Skip navigation
Library

Imperials or Stormcloak?

387 replies [Last post]
Stuhn's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/01/2013

One point Imperials make that you forgot is that Ulfric only protects Nord villages. Easily debunked. The conversation goes like this;

 Only protect Nord villages? All villages are Nord dominated? What other villages are there? Oh, so now you mean stuff like bands of refugees, or caravans? Now, ask yourself this, which is Ulfric going to put more effort into defending; a band of maybe 5 people or an entire village filled with people, of all races, with lots of resources? Ulfric is not protecting the villages because they are Nord dominated, he is protecting them as they are large settlments filled with goods, people, resources and coin. For an army with limited resources it makes a lot more sense to take men off the front lines to protect these villages from bandits, than to go throw away good men clearing out an entire camp for two captured Dunmer refugees. That's the Companions job.       

Sotha Chill's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/24/2013

Well, you're not considering the fact that they are two completely different generations of Nords. I'm sure that the Nords lived just fine in the other holds. You also have to consider that the first Nord Empire collapsed, and they lost power. They also persecuted the Reachmen for what the Aldmer took from them. I hardly find that fair. Also, I'm sure that forcing their religion, and taking their cities isn't at all taking their culture from them.

-edit- Not trying to give a derogative opinion on the Nords but it's just the truth. I actually like and respect the Nords very much.

Baldur Red-Snow's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/12/2013

Stuhn wrote:

One point Imperials make that you forgot is that Ulfric only protects Nord villages. Easily debunked. The conversation goes like this;

 Only protect Nord villages? All villages are Nord dominated? What other villages are there? Oh, so now you mean stuff like bands of refugees, or caravans? Now, ask yourself this, which is Ulfric going to put more effort into defending; a band of maybe 5 people or an entire village filled with people, of all races, with lots of resources? Ulfric is not protecting the villages because they are Nord dominated, he is protecting them as they are large settlments filled with goods, people, resources and coin. For an army with limited resources it makes a lot more sense to take men off the front lines to protect these villages from bandits, than to go throw away good men clearing out an entire camp for two captured Dunmer refugees. That's the Companions job.       

 

Nah, I actually believe that Ulfric doesn't bother with helping Argonain and Khajiit caravans, but not because he's a bigot, but because they don't help him in the war effort. He's got a limited amount of men, so much that a murderer runs around within the city killing Nords. He has to assign his man power carefully. Most will see that as a negative, and that is their prerogative.

Baldur Red-Snow's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/12/2013

Here's a new addition on Roggvir's innocence:

.

http://colonelkillabee.tumblr.com/post/71467227749/new-stormcloak-bible-...

 

Stuhn's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/01/2013

 two completely different generations of Nords.

Well, if you want to talk about different generations, ask yourself this; which generation of Nords were the Nords who took back the Reach? The long dead ones, or the current generation? The generation who actually did what is angering the Reachmen, or the poor farmers who are being brutally murdered in their sleep? If you want generations in this then the Reachmen shouldn't even be attacking the local Nords! They should be attacking Cyrodiil, they are the ones with the power to give them their kingdom. 

Note: I'm not saying they don't attack local Legion patrols. They do that.

Fiore1300's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/24/2011

Stuhn wrote:

"Took their land" How?  

- The Nords originally owned the Reach  (First Empire)

- The Aldmer took it  (Direnni)

- They brought early Bretons  (became Reachmen)

- The Aldmer left  (Direnni Empire collapse)

- The Bretons, now Reachmen, took the land  (Reach Kingdom)

- The Nords took it back. 

Yes the Nords took the Reachmen's land, but it wasn't the Reachmen's in the first place. The Nords have more claim on the Reach than the Reachmen! Look at it, it's dotted with ancient Nordic architecture! Clear evidence the Nords were there first!

I don't see how the Nords 'took' the Reachmen's culture either.

Typical mannish arrogance...

Stuhn's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/01/2013

Typical mannish arrogance..

How? Just because it's true! 

Stuhn's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/01/2013

Excellent! You could put it in with the Empire's morals section.

Baldur Red-Snow's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/12/2013

Stuhn wrote:

Excellent! You could put it in with the Empire's morals section.

Ah yea, that's right. I'll probably just put a link in instead of getting rid of the post.

Stuhn's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/01/2013

Baldur Red-Snow wrote:

Stuhn wrote:

One point Imperials make that you forgot is that Ulfric only protects Nord villages. Easily debunked. The conversation goes like this;

 Only protect Nord villages? All villages are Nord dominated? What other villages are there? Oh, so now you mean stuff like bands of refugees, or caravans? Now, ask yourself this, which is Ulfric going to put more effort into defending; a band of maybe 5 people or an entire village filled with people, of all races, with lots of resources? Ulfric is not protecting the villages because they are Nord dominated, he is protecting them as they are large settlments filled with goods, people, resources and coin. For an army with limited resources it makes a lot more sense to take men off the front lines to protect these villages from bandits, than to go throw away good men clearing out an entire camp for two captured Dunmer refugees. That's the Companions job.       

 

Nah, I actually believe that Ulfric doesn't bother with helping Argonain and Khajiit caravans, but not because he's a bigot, but because they don't help him in the war effort. He's got a limited amount of men, so much that a murderer runs around within the city killing Nords. He has to assign his man power carefully. Most will see that as a negative, and that is their prerogative.

Isn't that what I said? It makes way more sense to protect villages rather than refugees?

Baldur Red-Snow's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/12/2013

No, you're saying he only protects villages because of population. I'm saying he does because only Nords are the ones providing soldiers.

Sotha Chill's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/24/2013

There's a difference lol. I honestly don't know which sounds more convincing.

Baldur Red-Snow's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/12/2013

Maybe its a combination of both then.

Fiore1300's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/24/2011
Stuhn's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/01/2013

You could reword it so they don't contradict each other.

Baldur Red-Snow's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/12/2013

Fiore1300 wrote:

Stuhn wrote:

Typical mannish arrogance..

How? Just because it's true! 

Did I not wrap your forefathers in their swaddling clothes!? Do not preach truth to me, issue of the Doom Drum's iniquity.

I think men have a lot to be arrogant about considering they wiped out two races of elves, and when their god died, all it did was strengthen his "prison", and he still wanders around Nirn as heroes of humanity.

.

To Stuhn, there's no contradiction. He can choose not to help others because Nord villages have more people, and because they provide support.

 

"Ulfric, why don't you help the non nord caravans?!?!?"

 

"Because I help those who help me. They do nothing for Skyrim's cause! And besides, the villages have more people. They need more men for their security."

Stuhn's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/01/2013

Baldur Red-Snow wrote:

Fiore1300 wrote:

Stuhn wrote:

Typical mannish arrogance..

How? Just because it's true! 

Did I not wrap your forefathers in their swaddling clothes!? Do not preach truth to me, issue of the Doom Drum's iniquity.

I think men have a lot to be arrogant about considering they wiped out two races of elves, and when their god died, all it did was strengthen his "prison", and he still wanders around Nirn as heroes of humanity.

.

To Stuhn, there's no contradiction. He can choose not to help others because Nord villages have more people, and because they provide support.

 

"Ulfric, why don't you help the non nord caravans?!?!?"

 

"Because I help those who help me. They do nothing for Skyrim's cause! And besides, the villages have more people. They need more men for their security."

Totally read that in his voice..

Anchorite's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/11/2012

Baldur Red-Snow wrote:

I think men have a lot to be arrogant about considering they wiped out two races of elves, and when their god died, all it did was strengthen his "prison", and he still wanders around Nirn as heroes of humanity.

Men have done much more than this: They are the heralds of the ever new, striking out with sword and spear and prow. Upon their belts are the tongues of a thousand races whose children shriek in the coldest Void. When they speak, empires fall and the breath of slaves becomes an uproar of adulation.

Their scripture is spilt blood and their holy wars are each an end-of-times.

The beams of their feast halls are mountains, and the fires of Red Mountain are their lord's hearth.

The sweet melodies of their skalds flays the skins of elfkind.

Their hearts are like their Father's, a beating drum in the dark.

Captain R.O.C's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/11/2013

Anchorite wrote:

Men have done much more than this: They are the heralds of the ever new, striking out with sword and spear and prow. Upon their belts are the tongues of a thousand races whose children shriek in the coldest Void. When they speak, empires fall and the breath of slaves becomes an uproar of adulation.

Their scripture is spilt blood and their holy wars are each an end-of-times.

The beams of their feast halls are mountains, and the fires of Red Mountain are their lord's hearth.

The sweet melodies of their skalds flays the skins of elfkind.

Their hearts are like their Father's, a beating drum in the dark.

 

Eh.......what is skalds?Are they others types of drums?

Sotha Chill's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/24/2013

Captain R.O.C wrote:
Eh.......what is skalds?Are they others types of drums?

Skalds are like traveling bards. They sing and tell tales.

Baldur Red-Snow's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/12/2013

Anchorite wrote:

Baldur Red-Snow wrote:

I think men have a lot to be arrogant about considering they wiped out two races of elves, and when their god died, all it did was strengthen his "prison", and he still wanders around Nirn as heroes of humanity.

Men have done much more than this: They are the heralds of the ever new, striking out with sword and spear and prow. Upon their belts are the tongues of a thousand races whose children shriek in the coldest Void. When they speak, empires fall and the breath of slaves becomes an uproar of adulation.

Their scripture is spilt blood and their holy wars are each an end-of-times.

The beams of their feast halls are mountains, and the fires of Red Mountain are their lord's hearth.

The sweet melodies of their skalds flays the skins of elfkind.

Their hearts are like their Father's, a beating drum in the dark.

 

Beautiful.

Happy Hist Friend's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/14/2013

Hey, nice to see that the heavy discussion is still ongoing! I was kinda busy :)

Just to respond to you, Baldur Red-Snow, about one of your earlier posts (which was like a month or two ago, so I don't blame you if you dont remember that particular argument) where you responded to my support of Balgruuf by saying that he should be the last man to rule Skyrim, I (obviously) disagree.

You said that him waiting till the last moment to "chose sides" and getting his city attacked was unacceptable. I actually really appreciated his calm and reasoning. He knew that if he sided with Ulfric it would be done once and for all, a heavy decision to make! He would be braded enemy of the Empire for the remainder of the Civil War and afterwards. On the other hand, he could have slavishly sided with the Imperials right away and proposed them his ressources, men and help, just to remain in their good favor. Only, he didn't. He wanted to wait and see where this budding conflict will lead, knowing that Whiterun would be attacked regardless of him quickly chosing sides or waiting to do it.

Because Whiterun is in a VERY sratategic place, maybe more so than any other city in Skyrim : one of the biggest Cities in Skyrim, in the middle of the country, on a hill (so in a very good position to defend oneself from enemies), the undoubted center of all Skyrim's trade, surrounded by huge cultivated fields (which means food and supplies if the ones that secure the city could also patroll the fields and the peasants could continue to produce food), etc etc. Let's face it : Balgruff waited because he knew that once he chose a side, his city would be the center of a huge battle, maybe the most important of the whole campaign. So, what's wrong with him wanting to spare his people as long as he can and stay calm and watch the conflict unfold? Maybe he even hopes that if the conflict just grinds to a halt without any progress made by either side, he'd be able to participate in the diplomatic negotiations for a truce and take the best advantage of it for Whiterun's people, not an unreasonable assumption. He constantly demonstrates that he cares for Whiterun's people. And since he's not joining Ulfric, we can argue that he's by default on the Empire's side, not actively helping them, but ultimately remaining under their jurisdiction and being in good terms with the Empire in general. And, you gotta admit, it takes balls to let a VERY LOUD (for Christ's sake, was he annoying) Talos apologist shout politically incorrect (as far as the Concordat goes) stuff all day and not imprison him or anything (which would be easy), even if you yourself are slightly pro-Empire. Honestly, if he wanted to lick the Empire's boots, it would be easy to imprison the prophet guy. He just seems to think that people can decide for themselves and lets them hear either side of the argument (by letting the prophet stay), as long as they're not ruling entire cities and having such huge responsibilities (like himself).

Whiterun was the city where I felt the most free, where trade and commerce flowered and, out of all the cities, there was the least really big public troubles. I assumed it was all Balgruuf's making. So yeah? I stand by what I said : he would be most suited to be High King (only, I doubt he'd really want it). He's a true Nord in his own way, he doesn't make hasty decisions *cough*Ulfric*cough* and tolerates much from his own people as long as they don't cause unrest and murder. What's not to like? Of course, he might be less flashy, chest-beating and tragic figure than Ulfric. But why not go for effective, instead of flashy?

 On an unrelated note, I find it great and surprising that you stick by the Stormcloaks so much, Baldur, this looks like a passion or something, I out of curiosity wonder what makes you such a fierce defender of everything Stormcloak related :)

 

Baldur Red-Snow's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/12/2013

What you call hasty decisions, I call being decisive. How was Ulfric making hasty decisions exactly? It was years after he came back before he killed Torygg, and he did so after he already spoke to him and the other Jarls at the moot about his intentions of seceding. And if he was so hasty, why did he wait so long to attack Whiterun? He says to Galmar himself he thinks Balgruuf is a true nord and he'll come around. That's patience.

It doesn't take balls to not arrest someone for doing something when there are no soldiers or police around to punish anyone for it, so I don't see the point about Balgruuf letting Heimskr preach, especially when he's later arrested anyway under Imperial control.

What Balgruuf did was stupid for both sides, and I'd dislike him whether I was an Imperial or Stormcloak. He sits around and waits in the most important spot in Skyrim so long that not only does me make battle inevitable, he makes it inevitable and gives the advantage to the Stormcloaks as well, by not letting the Imps in sooner, which means all they can do is fortify the city instead of Whiterun hold's roads and perimeter at all. And we knew he was pro Imperial from the start. Besides the bias against Ulfric, he also sends Whiterun guards to fight Stormcloaks according to Irileth.

So Imperial supporter or no, Balgruuf would not make a strong king. Maybe a good spouse to the real ruler to tend to the people's scraped knee with that bleeding heart of his, but not a King. I support the Stormcloaks because so far in about two years, I've yet to see anyone who supports the Imperials make a valid reason to support them and make Skyrim stay with a dying Empire that has proven ineffective to rule. Almost anyone who knows the lore knows they are slowly dying, but the biggest thing I see people say is that they're the best bet to combat the Thalmor. Well:

 

http://colonelkillabee.tumblr.com/post/68999802440/stormcloak-bible-part...

 

I've yet to see anyone really put up arguments that make enough sense to me to trust that the Empire can serve any real purpose as it stands without the divine help of Akatosh. Perhaps it's impossible for either side to do so. Philosophy says that it is impossible to make others from an old paradigm accept a new paradigm if they are not willing to think outside of their paradigm. So no matter how much logic or reason either side uses, no matter how persuasive one is, you can't make them accept your way of thinking with that alone.

 

Well, as you'll see in that link above, stepping out of my paradigm is exactly what I tried to do, and I still find this Imperial argument wanting. I think I lack the Colonel Tigh fetish and Imperial love from past games and bias for the Greek wannabes known as the Romans to be able to really accept their train of thought.

 

So, until someone comes up with something like this:

http://colonelkillabee.tumblr.com/post/69423051613/stormcloak-bible-index

And effectively not only counters the points, and by counter I mean really counter, not ignore or dismiss points, and also makes the Empire seem currently useful, and not just make excuses for them, or says they can be useful again some day...I'll always be a strong Stormcloak supporter.

Baldur Red-Snow's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/12/2013

Also, Balgruuf doesn't have as many problems in his hold because one, it's not very diverse, so the chances of racial issues in the city is already very small. And two, it's because of that wealth you mentioned that crime issues would more than likely be small. And any murderers they have in the city likely get dealt with by the Companions, if the guards who by the way do NOT have to deal with a civil war unless Balgruuf sends them off to fight, don't do it themselves. You may not have that going on in the city, but you do have a Stormcloak supporter being arrested and taken by the legion, who then gave him to the Thalmor, when he was in so called "neutral territory".

LoneWoldEburg's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2014

I think that people are far too quick to excuse some of the stuff that goes on in Windhelm, but 75% of Stormcloak racism belongs to the same category as the Vigilants' "ruthlessness", Isran's "even more ruthlessness" or, for a more minor and forgivable example, Ulfric's "combat prowess". Bethesda writers occasionally slipped into the "tell, not show" writing sin in Skyrim, and the Stormcloak "xenophobia" is the most major culprit. See my post in "Hatred of the Stormcloaks" topic in General board of this forum for details.

I'm largely willing to take the narrative about Stormcloak xenophobia on its word (I think that xenophobic Stormcloaks make for more interesting characters), but I understand why many people don't.

ladyonthemoon's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/31/2012

LoneWoldEburg wrote:
I'm largely willing to take the narrative about Stormcloak xenophobia on its word (I think that xenophobic Stormcloaks make for more interesting characters), but I understand why many people don't.

As usual, things are not that simple. Ulfric and Galmar and some others around them, Galmar's brother being the best example, are definitely racists. But, what about the others? What about Ralof? Gerdur and her family? They are not that obviously racists; actually, they are good people, lured into this mess by cynical politicians.

Anyway, to answer the question, neither of them. I generally stick to characters who think that this war is the stupidest thing that could happen to Skyrim, especially after the dragons have returned.

LoneWoldEburg's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2014

Well, I think that the narrative on Stormcloaks we're supposed to think of is "Ulfric himself is not personally racist, but #1 with racists and supports a couple of bigoted policies. Many other fighers for Skyrim's independence, especially ones outside Eastmarch, are perfectly honorable people". The supposed racism of Ulfric's supporters and the effect of his anti-Dunmer policies are just too tokenistic and sketchy.

Baldur Red-Snow's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/12/2013

ladyonthemoon wrote:

As usual, things are not that simple. Ulfric and Galmar and some others around them

Ironic that you say this "As usual, things are not that simple."

Then this, "Ulfric and Galmar and some others around them, Galmar's brother being the best example, are definitely racist."

Really? Galmar tells you himself point blank he is not racist and explains his position. And as for Ulfric himself:

http://colonelkillabee.tumblr.com/post/69420668506/stormcloak-bible-part...

 

You're right, it's not that simple. Suggesting it is gives Beth themselves no credit at all. They both may have a spot of racism, like pretty much everyone in Tamriel, but it's not enough to say Ulfric is a racist. Otherwise, everyone in real life would be racists as well, as well as everyone in Tamriel. Which, is a lot less far fetched, admittedly, but still far fetched.

ladyonthemoon's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/31/2012

So, Galmar claiming that he is not a racist is enough to admit that he is not a racist? Since when? And Ulfric, because he never says that he is a racist, we should think that he is not? Do you know any leader of any extremist, racist and xenophobic political party in real life who will openly claim "yes, I am a racist!". (Let alone these factions that promote the supremacy of x race, of course; I mean political parties that want to survive in politics.)

Sorry, I don't click on links. Explaining here what is on the video would do the same.

LoneWoldEburg's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2014

Bethesda didn't have the guts to have the player be actually treated differently in the Blue Palace, depending on the player's ethnicity. Galmar's willingness to accept the player regardless of his race (he'll use a mildly insulting term for Argonians and Khajiits, but this is fairly weaksauce) contributes to "they're xenophobic because we want  you to think so" feeling. I think that Galmar is a rather extreme Stormcloak partisan, but I don't see anything in-game that reveals him, personally, as a racist.

I do think, however, that Baldur Red-Snow's analysis (it's not a video) misses a couple of counter-arguments and on occasion, displays tendentious reading of in-game text (there's nothing in the High King's invitation to the Dunmer that suggests that he legislated their segregation, or granted them immunity from taxes - in fact, one possible finale of Revyn Sadri's quest contradicts the "not taxed" argument. The rationale for keeping Argonians at the docks is also weak when we take Riften into account).

I also can't shake off the feeling that some of the more enthusiastic defenders of Ulfric turn the fellow into a sterile Martin Septim-type character.