, and so the Empire has every right to enforce them. They do it to keep the peace, it's not as if part of these rules says that the Provinces must give over all their resources to The Elder Council. They are taxed, but that is obviously a different matter. Taxes aren't evil, if actually invested in public services, but over-taxation is, but again, that is a differnh matter entirely. The thing is that these are not 'Imperial' laws in the sense that the Imperials have sole control over them, it refers to tr governing bodies which happen to be based in Cyrodiil. I said 'laws of the Empire', not 'Imperial laws' because people misunderstand what is being said. This is relevant because these laws are not laws made by the Imperials oppress people. These are laws of the Empire, meaning everyone, including the Nords, had a say in them, and the Nords had much more choice over these matters than the other races. These are commonly agreed upon and drawn up by a variety of races, not Imperisl oppression. Three out of the four that you named there, on the point of what Ulfric witnessed, aren't entirely relevant. Thalmor Justiciars did not really operate in Skyrim before Ulfric started causing trouble. People even had public shrines to Talos afte the White-Gold Concordat, will in effect means that the Justiciars and ban on Talos worship aren't really reasons why Ulfric betrayed the Emphre, especially the former. In response to your final point, Hitler thought the Holocaust was justified too. I'm not saying that the Stormcloaks are Nazis, or will attempt multiple genocides, even if some are quite fascist, but that them thinking their Rebellion is justified does not mean anything. The Empire also thinks that it's actions are justified. The thing is, these laws are not oppressive, and hardly anyone in Slyrim noticed because the majority of these laws were already in place. It was different in Morrowind, one, because they didn't agree like the Nords did, and two, they would have noticed it a lot more, as some of their traditions that were highly important to them were opposed by the laws of the Empire, such as the matter of slavery. Rebelling because of these rules is silly, because most of these rules are the same in Skyrim, the challenge of the High King was one of the few exceptions, but these are more safeguards for eulogy, the same laws in all nations, than oppression. Morrowind is the only exception as the Empire did not think a war with Morrowind would be good. Do you think it would then be fair to break the Treaty and enforce Imperisl Law once the Empire could? That would be more unfair than the Skyrim issue, because the Dunmer would not have agreed to it, unlike the Nords.
avatar
Lord Nerevar
Filthy Grey Skin

Posts : 198
Join date : 2013-03-25
Location : Red Mountain, Resdayn.

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  Lord Nerevar on Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:25 pm

I'll say my views on your other post later, if that's okay. My last post took a while to type out on my phone. Hopefully I can use a keyboard to discuss your other post.
avatar
Lord Nerevar
Filthy Grey Skin

Posts : 198
Join date : 2013-03-25
Location : Red Mountain, Resdayn.

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  james.steelhaven on Fri Apr 12, 2013 3:38 pm

You have no need to remind me, because the Empire isn't tyrannical.


Tell that to the Stormcloaks who imprisoned post Forsworn Incident. For helping the Empire out.

As I said, these are agreed upon rules that the Nords agreed to, and so the Empire has every right to enforce them.
Thalmor Justiciars did not really operate in Skyrim before Ulfric started causing trouble.

Banning Talos was NOT one of them. And don't give me this "The Empire turned a blind eye" non-sense.
The Empire didn't have to agree to alienate the Nords like that. But they did, and allowed Thalmor assassins to roam free across Skyrim.
Who cares if open Talos worship brought them. The Empire allows Thalmor to murder Nords without trial, and that is enough reason to rebel,
when foreign agents of an openly hostile force are rampaging across the county side, killing your people without trial.
What more needs to be said?
Spoiler:
Let us not forget, that document found in game reveal that the Thalmor are using the rebellion to weed out skilled opposition (leaders, organizers, etc...)
(Why it wasn't turned over to the Imperial faction in a quest is beyond me.)



avatar
james.steelhaven
Bone-Breaker
Bone-Breaker

Posts : 275
Join date : 2013-04-05

Back to top Go down

Re: Dead King Torygg - DISCUSS!

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum