Headed to Valthume right now, be ready, I'll kill you again. it's what I do.

I voted no. Whether you believed it was a fair fight or not, I do not see how killing the king gives Ulfric any right to the throne. The moot decides who is going to rule Skyrim, not some rebel who can shout.

Only if he served skooma on a platter.

Gameplay =/= lore.

I don't want to get drawn into another 8 page debate so I'll say only this: yes he is

i like the idea of an empire-free skyrim, and i do think that he challenged him properly, being the high king is all about strength to the nords

that being said, i don't particularly like him, i wouldn't want to see him on the throne

Well yes, given that the LDB is the player character, it won't happen.

Either way, Ulfric isn't the rightful high king unless the moot name him as such, which is the most relevant thing regarding the OP.

Complete agreement.

Nobody is the rightful anything. Except maybe the LDB being the rightful hero of the story.

No, because he murdered the High King in a dishonourable fight.

Also, a moot declares a High King. The claimant does not proclaim himself.

The moot does decide the High King, but how exactly was the fight dishonorable?

This, of course. I don't like the method Ulfric used to defeat Torygg, but if he the Moot elects him, then that's that.

Oh, I almost forgot: long live Hevnoraak!

No. Perhaps he has the right to be a candidate - but then, he already had that as Jarl of Eastmarch. The manner in which the fight took place doesn't change anything. Ulfric killed his King, plunged his nation into Civil War and cost the lives of hundreds, perhaps thousands of Nords, and potentially made the Dominion's war effort even easier.

Because he used a hidden weapon, the Thu'um.

Same thing as a hidden dagger in an unarmed fight or a sniper archer pal on the battlements.

I would disagree, he used the shout against Markarth and is known to have it. Had the High King accepted the combat under the stipulation it was not used then it would have been unlawful and unwarrented and privy to sanction and/or punishment. As it is Toryyg knew what he was getting into and expected to die. It is his fault for not leveling the playing field although chances are Ulfric probably woud have killed him anyway. Imperial claims he 'murdered' the High King are false. It was not murder nor was it unfair.

A fight for honour is always highly ritualised, especially when fighting the High King.

There is no way the rules would allow for anything as dishonourable as a hidden weapon, or even an unlevelled playing field except if the balance was in favour of the incumbent.

Ulfric used a hidden weapon that gave great advantage over the High King, because it was both unexpected (since the expectation would be an honourable, fair fight) and something the High King could neither defend against nor match.

As such, it put the balance of the fight clearly in favour of Ulfric and this is dishonourable.

Hidden weapon? I'm pretty sure the residents of Skyrim know Ulfric trained with the Grey Beards when he was a lad. Even if they didn't, a Jarl, the High King no less, would have known. One does not train with the Grey Beards in secret, even if they themselves live in seclusion. You meet the Grey Beards and people tend to find out. The thu'um is also not what killed the poor boy, it just staggered him, a sword plunged into the boy is what killed him.

Your scenarios are flawed as well. Lets say a person does bring a hidden dagger to an unarmed fight, if their opponent is trained, that dagger could amount to squat. In the end, skill, experience, and preparedness are what counts. The High King had none, and he died. He was weak, Skyrim has no need for the weak. The weak are why they are banned from worshiping Talos. The weak are why the Dominion is able to abduct random residence of Skyrim. The weak must be purged for Skyrim to be strong. Ulfric started the purging. More importantly, Ulfric could have beaten Torygg without using the thu'um, that was a statement, it had no real bearing on the outcome of the duel. Torygg would have lost regardless.

No, as Toryg says in Sovngarde, Ulfric killed him with savage shout. Other eyewitness accounts say he nearly tore the boy in half.

Of course Ulfric lies about how he killed him. He knows it was dishonourable.

If someone could defend against a hidden dagger is irrelevant.

This was a highly ritualised fight, which always follows very strict rules. There is no way these rules would allow for a hidden advantage against the incumbent.

Other way around however, that is feasable, but it's not how it happened.

Ulfric might can shout, but he isn't that proficient. Hell, I as dragonborn can't tear a person in half, even if I can Fus Ro Dah them halfway across a room. Has it ever dawned on you that Torygg got the brakes beat off him so badly that he doesn't even know what happened? He heard a shout, got hit by the shout, next thing he knows, Sovngarde.

I'm sorry Merari but I don't see the hidden weapon argument since it was well known to Toryyg what Ulfric was capable of. Was it cheating or dishonorable to use whatever weapon he had at his disposal in the fight? I don't believe so and I have been an ardent Imperial supporter in the forums, I am simply trying to look at this from a neutral viewpoint. This contest was between two men who used every available weapon at their disposal to kill the other. Toryyg was simply overmatched and outgunned. My opinion for what it's worth.

No he obviously does not. I don't know the full details, but if you have that right of Old Ways thingy, you should have a few witnesses, or there must be some ceremony. Otherwise it is no different to an assassin killing the High King in cold blood.

If there had been an official ceremony, there would be witnesses who could vouch that such an event took place.

But look at how Ulfric RAN AWAY after murdering the High King. Does this sound like someone innocent? If the Old Ways was legal, why did he run away?

No, I say there was no such ceremony. Ulfric used it as an excuse to murder the High King. So Ulfric has no claim to the throne.

Gameplay =/= Lore. In lore Ulfric could shout with enough force to breakdown walls.

In my opinion, I believe Ulfric has a claim to the throne. Do I want him to have the throne? Ehh... possibly? He'd have some proving to do. Although I guess he can't do that without being on the throne. Trial run I guess?

Anyways, the reason I believe he has a claim is simple. He defeated the High King by right of the Old Ways. Now, are they old and outdated? Probably, but until I see a new law (if there is one, point me to it) completely banning or overturning the Old Ways, it still holds up.

Gameplay is not lore.

Lorewise Fus Ro Dah is quite a lot stronger than what you see represented in-game, it tears down city walls.

Yes, Toryyg knew Ulfric had the Thu'um. But, as you say he was overmatched and outgunned. Ulfric had far better weaponry.

Now, my argument rests on that ritualised fights for dominance always follow very strict rules, they are never a free-for-all. If there is any sort of imbalance allowed, it's always in favour of the sitting ruler, never the challenger. The challenger has to prove himself, overcome great odds etc. while the incumbent can enjoy the privileges of his seat.

This means that Toryyg would be expecting a fair (balanced) fight. As such the use of the Thu'um was unexpected, therefore could be classed as 'hidden weaponry' (in the same vein as hiding a dagger in your boot in what's supposed to be an unarmed fight would be) and it was certainly dishonourable.

Alright that's all fine and dandy for most situations, but where is this said for Skyrim? I've never heard that there were such restrictions. Would that make sense? Yeah. Still though, I think proof is needed.