The Elder Scrolls XVI: Sworn to Carry Your Burdens

[Vinyadan]

The easiest, Elder Scrolls way to be king is treating cities like your home: "we could build a new fortress/theatre/temple in Riften, but we need 100,000 drakes!"

[Caelestion]

I thought he pretty much was?

Are we talking about the same William (the Bastard) of Normandy? Edward the Confessor died of natural causes and Harold II died on the battlefield at Senlac Hill . William managed to get Harold to swear on holy relics that William would be the next king some years before, and later used that as his pretext to invade England.

[halfeye]

Are we talking about the same William (the Bastard) of Normandy? Edward the Confessor died of natural causes and Harold II died on the battlefield at Senlac Hill . William managed to get Harold to swear on holy relics that William would be the next king some years before, and later used that as his pretext to invade England.

Not technically a rouge, but most of the rest of it fits him quite well I thought? Harold died in a battle that Willy started.

[Caelestion]

Brutal murderer, I'll grant you, but hardly a cult assassin. :)

[veti]

Brutal murderer, I'll grant you, but hardly a cult assassin. :)

A bit harsh. Being a medieval ruler inevitably entailed a certain amount of bloodshed, but I've seen no indication that William was above average in his body count. And his legacy to England was a strong centralised monarchy, which probably helped limit the strife over the next 3 centuries or so.

(For instance, he figured out an effective strategy against the Vikings, which was something the English had desperately needed for a couple of centuries by then. It was called "building castles near the coast".)

[Rater202]

Back when Skyrim first came out, Bethsda did an offer where anyone who named their newborn child Dovahkiin would be given free gams for life.

At least one couple took them up on this offer.

That poor kid is gonna be ten this year, if they aren't already.

They are gonna get so much crap.

[Fyraltari]

Back when Skyrim first came out, Bethsda did an offer where anyone who named their newborn child Dovahkiin would be given free gams for life.

At least one couple took them up on this offer.

That poor kid is gonna be ten this year, if they aren't already.

They are gonna get so much crap.

That kid will have to ally with the Khaleesis.

[Rynjin]

I have to wonder if, even if that is on their birth certificate, they actually call them that.

Personally I think it would be a decent racket to name your kid Dovahkiin for the free swag and then just let them grow up believing their name is...Kevin, or something. Legally change it at a later date once they start having to use their legal name for stuff.

[Eldan]

Heh. Rename little Dovakhiin to Dave Kevin, yeah.

[Vinyadan]

Heh. Rename little Dovakhiin to Dave Kevin, yeah.

Does Switzerland share the German prejudice against the Kevins?

[Eldan]

Not as strongly, but a bit.

[Fyraltari]

That's not just a French thing?

[Caelestion]

A bit harsh. Being a medieval ruler inevitably entailed a certain amount of bloodshed, but I've seen no indication that William was above average in his body count. And his legacy to England was a strong centralised monarchy, which probably helped limit the strife over the next 3 centuries or so.

(For instance, he figured out an effective strategy against the Vikings, which was something the English had desperately needed for a couple of centuries by then. It was called "building castles near the coast".)

Well, there was also the Harrying of the North. Tens of thousands of civilians died when homes and food stocks were deliberately burnt in a hugely unnecessary scorched earth campaign during the winter against northern rebels.

[The_Jackal]

A bit harsh. Being a medieval ruler inevitably entailed a certain amount of bloodshed, but I've seen no indication that William was above average in his body count. And his legacy to England was a strong centralised monarchy, which probably helped limit the strife over the next 3 centuries or so.

That's certainly one way to put it. Another way to put it would be that he systematically subjugated the Anglo-Saxon culture he conquered, supplanting a relatively more egalitarian system (the Anglo-Saxon kings were chosen by the Witenaġemot, literally, the "Meeting of Wise Men"), and replaced it with a regime which was far more autocratic, and supplanted the local nobility with mercenaries and retainers who had helped him gain his throne; the irony being that he and his sons would wind up fighting rebellions against those self-same retainers or their offspring.

(For instance, he figured out an effective strategy against the Vikings, which was something the English had desperately needed for a couple of centuries by then. It was called "building castles near the coast".)

It was Harold Godwinson, not William of Normandy, who put an end to the last Viking incursion into England, with the Battle of Stamford bridge, and part of the reason that further incursions weren't made was because William of Normandy *was* a Norseman, that's what Normandy is named for, the Norse people who came, conquered, and settled the French channel coast, and they were given Lordship over the region in exchange for fighting other invaders from what is now Scandinavia.

I'm not going to pretend that the Anglo-Saxon ruling class were any more fair-minded, merciful, or enlightened than the regime which replaced them, but pretending William's Conquest led to a more stable realm glazes over the fact that stability didn't arrive for a number of generations, and was rewarded by recruiting England's fighting men into the Plantagenet Dynasty's continued struggles to expand their French holdings.

[Fyraltari]

and part of the reason that further incursions weren't made was because William of Normandy *was* a Norseman

His great-great-grandfather was a Norseman. William was a Norman and therefore French (well, as much as it makes sense to call someone not from the parisian bassin French in the Middle-Ages). And the viking raids certainly didn't stop because of his genealogy, as the Norsemen were just as prone to fighting relatives as everybody else.

[Vinyadan]

1066 symbolically ends the Viking age in Scandinavia, too, so it wasn't just a change in England that brought it about. Scandinavia had changed in many ways, many of which cannot be discussed here, and vikings in general weren't really a thing any more. Even Harald Hardrada was actually a king leading an invading army on invitation of a local noble, nothing too viking about that. Another Scandinavian king, Sweyn II of Denmark, invaded England during William's reign, and king Magnus III of Norway made war in Ireland, Scotland and the isles around them, and attacked the Normans at Anglesey, conquering it* during the reign of William II, William's son.

*he immediately left, so it was occupied by the Welsh.

[veti]

Well, there was also the Harrying of the North. Tens of thousands of civilians died when homes and food stocks were deliberately burnt in a hugely unnecessary scorched earth campaign during the winter against northern rebels.

I'd only quibble with the rather loaded word "unnecessary" in that assessment. (Well, that and the disturbingly anachronistic term "civilians".) Who gets to decide what's "necessary"? I suspect the troops who actually did the work, and then got to go home afterwards rather than having to spend the next several years in seasonal campaigning against recalcitrant Saxon (and Danish) nobles, would have voted "necessary" if anyone had asked them.

Which is kinda my point. William certainly wasn't a "nice" guy, but all his actions made military and/or political sense within the context of their time, and they weren't purely selfish or capricious. We'll never reach agreement on his net effect (largely because we don't have a counterfactual version of world history, with a slightly-less-ambitious William of Normandy, to refer to), but to shrug him off as nothing more than a "brutal murderer" seems to me - ahistorically glib.

1066 symbolically ends the Viking age in Scandinavia, too, so it wasn't just a change in England that brought it about. Scandinavia had changed in many ways, many of which cannot be discussed here, and vikings in general weren't really a thing any more. Even Harald Hardrada was actually a king leading an invading army on invitation of a local noble, nothing too viking about that. Another Scandinavian king, Sweyn II of Denmark, invaded England during William's reign, and king Magnus III of Norway made war in Ireland, Scotland and the isles around them, and attacked the Normans at Anglesey, conquering it* during the reign of William II, William's son.

True. Harald Hadrada's invasion was not really a "Viking" operation, more like an attempt to revive the Danelaw.

But Scandinavian kings kept trying to stick their thumbs into English politics for about 20 years after 1066, and William saw them off. Eventually they decided that game was no longer winnable, and I think that realisation on their part can be credited largely to William's building strategy. Castles are a game changer, they affect both axes of the risk/reward matrix of either raiding or invading.

Pinning 1066 as "the end of the Viking age" - is I think quite an Anglo-centric view. I understand Scandinavian historians are happy to argue over quite a range of dates, depending of course on what they see as the defining characteristics of "Viking-ism".

[Rater202]

So... You can kill Grelod the Kind in front of witnesses without getting a bounty.

Does that mean that in Skyrim, vigilante execution of child abusers is legal?

[Fyraltari]

So... You can kill Grelod the Kind in front of witnesses without getting a bounty.

Does that mean that in Skyrim, vigilante execution of child abusers is legal?

It means the kids (and the houseservants) are no snitches.

[Grim Portent]

I think it's a case of no one caring enough to want to chase you down for it. Grelod was fundamentally a horrible person, so the guards probably just chalked it up as her getting what she deserved and left it at that. While corrupt, I don't think the Riften guards liked Grelod being casually cruel to the children she was supposed to care for.

They do know it was you, they have some comments about seeing you at the orphanage when she was killed, they just don't really care.

[Kareeah_Indaga]

So... You can kill Grelod the Kind in front of witnesses without getting a bounty.

Does that mean that in Skyrim, vigilante execution of child abusers is legal?

I have a sudden urge to roll up Frank Castle. Pity so many of the really scummy people are marked essential.

[Triaxx]

If there's not a mod for that, the console commands exist.

[Caelestion]

I'd only quibble with the rather loaded word "unnecessary" in that assessment. (Well, that and the disturbingly anachronistic term "civilians".) Who gets to decide what's "necessary"? I suspect the troops who actually did the work, and then got to go home afterwards rather than having to spend the next several years in seasonal campaigning against recalcitrant Saxon (and Danish) nobles, would have voted "necessary" if anyone had asked them.

Which is kinda my point. William certainly wasn't a "nice" guy, but all his actions made military and/or political sense within the context of their time, and they weren't purely selfish or capricious. We'll never reach agreement on his net effect (largely because we don't have a counterfactual version of world history, with a slightly-less-ambitious William of Normandy, to refer to), but to shrug him off as nothing more than a "brutal murderer" seems to me - ahistorically glib.

Well, to be fair, I was saying that he was particularly brutal, not that he was only brutal (he was certainly more than that). I used "civilians" to underscore what I see as a humanitarian issue, but the Normans were all about shock and awe tactics to keep the populace in line.

[Vinyadan]

So... You can kill Grelod the Kind in front of witnesses without getting a bounty.

Does that mean that in Skyrim, vigilante execution of child abusers is legal?

I got the impression that the kill is heavily scripted, so that you cannot pull it off without being noticed. Talking to Grelod gives you away to her as aggressive, and, when she dies, she lets out a loud scream that awakens everyone in the house, followed by a scene with children rejoicing at her death and the young woman asking you to leave.

In practice, the game cannot legitimately punish you, because you must have witnesses.

It's something I didn't like, to tell the truth. What's the point of radiant AI, if you are stuck with scripted interactions that make your choices irrelevant?

[LibraryOgre]

In Oblivion, by comparision, you're kind of a nobody. You're just muscle for Martin. It's much less surprising when that hero vanishes after the main quest.

To be fair, the Hero of Kvatch gets drafted into an entirely new position, as well.

But, yeah, Skyrim. Here I am, Dragonborn. Leader of the College at Winterhold. Leader of the Companions. Chief of the Thieves guild. Destroyer of the Dark Brotherhood. Possibly Thane in every hold. Owning vast amounts of property. Possibly having killed a king, and married a Queen. Positively dripping with daedric artifacts. Who's going to stand against me being High King of Skyrim, especially if you show up with Ysgramor's Wuuthrad and say "By this Axe, I rule"?

[Misery Esquire]

To start; whoops, I didn't think a King Will reference would go so far.

Who's going to stand against me being High King of Skyrim, especially if you show up with Ysgramor's Wuuthrad and say "By this Axe, I rule"?

Well, having Wuuthrad in particular as part of your claim, while possibly convincing to Nords and very-old-school (Atmoran-identifying) Imperials, would probably be highly worrying to all the nearby elves.

[Grim Portent]

How many sources of legitimate authority can the Dragonborn lay claim to anyway?

The legacy of Ysgramor, first human king of Skyrim, by right of being leader of the Companions and bearing Wuuthrad.

The legacy of Shalidor, the greatest archmage ever to live in Skyrim, by being leader of the College and having delved into the secrets of Labyrinthian.

Dragonborn, as recognised by the Greybeards and which to some extent means inheriting the legacy of Talos.

Agent of Mara.

Agent of Dibella.

Thane of every hold.

Close affiliate of the Black-Briars, who have a lot of soft power.

Champion of Malacath and blood-kin of the Orcs.

Champion of each member of the restored Tribunal.

Ally of House Redoran and House Telvanni.

Hero of the Civil War.

High ranking vampire hunter/Leader of a vampire dynasty. Not legitimate in the latter case since being a vampire is illegal.

Completed Kyne's Trials, not that many Nords still worship Kyne.


Did I miss anything? Leaving aside the Dark Brotherhood and the Thieves Guild because they aren't exactly things you can put on a banner, even if everyone knows the DB is in charge of both.

[Eldan]

I mean, if you add Redoran and Telvanni, you might as well add the Good Daedra to convince more Dunmer to your side. Minus points with the Nords, though, if you mention that too much.

[Anteros]

How many sources of legitimate authority can the Dragonborn lay claim to anyway?

The legacy of Ysgramor, first human king of Skyrim, by right of being leader of the Companions and bearing Wuuthrad.

The legacy of Shalidor, the greatest archmage ever to live in Skyrim, by being leader of the College and having delved into the secrets of Labyrinthian.

Dragonborn, as recognised by the Greybeards and which to some extent means inheriting the legacy of Talos.

Agent of Mara.

Agent of Dibella.

Thane of every hold.

Close affiliate of the Black-Briars, who have a lot of soft power.

Champion of Malacath and blood-kin of the Orcs.

Champion of each member of the restored Tribunal.

Ally of House Redoran and House Telvanni.

Hero of the Civil War.

High ranking vampire hunter/Leader of a vampire dynasty. Not legitimate in the latter case since being a vampire is illegal.

Completed Kyne's Trials, not that many Nords still worship Kyne.


Did I miss anything? Leaving aside the Dark Brotherhood and the Thieves Guild because they aren't exactly things you can put on a banner, even if everyone knows the DB is in charge of both.

You forgot "because I say so, and who can stop me?" Probably the most important criteria of all.

[Kareeah_Indaga]

I mean, if you add Redoran and Telvanni, you might as well add the Good Daedra to convince more Dunmer to your side. Minus points with the Nords, though, if you mention that too much.

I think that’s what Grim meant by ‘Champion of each member of the restored Tribunal’ since I don’t recall Almalexia/Sotha Sil/Vivec showing up, unless we could somehow swing possession of Keening into being some sign of favor from them, but that would be a stretch.

I thought if we destroyed the Dark Brotherhood we got to be honorary members of the Penitus Oculatus, but checking the wiki it looks like Maro just pays us really well. I’d add the Bard’s Collage, but they aren’t really an authority.