Imperials or Stormcloaks, what one?

[Anouck]

and if lore states that Imperial law says that, why would a character who dislikes the Empire care about what the Empire says happened to the last High King? Stormcloaks see things through a different lens than Imperial characters.

All the lore says is that Ulfric challenged Torygg to a duel to the death, that Torygg accepted, and Ulfric killed Torygg. Imperial law (which half of skyrim is trying to break free from) says it was treason and murder.

I believe it was an example. Another, perhaps clearer example being if lore states the sky if blue, and you role play it is in fact green.

You can't come into a debate on facts and lore and say, but in my RP it is green!

it was an example; that is why I said 'for instance'

 

[Jurgarik Greycloak]

and if lore states that Imperial law says that, why would a character who dislikes the Empire care about what the Empire says happened to the last High King? Stormcloaks see things through a different lens than Imperial characters.

All the lore says is that Ulfric challenged Torygg to a duel to the death, that Torygg accepted, and Ulfric killed Torygg. Imperial law (which half of skyrim is trying to break free from) says it was treason and murder.

I believe it was an example. Another, perhaps clearer example being if lore states the sky is blue, and you role play it is in fact green.

You can't come into a debate on facts and lore and say, but in my RP it is green!

like I said, i do not see lore as biased "side with the Imps" or "Side with the Stormcloaks" and I see it rather as it is there to simply back up decisions already made in the character creation process.

 

[Anouck]

Jeremy, like I said..
Of course I understand it when talking about the character. But you should not use that argument to convince, for instance, me. Just because your character roleplays something, that doesn't mean it is now a valid argument, lore or a fact.

does it sound like I am trying to convince you? OR, does it sound like I am simply stating my view of the debate?

It sounds like you are trying to convince someone, yes.
If you state your opinion, you leave the debate after that. You don't start arguing on other people's opinions. You are in the thread for quite a while now, trying to proof others wrong, using your RP as an argument. That is how it comes across.

 

[Seanu Reaves]

All the lore says is that Ulfric challenged Torygg to a duel to the death, that Torygg accepted, and Ulfric killed Torygg. Imperial law (which half of skyrim is trying to break free from) says it was treason and murder.

Even in most warrior cultures, such as the Norse who the Nords are most obviously homage to, think about it. Torygg was basically a young inexperienced boy. Ulfric a weathered veteran who could shout. Now that is enough of an advantage of just martial skill differences. But Ulfric decided to shout. That seems odd to me since he could have proven his strength without using that skill. The question is then why not do the same to say Balgruuf who he has something of a rivalry with? I mean honestly I wonder how much the writers thought about the implications. Because instead of looking strong if you think about it, it makes Ulfric also look weak.

 

[Jurgarik Greycloak]

Jeremy, like I said..
Of course I understand it when talking about the character. But you should not use that argument to convince, for instance, me. Just because your character roleplays something, that doesn't mean it is now a valid argument, lore or a fact.

does it sound like I am trying to convince you? OR, does it sound like I am simply stating my view of the debate?

It sounds like you are trying to convince someone, yes.
If you state your opinion, you leave the debate after that. You don't start arguing on other people's opinions. You are in the thread for quite a while now, trying to proof others wrong, using your RP as an argument. That is how it comes across.

did not sound like that when I wrote it.

once again. the lore is never biased, the people playing the game are biased. using the lore, that states nothing of anything you say it does, is not how i view the game\

an Empire-supporter is not going to care about what a stormcloak's view of the lore is (and say that they deny the lore) and a stormcloak-supporter is not going to care if imperial law says Ulfric is a traitor and a murderer.

 

[DrunkenMage]

like I said, i do not see lore as biased "side with the Imps" or "Side with the Stormcloaks" and I see it rather as it is there to simply back up decisions already made in the character creation process.

I see lore for lore. Like I've said in the past, Yellow Book of Riddles is also counted as lore.

Lore can be grey, lore can be fact, it can be fiction. It can be one sided, it can be two sided.

 

[Anouck]

does it sound like I am trying to convince you? OR, does it sound like I am simply stating my view of the debate?

It sounds like you are trying to convince someone, yes.
If you state your opinion, you leave the debate after that. You don't start arguing on other people's opinions. You are in the thread for quite a while now, trying to proof others wrong, using your RP as an argument. That is how it comes across.

did not sound like that when I wrote it.

once again. the lore is never biased, the people playing the game are biased. using the lore, that states nothing of anything you say it does, is not how i view the game\

an Empire-supporter is not going to care about what a stormcloak's view of the lore is (and say that they deny the lore) and a stormcloak-supporter is not going to care if imperial law says Ulfric is a traitor and a murderer.

Like I said; I get your point on the roleplay thing. I just say it is not a valid argument in a debate like this. And if you are not trying to convince anyone, that is fine. But you asked what you came across like, and I answered.

 

[Jurgarik Greycloak]

like I said, i do not see lore as biased "side with the Imps" or "Side with the Stormcloaks" and I see it rather as it is there to simply back up decisions already made in the character creation process.

I see lore for lore. Like I've said in the past, Yellow Book of Riddles is also counted as lore.

Lore can be grey, lore can be fact, it can be fiction. It can be one sided, it can be two sided.

and you say imperial law says that the duel between Torygg and Ulfric was treason and murder. I would agree...IF lore did not also state that Torygg agreed to it. If I did, then I would have to declare Torygg a traitor as well, no matter the reasoning behind it.

I see lore as the events that have happened in the past, not the biases peopel have that they use for the lore. Like at the summit. Ulfric, being the leader of the stormcloaks, has the final say on the stormcloak side of the truce. That means he does get to decide what is best, just like every Jarl for their hold and like the High King for Skyrim and the Emperor/Elder Council for the entire Empire. it is a maximum power thing. for the Dunmer, it may have started as a purely race-based thing, but right now, windhelm is the seat of the rebellion so taking no side in that is a bad idea, especially if you want/deserve something.

 

[DrunkenMage]

I used Imperial law, as to why the Imperial Legion was going to execute Ulfric Stormcloak. The book 'Legal Basics' and Tullius' dialogue during the Battle for Windhelm.

It doesn't mean Torygg is a traitor, unless he killed himself then technically perhaps.

Lore is the past, present, future if known. Everything is lore, every book, every note, every NPC's dialogue.

Many in Windhelm don't take part in the Stormcloak cause, they're not racially segregated. Many don't contribute to Windhelm's economy, the Dunmer do.

Dunmer expect to be treated the same as they always were, why should they be lesser when others who also don't fight are treated better. The situation with the Dunmer and Argonians, purely racial.

 

[Jurgarik Greycloak]

For the Dunmer, lets say it is racial between the stormcloaks and the Dunmer because the Dunmer, as a race, are generally unhelpful to the rebels. Would that not be racially motivated? would that not help the Dunmer in that case, because they are perpetuating a racial stereotype that the Dunmer are selfish? would it not help the Dunmer in that case to show the Stormcloaks that they can be trusted and can help the rebels free THEIR homeland?

 

[Seanu Reaves]

For the Dunmer, lets say it is racial between the stormcloaks and the Dunmer because the Dunmer, as a race, are generally unhelpful to the rebels. Would that not be racially motivated? would that not help the Dunmer in that case, because they are perpetuating a racial stereotype that the Dunmer are selfish? would it not help the Dunmer in that case to show the Stormcloaks that they can be trusted and can help the rebels free THEIR homeland?

You don't seem to get how Racism works. They actually are helping even though they aren't picking up a sword because they are still paying taxes and such. If they tried to help the Stormcloaks likely wouldn't accept it. Then still complain how they do nothing. Xenophobia isn't pragmatic at all, and again they have no reason to help the people who are for no other reason than just cause being discriminatory towards them for not being Nords. It doesn't matter, If you are not a Nord Skyrim is not your home.

 

[Anouck]

For the Dunmer, lets say it is racial between the stormcloaks and the Dunmer because the Dunmer, as a race, are generally unhelpful to the rebels. Would that not be racially motivated? would that not help the Dunmer in that case, because they are perpetuating a racial stereotype that the Dunmer are selfish? would it not help the Dunmer in that case to show the Stormcloaks that they can be trusted and can help the rebels free THEIR homeland?

What if the Indians start a rebellion to free their homeland. Would you (I just assume you are an American.Just a guess) support them? Most Americans wouldn't, not if that means they have to leave the country where they grew up as well. And the Indians might have a reason because they are just being oppressed by modern day society. The Nords are not.
And there are many many races that do not support the rebels. Such as Imperials. Should we make an Imperial quarter? Or a Breton quarter? For some reason there is only a grey quarter.

You don't justify racism. And disagreeing with the grey quarter doesn't mean you are not a good stormcloak. I don't understand why the majority of the stormies try to make the racial segregation between Dunmer and Nords look okay.
Even if the majority of the Dunmer would be douches (they are not, but lets say they are), then still it would be racism to put that prejudice on the head of EVERY dunmer. Forcing them to live in the grey quarter because of their race = racism.

 

[Jurgarik Greycloak]

For the Dunmer, lets say it is racial between the stormcloaks and the Dunmer because the Dunmer, as a race, are generally unhelpful to the rebels. Would that not be racially motivated? would that not help the Dunmer in that case, because they are perpetuating a racial stereotype that the Dunmer are selfish? would it not help the Dunmer in that case to show the Stormcloaks that they can be trusted and can help the rebels free THEIR homeland?

You don't seem to get how Racism works. They actually are helping even though they aren't picking up a sword because they are still paying taxes and such. If they tried to help the Stormcloaks likely wouldn't accept it. Then still complain how they do nothing. Xenophobia isn't pragmatic at all, and again they have no reason to help the people who are for no other reason than just cause being discriminatory towards them for not being Nords. It doesn't matter, If you are not a Nord Skyrim is not your home.

who are they helping? I do not know of an instant where they say they donated food or coins to the stormcloak cause? just working for the city is not working for the rebellion. besides, if the stormcloaks/nords are not going to help them based on their race, why bloddy wait for the Empire to solve your problems? Why not roll up your sleeves and fix the grey quarter yourselves?

 

[Seanu Reaves]

They pay taxes and farm the land. The city of Windhelm is the rebel capital. Are you really gonna tell me... Ulfric is gonna get all this money and go "Hmmm I could fund my war... or I could help the invading Ash faces or even renovate my Palace."

Please.

 

[Anouck]

For the Dunmer, lets say it is racial between the stormcloaks and the Dunmer because the Dunmer, as a race, are generally unhelpful to the rebels. Would that not be racially motivated? would that not help the Dunmer in that case, because they are perpetuating a racial stereotype that the Dunmer are selfish? would it not help the Dunmer in that case to show the Stormcloaks that they can be trusted and can help the rebels free THEIR homeland?

You don't seem to get how Racism works. They actually are helping even though they aren't picking up a sword because they are still paying taxes and such. If they tried to help the Stormcloaks likely wouldn't accept it. Then still complain how they do nothing. Xenophobia isn't pragmatic at all, and again they have no reason to help the people who are for no other reason than just cause being discriminatory towards them for not being Nords. It doesn't matter, If you are not a Nord Skyrim is not your home.

who are they helping? I do not know of an instant where they say they donated food or coins to the stormcloak cause? just working for the city is not working for the rebellion.

Oooh the sweet irony. The hypocrisy...

The Thalmor don't allow us to worship our own Gods! They force their believes down our throats. Lets revolt!

WHAT?! You disagree with the Stormcloaks? How dare you not sharing our superior opinion? How dare you not donating your money to the rebels?! What? You live in a getto because we put you there, only because you are a dark elf? Well, Skyrim belongs to the Nords!

Am I the only one who hears the error?
Also; war gets funded by taxes. And guess who also pays taxes? The Dunmer...

 

[Seanu Reaves]

The funny thing is the Thalmor didn't actually have the power to enforce that ruling... Until the revolt occurred.

 

[Jurgarik Greycloak]

You don't seem to get how Racism works. They actually are helping even though they aren't picking up a sword because they are still paying taxes and such. If they tried to help the Stormcloaks likely wouldn't accept it. Then still complain how they do nothing. Xenophobia isn't pragmatic at all, and again they have no reason to help the people who are for no other reason than just cause being discriminatory towards them for not being Nords. It doesn't matter, If you are not a Nord Skyrim is not your home.

who are they helping? I do not know of an instant where they say they donated food or coins to the stormcloak cause? just working for the city is not working for the rebellion.

Oooh the sweet irony. The hypocrisy...

The Thalmor don't allow us to worship our own Gods! They force their believes down our throats. Lets revolt!

WHAT?! You disagree with the Stormcloaks? How dare you not sharing our superior opinion? How dare you not donating your money to the rebels?! What? You live in a getto because we put you there, only because you are a dark elf? Well, Skyrim belongs to the Nords!

Am I the only one who hears the error?
Also; war gets funded by taxes. And guess who also pays taxes? The Dunmer...

and likely everyone else in windhelm. it is not just the Dunmer who are paying the taxes. besides if the Dunmer do not like the way things are, they should fix it themselves by fixing the grey quarter, not complaining until you get someone who will help you for just asking for their help.

 

[Jurgarik Greycloak]

The funny thing is the Thalmor didn't actually have the power to enforce that ruling... Until the Markarth incident occurred.

fixed that with the correct problem.

 

[Seanu Reaves]

Do you not understand how oppression works? You subjugate a people and hold them by the throat so they cannot do anything against you.

They are doing what they can. You act like they are sitting around. No they are in communication with Brunwulf Free-Winter who is trying to get something resembling equality.

 

[Seanu Reaves]

The funny thing is the Thalmor didn't actually have the power to enforce that ruling... Until the Markarth incident occurred.

fixed that with the correct problem.

Thank you for correcting my words. But still the point stands there. He created a problem that just so happens to help his ambition to become High King.