I would think that if he had any confidence in Nord law that was the place to make his stand. The royal court of Skyrim confronted by Imperial soldiers defying Nord law right after they had followed it would have to take offense, even if they didn't really agree with Ulfric. Imperial forces in Skyrim's capital city would face a much bigger problem trying to behead a Jarl protected by Nord law than some poor gate guard.

Instead he opted for splitting Skyrim into warring factions. Of course those warring factions make the game much more interesting so it's pretty easy to see why the writers had him do what he did.

It's not about confidence in Nord law, it's about the Empire's law superseding it. I doubt the legion was in Solitude, they were only fighting in light skirmishes in Skyrim before, but they were still fighting. If they were in Solitude, they would have arrested him before he even got to Torygg. When they said he evaded capture, they likely mean on his way to Windhelm. In which case, the guards of Solitude wouldn't have even tried to arrest him. He likely fled because he knew it was only a matter of time before the legion got wind of this and made a move on him.

If the legion 'made a move' on someone that stood his ground with the backing of Skyrim's royal court that would produce the united Skyrim opposing the Empire that Ulfric wants. When there is unrest executing the spokesman creates a martyr and makes the situation worse, not better, so the Empire would be foolish to do that...but if it had been written that way it could have made a great game revolving around a Skyrim war of secession. The world would have needed at least the northern part of Cyrodiil to play that out though.

So again there's the obvious reason for him to flee...it creates a civil war that adds a lot to the game. His actions don't have to be perfectly reasoned as long as they aren't wildly unbelievable. Those who play on the side of the Imperials can say 'he fled because he's a coward', or an outlaw, or whatever, and those who play on the side of the rebellion can say he had to flee because 'the Imperials are dirty oppressors', or they trample on Nord law, or whatever. Good game design.

The Royal Court wasn't backing him. He fled because he knew the Solitude people listen to the Imperials, and they'd have him arrested.

They didn't stop him. Haven't you said that they acknowledged that under Nord law he had the right of it so the duel went on? Something in one of your quotes about how the King couldn't refuse the challenge without losing face...

I don't doubt the Imperials would want to arrest him, and might even do it, but with the king's own courtiers having approved of the duel the arrest would seem a very bad idea. Everyone there would be called to answer for why they let it happen, and have to say 'it is Nord law'...in the face of that practically every Nord (including the ones in the legions) would be calling for his release (obvious exception being the not so merry widow), and executing him would mean a united Skyrim screaming to secede and mass desertions from the legions...probably even outside Skyrim, where the legions have a large number of Nords in the ranks I think. If Ulfric wanted a united and independent Skyrim getting arrested may have been his best available move...and certainly would have saved poor old Roggvir.

But that's a different game. A Nord war of secession would have been very cool. Would have required near doubling of the world space and I don't know if it would have been that much cooler than the civil war they opted for though, so the design choice is certainly understandable.

Who said he had any confidence in imperial- not Nord- law? The Markarth Incident ought to have demonstrated to anyone paying attention that the empire uses its laws arbitrarily to prop up its power. By which I mean that they scapegoated Ulfric for the MI while rewarding the jarl who was just as involved in violating the WGC- by Igmund's own admission.

Lack of confidence in civil institutions is precisely why rebellions happen.

He didn't split the country- it was already split. Did you read the link I posted?

Read carefully, I know they didn't initially, I said they would. The Imperials weren't there when the duel went down, so they went by Nord law, until the Imperials enforced theirs.

As for punishing everyone, why do you think they killed Rogvir? He was their scapegoat to take the blame. I doubt they told the Imperials they just let him walk, they were saying to everyone it was murder after all. The person who obeyed the Nord law was Torygg, but he was dead. In that shock, and from the momentum of Torygg accepting it, I doubt they at the time made a move on Ulfric. But like I said, he knew it was just a matter of time before they did because of the Imperials.

What I did was put on the Cowl of Nocturnal (It's a mod but it gives you the exact same effects it did in OB) snuck up onto the battlements, sniped the executioner, took off the hood and casually strolled back through town, as everyone panicked and the guards went nuts.

I don't remember what happened to Roggvir though.

What you did was prove that the empire, stormcloaks and Thalmor are a huge bunch of jerks.

Well it is time to create a new faction called Dovahkiin hopefully they will not be jerks.

*sees that followers also become a bunch of jerks and facepalms*

There were plenty of opportunities to save Roggvir, too bad none got implemented. Here's one I can think of:

Joining the Stormcloaks:

Kind of stupid how Roggvir's always there, except when you're about to storm into

It's funny how often people don't differentiate between 'Imperials' and 'Nords who don't favor secession'...of course both groups have been proven to consist of a bunch of jerks, so in this case it isn't really necessary.

The Nord civil war is between two groups of Nords, with one group backed by the Imperials. It isn't really a war of secession.

A war of secession is when there are two claimants to a throne and said two are fighting over the throne, the CW is both a secession war and a independence war.

I think that's a war of Succession.

That's a war of succession...a war of secession is when some portion of a united nation wants to be independent and the nation as a whole resists. If Skyrim featured a war of secession it would either be a united Skyrim fighting for independence from the Empire, or the Stormcloak provinces fighting for their independence from the empire and the rest of Skyrim. The civil war is a war of succession, internal to Skyrim. The Imperials back one side because the other side might start a war of secession if they win the war of succession.

Dude, that is probably a common spelling error for that word ok?

Actually come to think of it the civil war is essentially a war of succession.

Common spelling errors seldom happen to land on another correctly spelled word. Mine usually come out gibberish.

Sometimes a spelling error can land on another correctly spelled word especially when they both are spelled just the same but with one letter different and that letter happens to be in the same position on each word.

True enough...I just seldom get that lucky. Changing one letter and dropping another lowers the odds, and I probably won't ever be that lucky. I just about always get gibberish.

Yes, it is. Cyrodiil is claiming ultimate rule over Skyrim and the rebellion wants Skyrim to be sovereign. Most of the combatants are Nords, but that doesn't mean it isn't a war of secession from the empire. The main issue wasn't Torygg's rule but imperial control of Skyrim. As for people calling the imperial side "imperials," it's also shorthand for imperial Nords, a faction name and not just for ethnic Cyrodiils.

As long as we're being anol about terminology.

And the rest of the Nords don't want Skyrim to be sovereign. Hence the civil war...war of succession to choose a king who would then most likely start a war of secession or a different king who probably won't start a war of secession.

A successful war of secession almost always requires unity within the potentially independent nation (see colonial rebellion, circa 1776). Even a serious failed attempt requires unity (see confederate states war of secession, circa 1860). Half the holds for one potential King and half the holds for another is a war of succession (see war of the Roses, circa the entire sixteenth century). The Empire has an obvious interest and are interfering, as is almost universal in civil wars.

And the idea that you of all people would comment on being 'anol about terminology' was the funniest thing in this thread so far.

It's still a war to secede from the empire. The succession only became an issue because of Torygg's pro-imperial stance. The end result of a Stormcloak victory is Skyrim becoming independent from the empire.


There wasn't complete unity in the American Revolution. The Tory faction lost and were hounded out.

Glad to amuse you. You're the one playing grammarian.

LOL...said the guy posting dictionary quotes.

The tories did indeed get hounded out, and there were union sympathizers in the southern states as well, but that isn't an accurate parallel with the situation in Skyrim where half the regional governors don't support the rebellion.

For the colonial rebellion to parallel the Skyrim civil war you would need to have six of the thirteen colonies governed by tories and actively siding with the British empire, leaving the rebel colonies fighting for 'colonial unity' before they could even consider independence...unless they just went with independence for themselves and let the tory colonies stay with the British, which turned out to be Canada I suppose.

It's TES. How is this news? Everyone's a jerk to someone. Anyway, it's nice to see the thread is yet again derailed by grammar and english lessons.

Nine holds and thirteen colonies

Both are uneven numbers, if both were split in the middle than whiterun and one of the colonies would be the literal middle man.

The gal, and you were the one correcting people.