I want to share an opinion and maybe discuss on some feedback.

I used to believe ulfric is a huge selfish jerk. I still do, but i realized some things today.

Empire banned talos worship but realistically, all believers of talos do what they want. Ulfric wants the crown so he uses that excuse, but his goals are clear, "let us live in our customs and traditions". Is he a racist? In real life YES. But we cant judge a character with our moral, but with the morality of his environment with some "natural law" thoughts as well.

He cares for his people, well where is the problem in that? He allows the different races in the city in an indeed diminishing role. But technically, skyrim is enslaved to thalmor. They barely rule themselves, let alone helping others. Of course he is selfish, but you know, people can be selfish too.

I dont see imperials NOT being selfish at all... Torture rooms? Kidnapping citizens for thalmor? But honestly i am angry enough at torture rooms.

I used to believe stormcloaks are lawless morons. But they respect laws, just not the imperial ones, the nordic laws.

If i were a politician, i would have agreed with the empire. "Sign the deal, and save your people from genocide". But i am not a politician, i am supposed to be a random citizen turning to dragonborn. I am supposed to think with my own life experience and role, not in someone else's role.

And as a citizen i believe, having freedom and avoiding harm is what justice is all about. If nords want to fight alone and die by thalmor, who is the empire to tell them not to and force them to be "saved by them" (with the magnificent torture rooms and thalmor spies)

The empire, acts so skyrim is physically unharmed (generally), but wounds skyrim's mental and social well being. "i save the citizens but kidnap those disagreeing with me and rule under fear"

Every living entity can be harmed 2 ways, physically, or mentally. The point of justice is to act against both types of damage as you act for yourself.

SO the empire chooses when to fight and when not to, but skyrim cannot make the same decision?

I loved the Empire and supported their cause (IC) throughout the series but in Skyrim I just could not.


They are led by a weak emperor of a weak bloodline - But the greatest affront is their pandering to the Elves through their banning of Talos worship.


The Imperial Empire has run its course. That's why I support Ulfric. His cause has good reason and is righteous

I don't think neither of them are ''right'', I won't go into any details right now because I'm tired , BTW, glad you let it all out pal, at least I'm the one who listening.

Off topic comments removed.

Yes, the topic has been beaten to death and these threads can get ugly, but that doesn't mean everyone is allowed to just ruin OP's thread.

If you want to join the discussion, do so constructively.


Also, real world politics are not allowed here, so keep it strictly about Skyrim. Thanks.

I am sorry if i have spoken about real world politics, it was not my intention. Also i know, the civil war has been discussed a lot. I didnt start a "imperial vs stormcloaks" thread. More like some specific views to be discussed.

What i said about politics is that, if i was emperor/high king of skyrim, i would view the world as a politician and i would have agreed with the empire. But i am supposed to be dragonborn a hero of the people, not a politician, so i probably should not view the world as a politician (because i dont spawn as high king or something) but as a common person, that wants to save his homeland, and eventually will become a hero of skyrim.

Well actually, that is part of the beauty of TES games not giving you any real back story.... your character COULD be royalty, or a noble, or a commoner, or a war veteran... the PC's background is always left vague for the player to fill in the gaps.


In Morrowind I imagined that my character was a spell sword framed for a crime, in Oblivion I imagined I was the son of my Morrowind character who had fallen into a life of crime due to his family name being ruined and in Skyrim I imagined I was a Ranger hunting a deer who was unfortunately in the wrong place at the wrong time.

i side with neither because bothe are idiots and I'm have better things to do then play politics like fighting dragons. If I had to pick one it would be the Empire but that's only because the Stormcloaks are racist. The banning of Talos wasn't a big deal until the Stormcloak rebellion started according to the blacksmith in Riverwood. Also Ulfric comes off as a fake tough guy to me. He talks a big game but he really just a coward using fear to get power.

Stormcloaks are not racist. The Imperials are sixist and Tullius tried to have an innocent person's head cut off. Are there racists in the game? Sure. There are plenty of jerks in it too. Don't judge all for the actions of a few. But, this is why I leave the CW alone in game, and these threads. That's MY opinion. You won't change mine, and I won't change yours.

I won't be replying to any more of this thread, Please enjoy.

My apologies to the thread author.....

JMO, I but I believe both sides to be right and both sides are wrong.. pick apart the detail's and create a list. I think this was done on purpose to give one the choice as to which side a person wanted to play from RP wise or as many have done, find reason's they can play both sides on various different characters. If one side or the other was completely wrong, it would be harder to come up with good reason's to join that side... so why do it?

If as it happens, you can find reason's to play either side...win-win. I've done each side once in 5 yr's, I may like the Dark Brotherhood, give them both another run through, but it would have to be with the right characters...and not back to back.

If the Stormcloaks didn't rebel during a cold war and were doing exactly what the Thalmor wanted (destabilizing the human race) I would support them. People should always have a choice of self governance. If they remained loyal to the Empire until the Thalmor were dealt with and then declared independence then fine by me. But they were pigheaded and stupid in their timing. Bringing civil war to humanity while a powerful confederation of Elven states is preparing to end your races is the worst idea in the long history of bad ideas.

The moment Ulfric forces you to swear fealty to him as the "rightful" ruler of Skyrim in order to fight for the Nordic cause is the day my character walked away from the Stormcloaks. The Stormcloak minions themselves blindly swearing by Ulfric

Maybe Skyrim's independence is a worthy goal and maybe Empire is corrupt and arrogant, and at any other time i may well agree with Ulfrics goals, but not now, not while Thalmor is banging at the door, some sacrifices need to be made in order to survive and fight another day, anyone who does not see it is a fool, Ulfric would bring Skyrim into a war with Aldmeri dominion that he has no hope of winning, and in few dozen years when the Altmer decide time is ripe to finish what they started they will conquer what little is left of the empire and then turn on isolated former provinces that will not be able to fight them alone, Divide et impera at it's finest.

The way I looked at it, is do I want to support the racists, or do I want to support the religious persecutors?


In the TES universe, strict regulations on religious practices seem pretty reasonable, tbh. This is a place where supernatural beings unarguably exist, are very powerful, and reach out to mortals on a regular basis. Just like, for the general safety of the world, you probably don't want people interacting with these beings, who don't know what they're doing.


The overt racism is a lot harder to justify, especially since it's not just a fringe a thing within the Stormcloaks. The game goes out of its way to show it actively happening practically right on Ulfric's doorstep.

I used to believe the same. But it seems wrong and unfair. "Sacrifices need to be done". Well everyone has the right to disagree. You cant force someone to sacrifice something. What if they dont want to "survive to fight another day". Justice is about acting so others are not harmed both physically and in terms of freedom. You cant rightfully say to a person "live as a slave because you will live longer than way". The person is capable of choosing. Maybe skyrim wants to die with their ideals rather than compromise to live.

Skyrim is not united in this opinion though, Ulfric would want you to think all of Skyrim wants independence at this time, but barely half of people are on his side, Skyrim is split in the middle (literally) on this, besides that's not what Ulfric promised, he promised them freedom, not death, he uses false propaganda to lure his people on his side, so instead of the figurative slavery at the hands of the empire they will have literal slavery at the hands of Thalmor, tactical retreat is viable tactic when circumstances demand it, staying and fighting battle that is already lost may be nice in theory but it's pointless.

This is up to a person's pride. I wont make this specific, since the moderator told it would be inappropriate, but generally in human history there are many examples of "liberty or death" by the enslaved people.

Except slavery in this instance is only figurative, Nords are not literally enslaved nor were they ever conquered, in fact they founded the empire, Talos was original emparor Tiber Septim, one may argue that letting his empire fall on behalf of honor would be even greater transgression then bidding your time for awhile until you can strike back at the dominion.

Been giving this some thought before weighing in.

TES has always been the story of the Empire. The downside to this is in the back of my mind I know that nothing my character does in Skyrim will ultimately matter. "Something" will happen that will make all choices either irrelevant or lost in obscurity. An easy out would be the Thalmor striking during the height of the Skyrim Civil War, using that as their opportunity. The Empire will survive somehow, Talos worship will be re-established, and life will go on. There are plenty of other options available of course, depending on how long a time skip occurs before the next game.

Regarding the "sides" - I think they went a bit too far with the moral ambiguity. Both sides are right. Both sides are wrong. That doesn't leave a lot of room for you to really play a hero or a villian. I think the best "Bethesda" game in recent years is the one they didn't make - New Vegas, in large part because of the factions available. The courier could be EVIL. Which also put more value on choosing to be GOOD.

Specifically to the Talos worship: If you believe that Talos is necessary for the strength of the empire (or even for the strength of Skyrim), then the rebellion makes sense. Once Talos worship was banned, the empire was doomed to a slow death (according to this line of thought). If Hammerfall can fight off the Thalmor on their own, then Skyrim should be able to do the same. Unfortunately they have to fight the Empire at the same time, but you can't always choose your battles to suit your tastes. Skyrim winning its independence could be the wake up call the Empire needs to realize they don't have to capitulate to the Thalmor and the war can continue (as it undoubtedly will).

Ironically perhaps, the best (IMHO) course of action you can take to save the Empire and Skyrim is to follow the Dark Brotherhood questline and remove the fool of an emperor that landed everyone in this mess to begin with. Hopefully the next in line will have a better head on his shoulders and be more willing to do what needs to be done.