Stormcloaks Or Empire (One Of The Three Certainties Of Life)

[Keltest]

Probably, but I don't know if all of Nord society is of the same mind as that.

I'm not aware of any nords voicing (heh) any other opinion. Lots of them hold opinion on the honorable uses of the Voice, due to the influence of Jurgen Windcaller and the greybeards, but at the general level I don't think anyone contests that it's magic or anything.

[Cikomyr2]

Yes, you have described every government everywhere. It turns out no constituent parts can just unilaterally override the higher authority without consequence.

Nonono. The "unilateral" carries a lot of weight in what you are writing.

In the Septim Empire, except for Morrowind, there is no way for a local authority to override the higher authority. Not merely "unilaterally". There is no way period. There is no entity that determined the limit of the central government compared to the local government. There is no equivalent to a supreme court (of any similar modern nation) that could claim "the Emperor's order is beyond his purview".

The Septim Empire as we have seen it only give power to local government as far as it facilitates their compliance with the expectations of the central state - that means taxes, levies, or whatever the Empire demands of them, in the form of the Emperor himself or his delegates.

The need to negotiate, compromise, etc.. between the Empire and its province, when it does happen, is not a reflection of constitutional rights (de jure) of the province to resists central rules but instead an admission of powerlessness (de facto) lack of authority of the central state that it doesnt have the might to just push around its vassals casually.

Ulfric believes that "if Skyrim is to exist in a society where the guy at the top makes all decisions, going as far as overriding traditions that were central to the Empire's legitimacy*, might as well make sure the Jarls of Skyrim are the ones to pick him and not the politics of Cyrodill".

*Said tradition was THE WORSHIP OF THE EMPIRE'S FOUNDER.

[Keltest]

Nonono. The "unilateral" carries a lot of weight in what you are writing.

In the Septim Empire, except for Morrowind, there is no way for a local authority to override the higher authority. Not merely "unilaterally". There is no way period. There is no entity that determined the limit of the central government compared to the local government. There is no equivalent to a supreme court (of any similar modern nation) that could claim "the Emperor's order is beyond his purview".

The Septim Empire as we have seen it only give power to local government as far as it facilitates their compliance with the expectations of the central state - that means taxes, levies, or whatever the Empire demands of them, in the form of the Emperor himself or his delegates.

The need to negotiate, compromise, etc.. between the Empire and its province, when it does happen, is not a reflection of constitutional rights (de jure) of the province to resists central rules but instead an admission of powerlessness (de facto) lack of authority of the central state that it doesnt have the might to just push around its vassals casually.

Ulfric believes that "if Skyrim is to exist in a society where the guy at the top makes all decisions, going as far as overriding traditions that were central to the Empire's legitimacy*, might as well make sure the Jarls of Skyrim are the ones to pick him and not the politics of Cyrodill".

*Said tradition was THE WORSHIP OF THE EMPIRE'S FOUNDER.

Ulfric is trying to become king though. He clearly has no problem with dictatorships when he's the one in charge. You're ascribing motives to him thst he doesn't actually have.

Extremely generously, if you take him as completely open and honest (which he is not), Ulfric has no problems with the idea of the Empire. He fought for it after all. What he feels is wrong is that the Empire is not meeting or able to meet its obligations to Skyrim. Now, that's if you take him at his literal word and don't just read it as a nominal party line for the public face.

[druid91]

Ulfric is trying to become king though. He clearly has no problem with dictatorships when he's the one in charge. You're ascribing motives to him thst he doesn't actually have.

Extremely generously, if you take him as completely open and honest (which he is not), Ulfric has no problems with the idea of the Empire. He fought for it after all. What he feels is wrong is that the Empire is not meeting or able to meet its obligations to Skyrim. Now, that's if you take him at his literal word and don't just read it as a nominal party line for the public face.

As far as I'm aware he never actually tells a direct provable lie throughout the entire game.

And he has that discussion alone with Galmar multiple times where he talks about why he thinks the empire is bad for Skyrim. Galmar is his right hand man who's been with him from the beginning. There's no need to lie to him so why would he?

[Keltest]

As far as I'm aware he never actually tells a direct provable lie throughout the entire game.

And he has that discussion alone with Galmar multiple times where he talks about why he thinks the empire is bad for Skyrim. Galmar is his right hand man who's been with him from the beginning. There's no need to lie to him so why would he?

Probably because if Ulfric flat out said it was a power grab to Galmar's face, Galmar's status as his right hand man has a good chance of changing. Ulfric may not want to admit it to himself either, he clearly enjoys being on the pedistal his followers put him on.

As far as provable lies go, you generally don't want to be telling them long term, especially in politics. It's easy to get called out on them then. It's no surprise that he doesn't say anything outright false. That doesn't mean he isn't being deceptive though. He wants the moot to make it seem like he was elected through acclaim rather than bloody conquest for example.

[druid91]

Probably because if Ulfric flat out said it was a power grab to Galmar's face, Galmar's status as his right hand man has a good chance of changing. Ulfric may not want to admit it to himself either, he clearly enjoys being on the pedistal his followers put him on.

As far as provable lies go, you generally don't want to be telling them long term, especially in politics. It's easy to get called out on them then. It's no surprise that he doesn't say anything outright false. That doesn't mean he isn't being deceptive though. He wants the moot to make it seem like he was elected through acclaim rather than bloody conquest for example.

I mean it kind of was if he wins. Elisif and the Imperial jarls are propped up by Imperial forces from within Cyrodil.

Ulfrics recruits are more or less solely from within Skyrim.

If Ulfrics wins, that implies sufficient support from the people of Skyrim that he not only outweighs that of the Imperial Jarls, but enough to overcome the additional weight of external legion forces.

In other words, he would have to have the support of well over half the nation to win.

[Keltest]

I mean it kind of was if he wins. Elisif and the Imperial jarls are propped up by Imperial forces from within Cyrodil.

Ulfrics recruits are more or less solely from within Skyrim.

If Ulfrics wins, that implies sufficient support from the people of Skyrim that he not only outweighs that of the Imperial Jarls, but enough to overcome the additional weight of external legion forces.

In other words, he would have to have the support of well over half the nation to win.

The flip side of that is that Nords make up a fairly significant portion of the imperial legions. Legate Rikke is a nord, for example. And Ulfric will flat out refuse to attack Solitude while the Emperor is there, because if the Emperor is hurt or killed then Cyrodiil will march its armies into Skyrim and crush the Stormcloaks, Implying that the current imperial forces are just the regular standing army for Skyrim.

[Rynjin]

You're simplifying.

He also says this, if you ask him if he shouted Torygg to death.

"Not entirely true, though not entirely false either. Any Nord can learn the Way of the Voice by studying with the Greybeards, given enough ambition and dedication. My shouting Torygg to the ground proved he had neither. However, it was my sword piercing his heart that killed him."

Like he makes it clear that Torygg is an issue not just because he's weak. But because he was just in general unsuitable for the war to come. He was without ambition, dedication, or strength. He was uninterested in ruling his realm and happy to be a puppet of the empire.

How true that is isn't clear. But his reasoning is more complex than "Strong should rule the weak."

And we're to...take Ulfric entirely at his word here?

Torygg may have been an Imperial loyalist...though even that is ambiguous, given how much he idolized Ulfric. We have no idea of his ambition or lack thereof, or what he was dedicated to simply because we are told practically nothing about Torygg.

I also find Ulfric's attitude laughable. "Any Nord can learn the Way of the Voice"? No, any Nord who lives a privileged enough lifestyle to simply spend an entire decade away from their responsibilities can do it. Ulfric is just posturing and trying to manufacture justifications, not actually positing a universal truth here.

While Ulfric spent ten years meditating, Torygg presumably spent the same time learning how to rule his province. Given how much of a ****hole Windhelm is, it'd be a lot better for Ulfric's people if he'd done the same.

[druid91]

And we're to...take Ulfric entirely at his word here?

Torygg may have been an Imperial loyalist...though even that is ambiguous, given how much he idolized Ulfric. We have no idea of his ambition or lack thereof, or what he was dedicated to simply because we are told practically nothing about Torygg.

I also find Ulfric's attitude laughable. "Any Nord can learn the Way of the Voice"? No, any Nord who lives a privileged enough lifestyle to simply spend an entire decade away from their responsibilities can do it. Ulfric is just posturing and trying to manufacture justifications, not actually positing a universal truth here.

While Ulfric spent ten years meditating, Torygg presumably spent the same time learning how to rule his province. Given how much of a ****hole Windhelm is, it'd be a lot better for Ulfric's people if he'd done the same.

As mentioned he at no occasion tells a lie you can catch him in. So given he tells the truth about everything you can confirm, there's little point in assuming he's lying about everything you can't.

As to the rest of the argument...

A.) Windhelm isn't that bad. I really don't understand the whole assertion that it's a ****hole at all. It's in somewhat disrepair but no more so than whiterun, and it's in significantly better shape than a few other hold capitals. Especially for the capital of a rebel army who is largely cut off from outside trade except with Morrowind.

B.) Dedication. Yes. That is a thing that is demonstrated by giving up other opportunities to dedicate time to a thing. Torygg was not demonstrably a better ruler in any way, though yes that is in part because we know little about him. And Solitude, while wealthier has its own, far more significant issues in the form of imperials cutting off peoples heads for questionable reasons and the Thalmor playing secret police while they subvert local politics.

[Divayth Fyr]

As mentioned he at no occasion tells a lie you can catch him in. So given he tells the truth about everything you can confirm, there's little point in assuming he's lying about everything you can't

Only half-truths. Like when he makes a point about not taking the throne before the Moot makes their decision when speaking to the crowd

"And it is for these reasons that I cannot accept the mantle of "High King." Not until the Moot declares that title should adorn my shoulders will I accept it."

only to tell us in private

"We'll wait for the Moot to name me High King. It'll be better for all that way. But, that doesn't mean I won't start acting like it."

.
May not be a straight lie, but also doesn't strike me as being entirely honest. Even if getting the title is a foregone conclusion, since he removed any opposition.

And we have the dialogu that normally is impossible to witness, since Lonely-Gale doesn't enter the Palace, but it is there

Spoiler

Show

Ulfric: "Captain, I've been receiving complaints about this Giordano woman.
Captain Lonely-Gale: "Yes, sir. I've been trying to quiet her, but she's insistent. She thinks she can find out who's been killing the women..."
Ulfric: "I don't care if she can find a living dwarf -- I can't have her stirring up trouble. We have enough problems as it is."
Captain Lonely-Gale: "Yes, sir. I'll try to contain her."
Ulfric: "See that you do. I will not let Windhelm descend into chaos over a few overactive imaginations."

Ulfric: "What's the current spirit among the dark elves?"
Captain Lonely-Gale: "As restless as ever, sir, but I don't see them taking any kind of incendiary action. Not soon, anyway."
Ulfric: "Well that much is good. Let's finish this first war before starting the next one, eh?"
Captain Lonely-Gale: "Um... yes, of course, sir."
Ulfric: "Carry on, Lonely-Gale. And loosen yourself a bit."

sounds like trying to ignore/cover up some actual issues plaguing his town...

[Rynjin]

As mentioned he at no occasion tells a lie you can catch him in. So given he tells the truth about everything you can confirm, there's little point in assuming he's lying about everything you can't.

As mentioned below, that's not true, and even if it were...Ulfric is the most biased possible source for this information. Even if he isn't lying, that doesn't mean he's correct. He could truly believe that and still be wrong.

A.) Windhelm isn't that bad. I really don't understand the whole assertion that it's a ****hole at all. It's in somewhat disrepair but no more so than whiterun, and it's in significantly better shape than a few other hold capitals. Especially for the capital of a rebel army who is largely cut off from outside trade except with Morrowind.

Windhelm didn'ty end up in its current condition overnight, and is certainly in more disrepair than Whiterun. Whiterun is a trade hub who has allowed their walls to fall into disrepair in an era of peace, which is understandable if not wise. The actual building inside the town are all well-kept and the people live comfortably. In Windhelm the dwellings are also in poor repair, but that's also largely beside the point of it having the most inept and uncaring guards in the region; an attitude that stems directly from Ulfric.

B.) Dedication. Yes. That is a thing that is demonstrated by giving up other opportunities to dedicate time to a thing. Torygg was not demonstrably a better ruler in any way, though yes that is in part because we know little about him. And Solitude, while wealthier has its own, far more significant issues in the form of imperials cutting off peoples heads for questionable reasons and the Thalmor playing secret police while they subvert local politics.

The mistake is that assuming someone "lacks dedication" because they dedicated their life to something different from you.

And executing someone for deliberately allowing a rebel assassin to walk free is not "dubious reasons". We have already established that if we are to assume Ulfric has any competence in politics AT ALL, he must have known that his challenge to Torygg would incite a war. Roggvir, specifically, can be blamed in large part for there being a war at all.

[Batcathat]

And executing someone for deliberately allowing a rebel assassin to walk free is not "dubious reasons". We have already established that if we are to assume Ulfric has any competence in politics AT ALL, he must have known that his challenge to Torygg would incite a war. Roggvir, specifically, can be blamed in large part for there being a war at all.

Presumably there were many other guards around when Ulfric showed up, issued his challenge and as the duel happened. If Ulfric was a rebel assassin a guard is duty bound to stop, surely they had plenty of opportunity to do so. Yet it seems like they didn't act until the king had lost the duel, which doesn't exactly scream "assassination" in my book.

[Rynjin]

Presumably there were many other guards around when Ulfric showed up, issued his challenge and as the duel happened. If Ulfric was a rebel assassin a guard is duty bound to stop, surely they had plenty of opportunity to do so. Yet it seems like they didn't act until the king had lost the duel, which doesn't exactly scream "assassination" in my book.

It was a politically motivated killing, which fits the vague definition of an assassin. That the guards were derelict in their duty to protect the High King is a separate matter.

[Keltest]

Presumably there were many other guards around when Ulfric showed up, issued his challenge and as the duel happened. If Ulfric was a rebel assassin a guard is duty bound to stop, surely they had plenty of opportunity to do so. Yet it seems like they didn't act until the king had lost the duel, which doesn't exactly scream "assassination" in my book.

It's not like shouting FUS RO DAH at someone and then stabbing them takes that long.

[Batcathat]

It was a politically motivated killing, which fits the vague definition of an assassin. That the guards were derelict in their duty to protect the High King is a separate matter.

Again, it's not like he jumped out and killed him out of nowhere. I think calling a formal duel (whether or not said duel is legal) that both participants agree to an "assassination" is questionable at best.

It's not like shouting FUS RO DAH at someone and then stabbing them takes that long.

Sure, but not even Ulfric's enemies suggests that he just showed up and attacked the king. He issued a challenge, the king accepted and they fought. While we don't know the exact time table, that should offer plenty of time for any guards present to try and stop Ulfric. But it seems everyone went along with things until the king lost, which is very odd behavior if Ulfric is some sort of lawless assassin trying to kill their king.

[druid91]

Only half-truths. Like when he makes a point about not taking the throne before the Moot makes their decision when speaking to the crowd

only to tell us in private
.
May not be a straight lie, but also doesn't strike me as being entirely honest. Even if getting the title is a foregone conclusion, since he removed any opposition.

And we have the dialogu that normally is impossible to witness, since Lonely-Gale doesn't enter the Palace, but it is there


sounds like trying to ignore/cover up some actual issues plaguing his town...

Certainly he will spin the way he says things to play to the crowd. But that's not dishonesty either. Just theatrics.

And to be fair, that dialogue effectively isn't in the game. Lonely Gale has a lot of glitches from how he's supposed to be a steward at some point before that got cut.

As mentioned below, that's not true, and even if it were...Ulfric is the most biased possible source for this information. Even if he isn't lying, that doesn't mean he's correct. He could truly believe that and still be wrong.



Windhelm didn'ty end up in its current condition overnight, and is certainly in more disrepair than Whiterun. Whiterun is a trade hub who has allowed their walls to fall into disrepair in an era of peace, which is understandable if not wise. The actual building inside the town are all well-kept and the people live comfortably. In Windhelm the dwellings are also in poor repair, but that's also largely beside the point of it having the most inept and uncaring guards in the region; an attitude that stems directly from Ulfric.



The mistake is that assuming someone "lacks dedication" because they dedicated their life to something different from you.

And executing someone for deliberately allowing a rebel assassin to walk free is not "dubious reasons". We have already established that if we are to assume Ulfric has any competence in politics AT ALL, he must have known that his challenge to Torygg would incite a war. Roggvir, specifically, can be blamed in large part for there being a war at all.

He could be wrong, but if he was why doesn't anyone actually defend Torygg's record as a king? Everyone who defends him focuses on how improper it was of Ulfric to duel him, how he was just a boy, nobody goes "Look at all these great things Torygg did for us!" And when you meet Torygg in Sovngarde his main concern isn't for his people, it's for Elisif. Which connects with Ulfric's statement about him being primarily concerned with pleasing his wife over leading his people. Was he an honorable doofus? Sure. But that doesn't make him a good high king.

They're not inept or uncaring, they're stretched thin due to the war. The idea that they're inept or uncaring comes from malcontents within the walls. Malcontents that haven't been beheaded or thrown into a torture chamber for being malcontents, unlike in Solitude.

This all hinges on a concept that Torygg did dedicate himself to something differently which isn't supported by the game at all. Other than maybe pleasing Elisif.

There was no assassination. There was a duel. That's the point. The idea he was an assassin is a cut and dry lie.

[Keltest]

Elisif flat out says that if Ulfric had just talked to Torygg about it, like at all, even just suggesting that they could do it, Torygg would have told the Empire to get stuffed. The fact is, his death was totally unnecessary, except to prove Ulfric's individual power. That's why all the imperials call it murder. Ulfric put Torygg in a position where his death was the only possible outcome.

[druid91]

Elisif flat out says that if Ulfric had just talked to Torygg about it, like at all, even just suggesting that they could do it, Torygg would have told the Empire to get stuffed. The fact is, his death was totally unnecessary, except to prove Ulfric's individual power.

And if you ask Sybille, she says Ulfric never knew how much Torygg respected him, and that Torygg would have supported the empire in the end even if he did respect Ulfric for what he had said at the moot confirming him High King.

[Rynjin]

Again, it's not like he jumped out and killed him out of nowhere. I think calling a formal duel (whether or not said duel is legal) that both participants agree to an "assassination" is questionable at best.

He kinda did. Remember that he was invited to court to parley with Torygg, who sympathized greatly with Ulfric. Torygg invited Ulfric there specifically to be convinced that independence was in the best interests of Skyrim.

When he got there, he simply challenged Torygg with little to no preamble.

He showed up to a peace conference with nothing but blood on his mind.

He could be wrong, but if he was why doesn't anyone actually defend Torygg's record as a king? Everyone who defends him focuses on how improper it was of Ulfric to duel him, how he was just a boy, nobody goes "Look at all these great things Torygg did for us!" And when you meet Torygg in Sovngarde his main concern isn't for his people, it's for Elisif. Which connects with Ulfric's statement about him being primarily concerned with pleasing his wife over leading his people. Was he an honorable doofus? Sure. But that doesn't make him a good high king.

I'll note that Torygg wasn't king for very long. There is every possibility he was killed before he ever had a chance to do anything.

They're not inept or uncaring, they're stretched thin due to the war. The idea that they're inept or uncaring comes from malcontents within the walls. Malcontents that haven't been beheaded or thrown into a torture chamber for being malcontents, unlike in Solitude.

The idea that they're inept and uncaring comes from...doing literally any of the quests that take place in Windhelm. Blood on the Ice is the biggest example, where all that would need to be done to find the killer is to follow the obvious TRAIL OF BLOOD leading away from the crime scene, but the guard is not interested in doing so.

Sure, they cite being "stretched thin" as the reason...but I'll say that I have little sympathy for that as an excuse when it's in the hold of the man who STARTED THE WAR for his own gain. If he's stretched so thin by the war that he cannot even police his own hold, then he cannot possibly be in a position to rule the whole of Skyrim.

This all hinges on a concept that Torygg did dedicate himself to something differently which isn't supported by the game at all. Other than maybe pleasing Elisif.

The assumption is that he was raised, as most nobles are, to rule from a young age. He may have been bad at it, he may have been good. We'll never know. That's what happens when you kill people while they're young.

[Keltest]

And if you ask Sybille, she says Ulfric never knew how much Torygg respected him, and that Torygg would have supported the empire in the end even if he did respect Ulfric for what he had said at the moot confirming him High King.

Well gosh, that sounds like Ulfric should have made a token effort at talking with the king and other Jarls before resorting to killing someone unprovoked, eh?

[Divayth Fyr]

Certainly he will spin the way he says things to play to the crowd. But that's not dishonesty either. Just theatrics.

I think I'm inclined to disagree here.

And when you meet Torygg in Sovngarde his main concern isn't for his people, it's for Elisif. Which connects with Ulfric's statement about him being primarily concerned with pleasing his wife over leading his people. Was he an honorable doofus? Sure. But that doesn't make him a good high king

Torygg seems to be talking about the moment of his death - thinking about your loved one doesn't seem too odd. He also claims Ulfric sent hom to Sovngarde with a Shout, not a blade (as Ulfric says)...

[druid91]

The idea that they're inept and uncaring comes from...doing literally any of the quests that take place in Windhelm. Blood on the Ice is the biggest example, where all that would need to be done to find the killer is to follow the obvious TRAIL OF BLOOD leading away from the crime scene, but the guard is not interested in doing so.

Sure, they cite being "stretched thin" as the reason...but I'll say that I have little sympathy for that as an excuse when it's in the hold of the man who STARTED THE WAR for his own gain. If he's stretched so thin by the war that he cannot even police his own hold, then he cannot possibly be in a position to rule the whole of Skyrim.

The assumption is that he was raised, as most nobles are, to rule from a young age. He may have been bad at it, he may have been good. We'll never know. That's what happens when you kill people while they're young.

He's literally fighting the armed forces of Cyrodil, the Aldmeri Dominion, and his rival Jarls. Of course he's stretched thin. He started the war because he believed he had to start the war and by all accounts he was more right than wrong. And he wasn't exactly great at it, given the situation in Skyrim when the game starts.

Well gosh, that sounds like Ulfric should have made a token effort at talking with the king and other Jarls before resorting to killing someone unprovoked, eh?

Not really. Torygg wouldn't have become a good high king all of a sudden. He'd have just been a bad king that might listen to Ulfric and weaken the cause. Especially given how fond Elisif is of Elenwen and Tullius, and how fond Torygg was of her in turn, it would have been a constant back and forth rather than the decisive action Ulfric wanted.

I think I'm inclined to disagree here.


Torygg seems to be talking about the moment of his death - thinking about your loved one doesn't seem too odd. He also claims Ulfric sent hom to Sovngarde with a Shout, not a blade (as Ulfric says)...

The shout ended the fight even if the blade killed him. And if you're thrown across a room by magical yelling I imagine that's what you remember more than the stabbing that finished you off after all your bones have been shattered.

[Cikomyr2]

Ulfric is trying to become king though. He clearly has no problem with dictatorships when he's the one in charge. You're ascribing motives to him thst he doesn't actually have.

He has no problem with dictatorship if its legitimized through "tradition". Or any other form of legitimacy. The current emperor just the great grandson of a clever general who savvily took an empty throne, not an actual descendant of the Ascended Tiber Septim, who became a God.

And this Mede Emperor is the one who ordered the outlawing of worship of that very founding Emperor. In Ulfric's eyes, he has lost any legitimacy he had in ruling over Skyrim.

Yes, Ulfric is not against the concept of an Empire. Hes against the concept of an empire that is against its own people. And forbidding worship of Talos as well as giving up the province of Hammerfell to the Dominion* was the Empire turning on its people. Or at least, HIS people.

Hence the need for Skyrim to be independant. So the dictatorial decisions that will determine what is and isn't legal in Skyrim will at least be made in Skyrim, and not by some pompous bureaucrat sitting in the White-Gold Tower that is probably too busy dealing with Cyrodill politics to actually know what the people of Skyrim are about.

*I know selling out Hammerfell was never cited as a motivation for Ulfric, but goddamn i believe there is no greater indictment of Titus Medes II for having decided to write off a province that not only was still fighting, but kept fighting off the Dominion's armies AFTER being abandoned by the Empire.

For me, it just proves the Empire is weaker than the sum of its parts. Its corrupt internal politics prevents if from organizing properly. The only thing it truly controls it the centralized army, which is more busy playing the internal game of politics and corruption than actually projecting power.

It is genuinely like the 5th century western roman empire. The central state is more of a parasite for its province, used to sucking off wealth and troops for its own purpose rather than develop the local economies. There is a reason certain roman enclaves cut off from Rome managed to last actually longer and wealthier than Italy did.

[Batcathat]

He kinda did. Remember that he was invited to court to parley with Torygg, who sympathized greatly with Ulfric. Torygg invited Ulfric there specifically to be convinced that independence was in the best interests of Skyrim.

When he got there, he simply challenged Torygg with little to no preamble.

He showed up to a peace conference with nothing but blood on his mind.

That's entirely possible, but (at least to me) there's still a very big difference between assassinating someone and challenging them to a fight. If Torygg had said "nah, I don't wanna throw my life away for nothing" and Ulfric still attacked and killed him? Then we can talk assassination, then we can talk prosecuting people for not stopping him. But that's not what happened.

Torygg accepted the challenge and since we don't hear anything about anyone attempting to forcefully stop Ulfric pre-duel or aid Torygg during it, it seems like everyone else did as well.

[Keltest]

That's entirely possible, but (at least to me) there's still a very big difference between assassinating someone and challenging them to a fight. If Torygg had said "nah, I don't wanna throw my life away for nothing" and Ulfric still attacked and killed him? Then we can talk assassination, then we can talk prosecuting people for not stopping him. But that's not what happened.

Torygg accepted the challenge and since we don't hear anything about anyone attempting to forcefully stop Ulfric pre-duel or aid Torygg during it, it seems like everyone else did as well.

If you want to quibble like that, people don't say he was assassinated, they say he was murdered. Ulfric walked up to him, announced his intention to kill him, and then did so. Really, if you take away the context of who the people are, its something you can do a dozen times in the Dark Brotherhood quests, up to allowing them to fight back if you feel like it. Torygg stood no chance against Ulfric, and Ulfric never intended to allow it to come to anything other than a fight. Torygg's acceptance speaks only of his personal character, not Ulfric's.

[Cikomyr2]

If you want to quibble like that, people don't say he was assassinated, they say he was murdered. Ulfric walked up to him, announced his intention to kill him, and then did so. Really, if you take away the context of who the people are, its something you can do a dozen times in the Dark Brotherhood quests, up to allowing them to fight back if you feel like it. Torygg stood no chance against Ulfric, and Ulfric never intended to allow it to come to anything other than a fight. Torygg's acceptance speaks only of his personal character, not Ulfric's.

As a Brotherhood assassin, if you manage to convince your target to throw down and actually fight, and you aren't seen as the aggressor, then you don't get a bounty because its not a crime.

Oh yhea, the entire was staged. But it's still not a crime.

You are applying more real world morality than the reality we actually see on display. It is not a crime to kill someone when both belligerent are throwing down.

[Keltest]

As a Brotherhood assassin, if you manage to convince your target to throw down and actually fight, and you aren't seen as the aggressor, then you don't get a bounty because its not a crime.

Oh yhea, the entire was staged. But it's still not a crime.

You are applying more real world morality than the reality we actually see on display. It is not a crime to kill someone when both belligerent are throwing down.

It... fully is though? Like, if I get attacked in Whiterun by, I dunno, a vampire or something, then I dont get a bounty if I kill them, but the guards will absolutely come to my help and attack the vampire too, because the vampire committed a crime by trying to kill me. Acting to defend myself doesnt make it not a crime to have attacked me.

[Batcathat]

If you want to quibble like that, people don't say he was assassinated, they say he was murdered. Ulfric walked up to him, announced his intention to kill him, and then did so. Really, if you take away the context of who the people are, its something you can do a dozen times in the Dark Brotherhood quests, up to allowing them to fight back if you feel like it. Torygg stood no chance against Ulfric, and Ulfric never intended to allow it to come to anything other than a fight. Torygg's acceptance speaks only of his personal character, not Ulfric's.

Yes, context matters. Such as the fact that Ulfric challenged Torygg to a fight and Torygg accepted. I don't deny that Ulfric's desired result was for Torygg to die, but that doesn't mean it's automatically murder. What if Ulfric's plan had been to provoke Torygg to such a degree that Torygg attacked him first? Would that also be murder, since Ulfric did it intending for Torygg to die?

And again, there are no signs that anyone attempted to stop what was happening until Ulfric won. Either this was an attack on the High King that no one attempted to stop and the king himself accepted (instead of, say, ordering his guards to defend him) or it was a duel that everyone involved accepted (most probably didn't like it, but they did nothing to stop it) until the wrong guy won and then suddenly it was murder.

EDIT: Why do I keep wanting to spell it "Torvygg"? Especially in a post where I used it roughly a billion times.

[Keltest]

Yes, context matters. Such as the fact that Ulfric challenged Torvygg to a fight and Torvygg accepted. I don't deny that Ulfric's desired result was for Torvygg to die, but that doesn't mean it's automatically murder. What if Ulfric's plan had been to provoke Torvygg to such a degree that Torvygg attacked him first? Would that also be murder, since Ulfric did it intending for Torvygg to die?

And again, there are no signs that anyone attempted to stop what was happening until Ulfric won. Either this was an attack on the High King that no one attempted to stop and the king himself accepted (instead of, say, ordering his guards to defend him) or it was a duel that everyone involved accepted (most probably didn't like it, but they did nothing to stop it) until the wrong guy won and then suddenly it was murder.

Yes it would still be murder, because Ulfric knew that Torygg stood no chance against him. It would just also have been murder if Torygg had won somehow. Its not like this was a skill contest that got out of hand, Ulfric went in there with the specific intention of killing Torygg unprovoked. And Ulfric knew what he was doing was wrong too, because he fled the scene immediately after instead of calling for the Moot to elect a new High King (or, you know, literally anything else that wasnt fleeing justice).

As far as stopping it, we don't know what the circumstances were in court that day, but the Blue Palace does not have an abundance of warriors on hand the way, say, Dragonsreach has. Elisif certainly isnt going to stop Ulfric.

[Batcathat]

Yes it would still be murder, because Ulfric knew that Torygg stood no chance against him. It would just also have been murder if Torygg had won somehow. Its not like this was a skill contest that got out of hand, Ulfric went in there with the specific intention of killing Torygg unprovoked.

Okay, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree about how to define "murder" then. Intent is part of it, yes, but it's not the only part. Again, Torygg accepted the challenge to fight to the death.

And Ulfric knew what he was doing was wrong too, because he fled the scene immediately after instead of calling for the Moot to elect a new High King (or, you know, literally anything else that wasnt fleeing justice).

Yes, the fact that they executed a guy for letting him escape totally suggests that they would have treated Ulfric fairly.

As far as stopping it, we don't know what the circumstances were in court that day, but the Blue Palace does not have an abundance of warriors on hand the way, say, Dragonsreach has. Elisif certainly isnt going to stop Ulfric.

While we can't know for sure without more information, I find it rather unlikely that the highest authorithy in Skyrim didn't have a single guard (or literally anyone else) around to help him. If Ulfric had to cut his way through innocent people to kill the king, I'm sure his opponents would have mentioned that.

There could be different explanations, of course, but I find the most likely one to be that everyone accepted the duel (after all, their king clearly did, so why disagree with him?) until they didn't like the outcome.