Imperials or Stormcloaks, what one?

[DrunkenMage]

Hah. You think fast and type fast.

My 'Why not?' was actually directed at why you didn't want to give Stormcloaks a good defense.

There are certain practices of the Empire that are indefensible, I love my Empire Talking it down isn't easy.

 

[Stephen Daidalus]

There are certain practices of the Empire that are indefensible, I love my Empire Talking it down isn't easy.

As Ozan pointed out repeatedly, yes.

You must a love a thing in spite of its flaws, yes? To love with full knowledge and clear vision is a deeper love than the blind love of infatuation.

 

[DrunkenMage]

As Ozan pointed out repeatedly, yes.

You must a love a thing in spite of its flaws, yes? To love with full knowledge and clear vision is a deeper love than the blind love of infatuation.

I like the Empire, my character doesn't love it with extreme passion, he doesn't agree with many practices. He's also against many terms of the treaty and having to uphold it and with the rebellion, those boys in blue aren't quite the enemy, he commanded some of them. What keeps him is he swore an oath that he can't simply dismiss.

"You swore an oath of loyalty to the Emperor, do you remember that?" - General Tullius

 

[Stephen Daidalus]

I like the Empire, my character doesn't love it with extreme passion, he doesn't agree with many practices. He's also against many terms of the treaty and having to uphold it and with the rebellion, those boys in blue aren't quite the enemy, he commanded some of them. What keeps him is he swore an oath that he can't simply dismiss.

"You swore an oath of loyalty to the Emperor, do you remember that?" - General Tullius

I wouldn't support a cause I questioned simply because of an oath, any more than I'd stay in a bad marriage because the popular phrase 'until death do us part' was in the vows. But perhaps I'm unusual in that. And what our Skyrim characters choose to do is not always what we would do in similar situations.

Anyway, I can't believe I actually posted in this thread, despite having no desire to debate the issues. I shall gracefully exit now, not because I think it's an unworthy debate (clearly it's not) but because I don't have the stamina for it. I continue to admire those, most especially you, who do.

 

[DrunkenMage]

I wouldn't support a cause I questioned simply because of an oath, any more than I'd stay in a bad marriage because the popular phrase 'until death do us part' was in the vows. But perhaps I'm unusual in that. And what our Skyrim characters choose to do is not always what we would do in similar situations.

Anyway, I can't believe I actually posted in this thread, despite having no desire to debate the issues. I shall gracefully exit now, not because I think it's an unworthy debate (clearly it's not) but because I don't have the stamina for it. I continue to admire those, most especially you, who do.

In the end, all a man is worth, is his word. Break that, what remains?

 

[Stephen Daidalus]

In the end, all a man is worth, is his word. Break that, what remains?

Grrr (at feeling the compulsion to reply). The lifetime vow is silly, in my opinion, and a completely reasonable way to reply is, 'No, sorry. If you want me for life, regardless of what you do from now on, whatever atrocities you commit, whatever violations of my core beliefs you commit, I cannot agree.'

What remains when you break your word because you gave it under coercive circumstances ('Agree to this vow forever and ever, or you cannot join') is who you are as a person, your own moral core. Whether you agree to farm this out to others by making vows and giving them permanent and complete control of your moral decisions or choose to remain accountable to yourself is up to you.

 

[Docta Corvina]

In the end, all a man is worth, is his word. Break that, what remains?

Ah, but if you feel as though the thing you swore loyalty to has betrayed you, you might at least reconsider your following. Rightly or wrongly, the Stormcloak ex-Legionnaires feel betrayed. Legionnaires can say what they want about the wrongheadedness of feeling that way. But the fact is that that emotion, that profound sting of perceived betrayal is enough to compel a shifting of loyalty. Especially when they believe it comes at the expense of all they hold most dear.

 

[DrunkenMage]

Ah, but if you feel as though the thing you swore loyalty to has betrayed you, you might at least reconsider your following. Rightly or wrongly, the Stormcloak ex-Legionnaires feel betrayed. Legionnaires can say what they want about the wrongheadedness of feeling that way. But the fact is that that emotion, that profound sting of perceived betrayal is enough to compel a shifting of loyalty. Especially when they believe it comes at the expense of all they hold most dear.

My character is not a politician, his political beliefs do not matter when it comes down to the lives of those he serves with. The Legion doesn't fight for petty Jarls or Counts and lowly nobles. He's not a mercenary for hire, he wasn't forced to join the Legion. He takes his oath of loyalty very seriously, not just to leave when the going gets tough. He didn't fight in the Great War so he could abandon his brothers in arms when the Empire needs peace and stability the most.

 

[Stephen Daidalus]

My character is not a politician, his political beliefs do not matter when it comes down to the lives of those he serves with. The Legion doesn't fight for petty Jarls or Counts and lowly nobles. He's not a mercenary for hire, he wasn't forced to join the Legion. He takes his oath of loyalty very seriously, not just to leave when the going gets tough. He didn't fight in the Great War so he could abandon his brothers in arms when the Empire needs peace and stability the most.

It's an age old and very compelling literary (mythic, psychological, philosophical) question.

We face moral dilemmas. On the one hand, loyalty, on the other, our personal moral beliefs. When these clash, great stories surely follow.

 

[DrunkenMage]

It's an age old and very compelling literary (mythic, psychological, philosophical) question.

We face moral dilemmas. On the one hand, loyalty, on the other, our personal moral beliefs. When these clash, great stories surely follow.

The Legions are very proud, they date back to the First Era. Would you betray those who look up to you, who depend on your leadership, though the tough question for many of these officers, would you bring shame to your Legion?

 

[Docta Corvina]

My character is not a politician, his political beliefs do not matter when it comes down to the lives of those he serves with. The Legion doesn't fight for petty Jarls or Counts and lowly nobles. He's not a mercenary for hire, he wasn't forced to join the Legion. He takes his oath of loyalty very seriously, not just to leave when the going gets tough. He didn't fight in the Great War so he could abandon his brothers in arms when the Empire needs peace and stability the most.

And I would not say that this is less than admirable. I have no doubt that your character is fighting for what he believes to be in Tamriel's best interests and takes his oath most seriously. I would simply argue that the Stormcloak Nords are collectively fighting to reject a very real and immediate threat to their homeland - the Thalmor - and they feel betrayed and abandoned as they look around and see an untenable status quo. Just as Nord Legionnaires empathize with their countrymen in blue, so can I. It's unfortunate that Ulfric is their leader, and it remains to be seen what would become of the rebellion efforts after his death, since the game's timetable doesn't allow us to see that far ahead. So I can't really comment on the legacy of it all.

However, the Stormcloaks' chief complaints are valid. Forget the overly jingoistic material we hear from Ulfric and Galmar. But the heartfelt expressions from the Stormcloak footmen, the "Ralofs" of the ranks - that's real. The sentiments of the "everymen", who are fighting for their homes and loved ones and what they see as central to their current culture. We can't forget that at the end of the day, the Imperial Nords and Stormcloak Nords are two sides to the same coin.

 

[DrunkenMage]

And I would not say that this is less than admirable. I have no doubt that your character is fighting for what he believes to be in Tamriel's best interests and takes his oath most seriously. I would simply argue that the Stormcloak Nords are collectively fighting to reject a very real and immediate threat to their homeland - the Thalmor - and they feel betrayed and abandoned as they look around and see an untenable status quo. Just as Nord Legionnaires empathize with their countrymen in blue, so can I. It's unfortunate that Ulfric is their leader, and it remains to be seen what would become of the rebellion efforts after his death, since the game's timetable doesn't allow us to see that far ahead. So I can't really comment on the legacy of it all.

However, the Stormcloaks' chief complaints are valid. Forget the overly jingoistic material we hear from Ulfric and Galmar. But the heartfelt expressions from the Stormcloak footmen, the "Ralofs" of the ranks - that's real. The sentiments of the "every men", who are fighting for their homes and loved ones and what they see as central to their current culture. We can't forget that at the end of the day, the Imperial Nords and Stormcloak Nords are two sides to the same coin.

Many Legionnaire's are fighting for their homes and their loved ones also. Pushing out the Empire removes many Legionnaire's from their homes and families. I will not say fighting for your homeland is not admirable, but Stormcloaks aren't the only group fighting for their homes. Many people forget that, they always assume they're fighting Imperials, even many threads are wrong about this. It isn't Imperials vs Stormcloaks, because it's the Legion and the Legion in Skyrim has many races within it. You have Breton Legate, Altmer Legate, Dunmer Legate, Imperial Legate, Nord Legate, you have Nord and Imperial soldiers, I also came across a Redguard Quartermaster (I could tell cause he had a hair style that only redguards can use)

"I don't fight for the glory of the Empire, nor do I glory in the death of my kinsmen. I fight to bring peace and order to my homeland." - Rikke

 

[Docta Corvina]

Many Legionnaire's are fighting for their homes and their loved ones also. Pushing out the Empire removes many Legionnaire's from their homes and families. I will not say fighting for your homeland is not admirable, but Stormcloaks aren't the only group fighting for their homes. Many people forget that, they always assume they're fighting Imperials, even many threads are wrong about this. It isn't Imperials vs Stormcloaks, because it's the Legion and the Legion in Skyrim has many races within it. You have Breton Legate, Altmer Legate, Dunmer Legate, Imperial Legate, Nord Legate, you have Nord and Imperial soldiers, I also came across a Redguard Quartermaster (I could tell cause he had a hair style that only redguards can use)

"I don't fight for the glory of the Empire, nor do I glory in the death of my kinsmen. I fight to bring peace and order to my homeland." - Rikke

This is quite true. And it's also fair to point out that the worship of Talos is not exclusive to Nords. Obviously, Tiber Septim is a rather considerable portion of the Empire's history and identity, and the Thalmor's affront to his legitimacy as a Divine is something of a double slap in the face to the Empire itself.

Whether it has to do with Ulfric's agitation or not, many Nords are simply that deeply troubled by the Thalmor encroachment on their land and in their very culture. Can you blame the farmer who, after his son was hauled off to some Thalmor prison and never heard from again because he was outed for wearing a Talos amulet under his tunic, in his anger and despair seeks to fight back - especially because when he looks around, he sees nothing happening to keep these offenders at bay? No end to the oppression?

Now imagine that this farmer was once a Legionnaire.

This is where we are in Skyrim right now. This is a taste of what's happening. And it's illustrative of at least some of the people lining up to fight in Ulfric's ranks. Every soldier's story is different. But love, hate, compassion, apathy and perceived betrayal all have their roles to play. It can be complicated. But it's most certainly tragic.

 

[DrunkenMage]

This is quite true. And it's also fair to point out that the worship of Talos is not exclusive to Nords. Obviously, Tiber Septim is a rather considerable portion of the Empire's history and identity, and the Thalmor's affront to his legitimacy as a Divine is something of a double slap in the face to the Empire itself.

Whether it has to do with Ulfric's agitation or not, many Nords are simply that deeply troubled by the Thalmor encroachment on their land and in their very culture. Can you blame the farmer who, after his son was hauled off to some Thalmor prison and never heard from again because he was outed for wearing a Talos amulet under his tunic, in his anger and despair seeks to fight back - especially because when he looks around, he sees nothing happening to keep these offenders at bay? No end to the oppression?

Now imagine that this farmer was once a Legionnaire.

This is where we are in Skyrim right now. This is a taste of what's happening. And it's illustrative of at least some of the people lining up to fight in Ulfric's ranks. Every soldier's story is different. But love, hate, compassion, apathy and perceived betrayal all have their roles to play. It can be complicated. But it's most certainly tragic.

The Legion suspects the Thalmor are behind this unrest in Skyrim, the first step is springing a trap is knowing of it's existence. Are the Empire the true threat to Skyrim? Or are the Stormcloaks the threat to Skryim? You don't see the Legions attacking a neutral Nordic city with fire and force. Ulfric's segregation policy of the Dunmer, the banishment of Argonians from his very city walls. The unwillingness to aid non Nordic races within the borders of Eastmarch when they're attacked by bandits. Calling Dunmer 'lesser beings' the Stormcloaks have more in common with the Thalmor than they would like to believe.

Can you blame the Empire when the Thalmor used Ulfric's rebellion to allow their Talos hunt to the extremes, when the Legions couldn't uphold their treaty agreements and the Thalmor now drag off people in the middle of the night to send supporters flocking to Ulfric's door. The Legion didn't start this rebellion, Ulfric hit first and he needs to answer for what he started. Tullius: "You started this war, plunged Skyrim into chaos, and now the Empire is going to put you down, and restore the peace."

There were peaceful alternatives, though peace doesn't make a good song. Is that what is best for Skyrim? For a man who is ruled by his ego and his image?

Galmar: "Just kill him and let's be done with it already."
Ulfric: "Come, Galmar. Where's your sense of the dramatic moment?"
Galmar: "By the gods! If it's a good ending to some damn story you're after"

Tullius: "Right. Well?"
Ulfric: "Let the Dragonborn be the one to do it. It'll make for a better song."
Tullius: "Song or not, I just want it done."

Stories and songs, how may should die for an ending to his song or story? Hundreds of Nords, thousands?

 

[DrunkenMage]

Are the Stormcloaks fighting for Skyrim or are they fighting for Ulfric? Their oath says Ulfric.

"I do swear my blood and honor to the service of Ulfric Stormcloak Jarl of Windhelm and true High King of Skyrim. As Talos is my witness, may this oath bind me to death and beyond..."

 

[Docta Corvina]

The Legion suspects the Thalmor are behind this unrest in Skyrim, the first step is springing a trap is knowing of it's existence. Are the Empire the true threat to Skyrim? Or are the Stormcloaks the threat to Skryim? You don't see the Legions attacking a neutral Nordic city with fire and force. Ulfric's segregation policy of the Dunmer, the banishment of Argonians from his very city walls. The unwillingness to aid non Nordic races within the borders of Eastmarch when they're attacked by bandits. Calling Dunmer 'lesser beings' the Stormcloaks have more in common with the Thalmor than they would like to believe.

Can you blame the Empire when the Thalmor used Ulfric's rebellion to allow their Talos hunt to the extremes, when the Legions couldn't uphold their treaty agreements and the Thalmor now drag off people in the middle of the night to send supporters flocking to Ulfric's door. The Legion didn't start this rebellion, Ulfric hit first and he needs to answer for what he started. Tullius: "You started this war, plunged Skyrim into chaos, and now the Empire is going to put you down, and restore the peace."

There were peaceful alternatives, though peace doesn't make a good song. Is that what is best for Skyrim? For a man who is ruled by his ego and his image?

Galmar: "Just kill him and let's be done with it already."
Ulfric: "Come, Galmar. Where's your sense of the dramatic moment?"
Galmar: "By the gods! If it's a good ending to some damn story you're after"

Tullius: "Right. Well?"
Ulfric: "Let the Dragonborn be the one to do it. It'll make for a better song."
Tullius: "Song or not, I just want it done."

Stories and songs, how may should die for an ending to his song or story? Hundreds of Nords, thousands?

That's one thing both sides agree on, that the Thalmor are the true enemy. The problem is that the Stormcloaks and their sympathizers see the Thalmor free to do what they will, while the Empire's agents/representatives are seen as basically conveying either, "Sorry, but it's just the way things are" or perhaps even less compassionately, "oh, you Nords and your stubborn ways". What the rebelling Nords see when they look around is a direct attack on their homes. They face a situation that they cannot and will not abide. Even Legion Nords like Rikke express deepest regret at the circumstances, even musing that the Thalmor's inquisitions need to stop, that they're only "making things worse". She means for this to happen once the rebellion is quashed, but the reality is clear that it's not presently doing anything to win over hearts and minds on the ground. It's only fueling the very real feelings of betrayal on the part of ex-Legionnaires and non alike.

I also think that more than a few Stormcloaks would agree that Ulfric is far from a Christ-like Talos-like savior. And many would rather see someone like a Brunwulf (sans the Imperial support, obviously) leading all of Skyrim's people out of the bleakness of Thalmor oppression and perceived Imperial inaction. There are those who speak with unease about Ulfric as a person, but they are willing (at least for now) to fight under his banner - because they see the present alternative as simply unacceptable. It is as unacceptable to them as the status quo.

Really, Ulfric is his own movement's worst enemy. And in so many ways. It's often stated by people who say themselves to be Imperial-siding or even neutral that the Stormcloaks have a basic grievance that is actually quite sympathetic on its own merits. But when put in the context of the leadership, the willingness to support it suffers some serious wavering if not full-on erosion. I still maintain that had Ralof been in Ulfric's place, the entire dynamic would be quite different. Being a Stormcloak doesn't necessarily mean a de facto embrace of all of Ulfric's Windhelm policies. Laila Law-Giver, though a Jarl of questionable aptitude, is a Stormcloak sympathizer but does not run Riften with any obvious racially constraining policy in effect - at least not to my knowledge. I think it's fair to believe that while some or even many Stormcloaks may well be fiercely xenophobic and unapologetic in their nativism, even an individual of a non-Nord race can support the case for Thalmor expulsion from the province.

And that's what is going to make the RP so much fun - every character will be coming at it with a varying perspective. Even those on the same side.

 

[DrunkenMage]

That's one thing both sides agree on, that the Thalmor are the true enemy. The problem is that the Stormcloaks and their sympathizers see the Thalmor free to do what they will, while the Empire's agents/representatives are seen as basically conveying either, "Sorry, but it's just the way things are" or perhaps even less compassionately, "oh, you Nords and your stubborn ways". What the rebelling Nords see when they look around is a direct attack on their homes. They face a situation that they cannot and will not abide. Even Legion Nords like Rikke express deepest regret at the circumstances, even musing that the Thalmor's inquisitions need to stop, that they're only "making things worse". She means for this to happen once the rebellion is quashed, but the reality is clear that it's not presently doing anything to win over hearts and minds on the ground. It's only fueling the very real feelings of betrayal on the part of ex-Legionnaires and non alike.

I also think that more than a few Stormcloaks would agree that Ulfric is far from a Christ-like Talos-like savior. And many would rather see someone like a Brunwulf (sans the Imperial support, obviously) leading all of Skyrim's people out of the bleakness of Thalmor oppression and perceived Imperial inaction. There are those who speak with unease about Ulfric as a person, but they are willing (at least for now) to fight under his banner - because they see the present alternative as simply unacceptable. It is as unacceptable to them as the status quo.

Really, Ulfric is his own movement's worst enemy. And in so many ways. It's often stated by people who say themselves to be Imperial-siding or even neutral that the Stormcloaks have a basic grievance that is actually quite sympathetic on its own merits. But when put in the context of the leadership, the willingness to support it suffers some serious wavering if not full-on erosion. I still maintain that had Ralof been in Ulfric's place, the entire dynamic would be quite different. Being a Stormcloak doesn't necessarily mean a de facto embrace of all of Ulfric's Windhelm policies. Laila Law-Giver, though a Jarl of questionable aptitude, is a Stormcloak sympathizer but does not run Riften with any obvious racially constraining policy in effect - at least not to my knowledge. I think it's fair to believe that while some or even many Stormcloaks may well be fiercely xenophobic and unapologetic in their nativism, even an individual of a non-Nord race can support the case for Thalmor expulsion from the province.

And that's what is going to make the RP so much fun - every character will be coming at it with a varying perspective. Even those on the same side.

Well for the very first time, I have nothing to say. You left me speechless, I see now why the Legion hired you. We use you for diplomatic situations where violence can be avoided.

Well I always assumed since Jarls are largely independent, that Ulfric wouldn't force policies on his allies until he's High King. Using Galmar to make sure they follow the orders, he gets put in charge of keeping the Jarls in line and making sure they're generally following orders, so we may see policy changes after his take over. Though I do know Laila supports the Stormcloaks but has little faith in Ulfric himself.

So this RP, is it something like Season Unending? I don't really know what you have in your mind as to what you want.

 

[Wildroses]

Well, my newest character has just decided to join the Imperials.

Why? Because I'm roleplaying her as hunting down her stolen family heirlooms (which are randomly generated levelled loot). One she found in a merchant shop, and I pulled out my system of numbered leads and used a random number generator, discovering that the person who sold that item to the merchant was an Imperial soldier heading to Falkreath Imperial camp.

After two hours walking in circles, I discovered that Falkreath Imperial Camp does not appear unless the Civil War questline has been started.

So, in essence, I'm joining the Imperials to make a tiny little camp in an unimportant part of Skyrim which is already allied to the Imperials spawn.

I defy you, ladies and gentlemen, to come up with a sillier reason to pick a side than that one.

 

[Ivory]

So this RP, is it something like Season Unending? I don't really know what you have in your mind as to what you want.

I too am curious as to the means of this. Depending on how this is going to play out will influcence my character over all from the start. I'm eager to draw out further plans for this.

 

[Locks066]

i can see many reasons to join either side. It all comes down to what your choice and belief of this situation or war. Political as the real politics theirs alot to know. Stormcloaks are simply fighting to keep their traditions alive. But are disowning all who aint nords. Imperials are fighting so that the empire may stand a chance to kill of the elfs that nearly crushed the entire empire. But signed the treaty in the process. sure the imperials were going to cut of your head but if u speak with hadva he explains it all and says it was all a big misunderstanding.

But politics wise my personal choice is the imperials. The stormcloaks would not be able to hold of the armies of thalmor for long being so little in numbers and then suddenly before you know it thalmor own skyrim. The imperials are all the armies that aint thalmor under one flag sure sacrifices were made but it dont mean it will stay like that forever because when the thalmor go so will their rules and all the empire will be safe. the stormcloaks are not bad guys just nords who have very strong beleif in what they beleive in and i wont fault them for that.