Ok guys, this is the first Civil War related topic I have created so bear with me here.

I remember when I visited the Blue Palace, and talked to Sybille Stentor. In her dialogue, she mentioned that High King Torygg actually admired and liked Ulfric. She also said that if Ulfric openly talked to Torygg about secedeing from the Empire, he would have listened and probably agreed with him.

Now I know the arguements about whether or not, Ulfric broke Imperial law by killing High King Torygg and how he was adhereing to his people's ancient traditions. I would like to keep those arguements out of the thread please.

P.S. If you guys think the poll is too biased, let me know and I will fix it.

It is a prime example of Ulfric's obtuseness that he did not pick up on that. That, and his inability to see the Empire's attempt to turn a blind eye towards Talos worship., and that he has Thalmor puppeteers pulling his strings.

You can see the aftermath of Torygg's admiration for Ulfric when you speak to him in Sovngarde: Completely gone.

Torryg admired Ulfric for it, but I don't think he was going to choose Ulfric. Even if Torryg sided with Ulfric, he still had the position of High King and that's in the way for Ulfric's plan.

So either way, Torryg woukd have been killed for Ulfric.

http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1454121-can-stormcloak-people-explaine-this-to-me/?p=22498185

Ulfric made the right choice. First Sybille says he may have listened, then she says he never would have. She doesn't even know, and neither would Ulfric, who already tried at the moot. Torygg knew what he wanted. He's the king. Its not the Jarl's job to hold his hand and tell him what to do. They all knew what Ulfric suggested.

He only wanted it because he didn't think Torygg would secede.

He should have tried to persuade Torygg to secede from the empire but I don't think Torygg would have, But Torygg cared more about his wife and his honour than anything else which is why I think Ulfric did right challenging him and killing him.

I voted- He should have tried to persuade Torygg to secede from the empire.

Ulfric was in the right. The duel happened because Torygg would not yeld his throne otherwise. But even after killing the king, Ulfric still wants to take the throne through the moot. Thats why he left Elisef in charge still after taking Solitude.

And he didn't kill the king to take the throne. he was making a point.

But I see this thread turning into another civil war debate. A subject that divided Skyrim and this very forum. Brilliance on the dev's part.

For me, neither would have worked. Both should have been taken to the top of a mountain and then thrown off.

Neither Torygg or Ulfric are truly balanced enough to rule Skyrim and thus neither should have even been considered.

He also expresses his dislike over the Moot not having "truly chosen a high king" in centuries. Guess why the moot does that? War of Succession. After that whole mess way back when, the Moot decided it would only choose a high king when there was no designated heir upon the king's death, so things like the War of Succesion wouldn't happen again....Oops! Until someone else who coveted the high throne sees the designated heir system as inconvenient to his goal!

Combine that with his violation of usage of the Thu'um (which is always countered with "They were used in duels before the Way of The Voice!" :rolleyes: ) comes to another reason I side against Ulfric: He's a reactionary. He can;'t even get it right, what with his still revering an Imperialized pantheon instead of the "true nord" totem gods and his shunning of the Clever Craft.

Ah ah. He didn't violate the way of the voice, because the way of the voice isn't pacifism. If anything, he's following it. The Greybeards are supposed to not use it except in times of need. Now, you can argue that this wasn't, but that is subjective and relies on a point of view that Imps and SC supporters will never agree on.

Not to mention, Ulfric took that oath when he was young, so I wouldn't hold that against anyone, even if the grey beards were actually pacifists, which they are not. They never wrote a rule on what truly is considered need, so that is on them. I from my pov would say what the wgc entails, even before the Markarth incident is just that, as worshiping in secret is not ok. Hell, he's fighting to restore worship of Ysmir, who the greybeards revere. Who's following the way of the voice truly, here?

Not to mention that the Duel itself, while legal, only lead to Ulfric being public enemy number 1 which is a bad thing. Imagine if this war goes on (Which will likely happen as both sides are just as canon as the other). My opinion is that Ulfric only duel Torygg to get on the Empire's bad side, and not truly to free Skyrim.

There was no violation of usage of the Thu'um. Not everyone who could shout followed the way of the voice. I know Ulfric was studying to become a greybeard but then he changed and now he doesn't have to follow the way of the voice.

The moot seems to always meet to affirm support for the new high king. That was not mentioned in pact of chieftains but apparently was a part of it given Skyrim dialogue. Skyrim's war is due COMPLETELY to the empire stepping in before the moot takes place. Hence the one reason the "War of Succession" is happening again is because the empire is interfering with the pact's enforcement.

As for Torygg. He would not have sided against the empire, Sybille says as much right after that line about torygg admiring ulfric. Ulfric gave his petition to Torygg at the moot. Torygg never acted on it, never hinted at anything to suggest he approved. Asking torygg to secede would've been a foolish move given torygg's lack of interest(From Ulfric's PoV). Torygg could've just had him executed on the spot for treason if he had done it.

That doesn't make any sense.

The Civil War only led to more deaths than was necessary sooner than just letting things happen would have. Needs of the few over the many? OR using other to simply get what you want?

He became the Empire's enemy nr.1 in Skyrim, not public enemy nr.1 in general. If he was, he wouldn't have about half of Skyrim supporting his bid for the High Throne.

Death of all men(Waiting for thalmor to kill everyone) vs death of some men(Not waiting for thalmor to kill everyone).

You're going to have to substantiate your argument.

You can't seriously hold that against him. Since when was it wrong to care for leaving your wife behind a widow? Isn't honor important to a Nord? He does care about Skyrim, otherwise Sybille wouldn't have said something among the lines "He didn't want to let what his father worked so hard just for it to fall apart".

You mean like they've been doing for 26 years?

Listen. Ulfric's sphere of Influence is no more than his hold. Other than that, he is sticking his nose where it does not belong. Simple as that.

Unrelated.

Prove to me that more people died because of civil war than would have without it. (Protip: This is impossible, because the future actions and outcomes of the empire and thalmor are an unknown)

Substantiate claims or retract.

What? He has been gaining influence. Legate Rikke says so. Winterhold, Dawnstar, and Riften support him.

In my opinion, Ulfric should have at least tried to talk with Torryg about making Skyrim independent. If this wouldn't have worked, a duel would have been the next option.

You need to read. I said more people died SOONER that without the war. As in the same number of people died for both, but letting things go naturally would have led to the deaths being over time as the nords became too Taos to care about keeping the peace. The duel, however, led to men and women sacrificing their lives, and dying, in moths rather than years.

He did so at the moot according to his court mage with all the Jarls present as well.

Ok so less deaths shortrun is worse off than far more deaths long run in your opinion.