So I am in the midst of Skyrim and I am torn on which faction to support. I know that High Elves have a tie to the Empire due to the Aldmeri Dominion, but is it unrealistic to have a high elf join the Stormcloaks?

The Aldmeri Dominion is nominally controlled by the Thalmor, who are actually not particularly popular even among the High Elves. It seems reasonable a player character could be a dissident from the Summerset Isles, or maybe your character has never been there and feels no loyalty to the Dominion.

Don't sweat it too much

It's Skyrim, nothing you do really matters. I mean, I love the game, but story-wise, it's utter garbage. You kill the FECKING EMPEROR and everyone is liek "Oh, ok, no probs, brah!". It's really, really bad.

Well the story also drops constant hints that the Medes aren't very popular either. The Council, while they might not all want him dead, is implied to be particularly unconcerned about the Dynasty losing power. It makes sense too, since with the fall of the Septims the Council had political power for about 20 years (might need to check that) before some merchant named Mede bought his way to being Emperor. It's a history that doesn't make for loyalty. What happens is a pretty cut and dry case of Collapsing Empire syndrome.

There are always going to be individuals bucking the trend in any large scale politically opposing factions. In Skyrim there are Nords who are perfectly happy with the Empire and can't stand Ulfric, and there are Imperials who would rather see the High King ruling the land again. So it's not a massive stretch to imagine a High Elf that feels aligned to the Stormcloaks' goals.

Nah. The Stormcloaks like Elves, or anybody really, that joins their cause and takes up arms for Ulfric. The Dark Elves in Windhelm are disliked partly because they won't help the Stormcloaks.

Eh. One of things that makes Ulfric compelling is that it's really hard to tell if he's racist or not. He makes a lot of disparaging comments directed at Elves but its unclear if he's really angry at the Thalmor or all Elves in general (and of course, segregation, though he has his excuse). There's no denying that the Storm Cloak movement itself has racist undertones.

I'd go further than undertones, the Stormcloaks do exhibit outright racism. Just talk to the Imperial Blacksmith on Whiterun after the Stormcloaks take it. The Stormcloak soldiers are highly reluctant to buy things from her, and only buy what little they do because her husband is a Nord. There's also that one Stormcloak general who talks about driving "the Elves" out of Skyrim.

Also, I would call Ulfric a bit of a racist, really. He has no regard for Elvish citizens who don't pledge themselves to his army. Also note that his city has not one, but two segregated areas for other races (the Argonians can't leave the docks). He could try and win his non-Nord citizens over with some nice gestures, make a speech about how all citizens need to work together against "the Imperial menace", but apparently he doesn't feel that they're worth the effort.

Here's a scenario.

It is easier for the Dominion to take over Skyrim if it ain't part of the Empire no more, and it'll also weaken the Empire itself. Win-win for the Thalmor and their Aldmeri Dominion.
So, they send an infiltrator to help dem Stormcloaks take Skyrim. He/she just happens to be you.

And yeah, Stormcloaks are racist bastards.

 thenoobbomb wrote:
It is easier for the Dominion to take over Skyrim if it ain't part of the Empire no more, and it'll also weaken the Empire itself. Win-win for the Thalmor and their Aldmeri Dominion.

Exactly. It's similar to how they handled Hammerfell and Elsweyr, really. Divide and conquer, they break the Empire down a province at a time so they can roll over anywhere they want at their leisure.

Anyways, as a High Elf in fancy Thalmor clothing, I joined the Imperials, and killed Ulfric with a Blades sword

I personally am not a fan of either. The empire seems to be a mere shadow of its former self and the Stormcloaks appear to be a racist faction. Ideally, I would join neither, but that's clearly not an option. Lol

 Troike wrote:


Also, I would call Ulfric a bit of a racist, really. He has no regard for Elvish citizens who don't pledge themselves to his army.

That's not racism. He has no regard for anyone who doesn't pledge to his cause. Plenty of his followers seem to have a Nord-supremacist view however.

Also in the intro, the Imperials were about to decapitate you. On my first playthrough there was no hesitation, Stormcloaks all the way (played a Dunmer).

Yeah the game didn't do much to make me reasonably see why my character, who is apparently completely oblivious to current events in Tamriel, would side with the Empire after they just decided to lop my head off for apparently just being somewhere some Stormcloaks also happened to be. And poor Lokir. Bro didn't deserve to go like that man.

 Havok210 wrote:
I personally am not a fan of either. The empire seems to be a mere shadow of its former self and the Stormcloaks appear to be a racist faction. Ideally, I would join neither, but that's clearly not an option. Lol

Oh, it absolutely is. You can completely ignore the Civil War questlines, and although there's a point in which you have to get involved to progress the Main Quest...

...you still don't have to pick a side. You're just getting them to stop fighting so you can resolve your business with the dragons.

MarsNZ wrote:
That's not racism. He has no regard for anyone who doesn't pledge to his cause. Plenty of his followers seem to have a Nord-supremacist view however.

True, he has little regard for anybody who doesn't bow down to him. And yet Windhelm, the city that he personally rules over, has not one, but two segregated areas for non-nords.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-4hfg01l2w

His response when told of the Dark Elves being unhappy is to brush them off, and suspect them of treachery. He could easily make some effort to try and win them over or at least calm them down, but he instead doesn't see them as worth it. Even if it's not racially motivated, he still has a fairly low opinion of them.

MarsNZ wrote:
Also in the intro, the Imperials were about to decapitate you. On my first playthrough there was no hesitation, Stormcloaks all the way (played a Dunmer).

 LordofHats wrote:
Yeah the game didn't do much to make me reasonably see why my character, who is apparently completely oblivious to current events in Tamriel, would side with the Empire after they just decided to lop my head off for apparently just being somewhere some Stormcloaks also happened to be. And poor Lokir. Bro didn't deserve to go like that man.

That's a clever thing about the intro. At first, you're quite inclined to side against the Imperials. But as time goes on, you start to uncover evidence that the Stormcloaks are hardly good. Chiefly the Stormcloaks being overtly racist, the Thalmor viewing Ulfric Stormcloak as an asset and Ulfric being antagonistic towards Whiterun simply because they will not side with him. The Imperials meanwhile are tolerant of other races, and are expecting to fight the Thalmor in the near future (a fight which they stand the best chance of winning with Skyrim).

It seems apparent to me that the Stormcloaks are racists. In the TES world, that's not a man versus mer thing. They're talking about Nords particularly, not humans generally, when they say that Skyrim belongs to the Nords (e.g., not the Breton Forsworn). On the other hand, they don't seem bent on lording it over every other race throughout the world; that would be the Thalmor. So I put it to you, racism is a given in the TES world insofar as we're only talking about a belief that a certain race should be dominant in a certain geographical area, such as Nords in Skyrim or Dunmer on Morrowind.

For those of you who played Morrowind, you'll remember that the Dunmer are even worse than the Nords when it comes to this sort of racism. I felt sorry for the Dunmer of Windhelm until I remembered how I was treated everywhere throughout Vvardenfell. Also, Dunmer once commonly held non-Dunmer races (especially Argonians) as slaves. Ulfric may segregate the Dunmer into a ghetto (NB: non-Dunmer were once only allowed to live in/visit a single canton of the city of Vivec) but I don't see him, or any other Nord, taking Dunmer slaves.

Indeed, it appears that the Ayleids of old invented slavery when they enslaved the Nords. You guys have to remember that the Ayleids were overthrown by a human slave revolt, led by St. Alessia -- who in turn founded the First Cyrodilic Empire. The parallels to the agenda of the Third Aldmeri Dominion are obvious: the Thalmor are trying to turn back the clock, back to Ayleid times. They have an explicitly supremacist perspective on the entire world, not just the Valenwoood or the Summerset Isles.

Any High Elf PC that rejects the notion of an Elven "master race" enslaving all other races could easily join up with Ulfric, perhaps seeing (as the Stormcloaks tend to) the Empire as a mere puppet state of the Thalmor.

 Manchu wrote:
For those of you who played Morrowind, you'll remember that the Dunmer are even worse than the Nords when it comes to this sort of racism. I felt sorry for the Dunmer of Windhelm until I remembered how I was treated everywhere throughout Vvardenfell. Also, Dunmer once commonly held non-Dunmer races (especially Argonians) as slaves. Ulfric may segregate the Dunmer into a ghetto (NB: non-Dunmer were once only allowed to live in/visit a single canton of the city of Vivec) but I don't see him, or any other Nord, taking Dunmer slaves.

Just because Morrowind had plenty of racism doesn't legitimise the Nord racism towards the Dark Elves.

 Manchu wrote:
On the other hand, they don't seem bent on lording it over every other race throughout the world

I disagree. Their behaviour towards Whiterun's Imperial blacksmith strongly suggests otherwise.

 Troike wrote:
Just because Morrowind had plenty of racism doesn't legitimise the Nord racism towards the Dark Elves.

I'm pointing out that there's a history there, as well as a difference. The Dunmer are as xenophobic as they come in TES (only the Thalmor are more racist and only because they take it on the road). When their own homeland was devastated by the most recent eruption of Red Mountain, they fled into the lands of their former slaves. Yes, they are second-class citizens in Windhelm -- but they are citizens nonetheless and not, as according to their own practice, slaves by virtue of being "foreigners." Oh and by the way, a Nord king even gave them Solstheim to settle in the wake of the destruction of Vvardenfell.

 Troike wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
On the other hand, they don't seem bent on lording it over every other race throughout the world

I disagree. Their behaviour towards Whiterun's Imperial blacksmith strongly suggests otherwise.

Do you really not see the difference? On the one hand, the Thalmor came to Skyrim to stamp out the worship of Talos, the hero-god of humanity. On the other hand, Adrienne Avenicci is allowed to own and operate a shop in a city controlled by the Stormcloaks, even if the Stormcloaks themselves do not care to buy much from her. If this is a matter of her race, it is more than superficial: her father, after all, is the steward of Balgruf who sided with the Empire against Ulfric.

If the Stormcloaks were as racist as you seem to think, I doubt they would allow Adrienne to remain in Whiterun -- much less allowing her to not only own property but a business. Also, you may have forgotten or not seen it but Idolaf Battle-Born also commissions weapons for the Imperial army from Adrienne because Jorland Grey-Mane won't make them. I'd say the Stormcloaks are going pretty damn easy on her.

 Manchu wrote:
I'm pointing out that there's a history there, as well as a difference. The Dunmer are as xenophobic as they come in TES. When their own homeland was devastated by the most recent eruption of Red Mountain, they fled into the lands of their former slaves. Yes, they are second-class citizens in Windhelm -- but they are citizens nonetheless and not, as according to their own practice, slaves by virtue of being "foreigners." Oh and by the way, a Nord king even gave them Solstheim to settle in the wake of the destruction of Vvardenfell.

But the Dunmer in Windhelm aren't particularly racist, most seeming to just want fair treatment from the Nords or reacting to how the Nords have treated them. And again, the fact that Ulfric had treated them better than their ancestors treated other races does not legitimise the racism towards Dark Elves in any way.

And yes a Nord king gave them land, but Ulfric was not that king.

 Manchu wrote:
[If the Stormcloaks were as racist as you seem to think, I doubt they would allow Adrienne to remain in Whiterun -- much less allowing her to not only own property but a business. Also, you may have forgotten or not seen it but Idolaf Battle-Born also commissions weapons for the Imperial army from Adrienne because Jorland Grey-Mane won't make them. I'd say the Stormcloaks are going pretty damn easy on her.

Not exactly what I meant. You said that they weren't bent on "lording it over" other races, to which I present their treatment of Adrienne as a counter-point. A pretty clear case of them "lording it over" another race by overtly being reluctant to buy from her.

Of course the Dunmer of Windhelm aren't racists. They're a long way from home. Ulfric simply believes that Skyrim belongs to the Nords first and foremost; if anything, the Dunmer should be entirely sympathetic with this notion because it is exactly the same as their own cultural tradition regarding themselves and their homeland. Now that their homeland is wrecked, do they have the right to expect Nord culture should change to accommodate them? The fact that they are not simply enslaved indicates to me that Nord culture is already more accommodating than Dunmer culture.

Also, I know Ulfric didn't give them Solstheim. I was comparing the cultures. No Dunmer ruler ever gave non-Dunmer land for refuge. The Dunmer are lucky to be allowed within Windhelm's walls to begin with, given their past dealings with the Nords. While we're on the subject of the Dunmer's past dealings, do you even know why the Argonians are forced to live on the docks? Besides Nord racism (let's face it, this is the standard TES racism), it's to keep them away from the Dunmer, who they hate because of their long history as slaves. The Argonians hate the Dunmer so much that they invaded Morrowind after Red Mountain erupted again, while the Dunmer were down.

 Troike wrote:
Not exactly what I meant. You said that they weren't bent on "lording it over" other races, to which I present their treatment of Adrienne as a counter-point. A pretty clear case of them "lording it over" another race by overtly being reluctant to buy from her.

You're not following my point. I said the Nords consider Skyrim to be the homeland and perogative of the Nords first and foremost -- and that they don't, like the Thalmor, travel the length and breadth of Tamriel forcing an aggressive supremacist position on everyone on the face of Nirn. Even the most famous Nord, Hjalti/Talos/Tiber Septim, who did indeed conquer the world created a cosmopolitan and egalitarian empire. So what if the Nords, and particularly the Stormcloaks, believe Skyrim is theirs? This is no different from how each of the races feel about their various traditional territories.

On a Skyrim related note, does anyone know if you can disable DLC on the Xbox? I have Dawnguard, and I was going to complete that questline before really digging into the main questline of the game, but I had forgotten I needed the Elder Scroll from the main questline, and I don't really feel like going into Blackreach as a level 12 Nord Fighter.

You could uninstall the DLC but it might mess up your save. I'm not sure how uninstalling/disabling Dawnguard actually helps in your circumstances, however. Are you just weary of fighting the vampire threat on an ongoing basis?

 Manchu wrote:
Of course the Dunmer of Windhelm aren't racists. They're a long way from home. Ulfric simply believes that Skyrim belongs to the Nords first and foremost; if anything, the Dunmer should be entirely sympathetic with this notion because it is exactly the same as their own cultural tradition regarding themselves and their homeland. Now that their homeland is wrecked, do they have the right to expect Nord culture should change to accommodate them? The fact that they are not simply enslaved indicates to me that Nord culture is already more accommodating than Dunmer culture.

 Manchu wrote:
Also, I know Ulfric didn't give them Solstheim. I was comparing the cultures. No Dunmer ruler ever gave non-Dunmer land for refuge. The Dunmer are lucky to be allowed within Windhelm's walls to begin with, given their past dealings with the Nords. While we're on the subject of the Dunmer's past dealings, do you even know why the Argonians are forced to live on the docks? Besides Nord racism (let's face it, this is the standard TES racism), it's to keep them away from the Dunmer, who they hate because of their long history as slavers. The Argonians hate the Dunmer so much that they invaded Morrowind after Red Mountain erupted again, while the Dunmer were down.

But this isn't about cultures and their history, its about whether Ulfric and his army are racists. Dunmer taking slaves or a previous king giving Dark Elves land is irrelevnt to Stormcloak/Ulfric's behaviour now, since it doesn't really legitimise it. And though you make an infromed point about keeping the Dunmer and Argonians seperate, the Nord racism towards the Argonians is still just as wrong.

Also, I wouldn't say that racism is standard in TES. The Empire, a major power, seems to be largely free of it. Just look at this guy.

http://uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Legate_Fasendil

 Manchu wrote:

 Troike wrote:
Not exactly what I meant. You said that they weren't bent on "lording it over" other races, to which I present their treatment of Adrienne as a counter-point. A pretty clear case of them "lording it over" another race by overtly being reluctant to buy from her.

You're not following my point. I said the Nords consider Skyrim to be the homeland and perogative of the Nords first and foremost -- and that they don't, like the Thalmor, travel the length and breadth of Tamriel forcing an aggressive supremacist position on everyone on the face of Nirn. Even the most famous Nord, Hjalti/Talos/Tiber Septim, who did indeed conquer the world created a cosmopolitan and egalitarian empire. So what if the Nords, and particularly the Stormcloaks, believe Skyrim is theirs? This is no different from how each of the races feel about their various traditional territories.

They're free to feel that it's theirs, but that hardly justifies abusing non-nords who live there. And just because the Stormcloaks aren't going around executing people they don't like, like the Thalmor are doing, doesn't legitimise their own racism.

Skyrim manages to strandle the lines with its characters rather effectively.

Ulfric might segregate the Dunmer in Windhelm but his own claim is that this is to protect them from his followers who he openly admits he has trouble controlling (read between the lines "I don't approve but my agenda comes first so I let it slide"). And likewise the Argonians are segregated so they don't pick fights with the Dunmer. Racist? Possibly but he also has legitimate concerns in what he does making it hard to tell what matter more to him. Balgruf only sided with the Empire when pressed by Ulfric's absolutism. Balgruf himself isn't much more confident in the Empire than Ulfric, he just doesn't like Ulfric or think that joing the rebellion is good for Whiterun. Then we have Toryigg who himself was apparently open to the idea of declaring Independence but struggled with Skyrim's need for the Empire's resources. And that's not even mentioning the implications that Ulfric is some kind of Thalmor sleeper agent.

Likewise there's legitimate concerns with Ulfric and the Empire. The Empire is weak. Three provinces now answer to the Thalmor, Blackmarsh is in open rebellion (and the Hist are back in force), Morrowind has been all but destroyed and Hammerfell is in the middle of a war with the Thalmor with no support from the Empire itself. The Empire at this stage of the game consists of High Rock, a rebelling Skyrim, and economically devastated Cyrodill and Morrowind (and its key military heartlands have always been Hammerfell, Morrowind, Cyrodill, and Skyrim).

It's not absurd for Ulfric to see the world around him and conclude the Empire is dead and that he has to tear Skyrim from the yoke least the Empire drag his country down with it. At the same time the Empire has a point. The provinces can't stand against the Thalmor alone and its not like the Empire plans to keep the White-Gold Concordant going forever. Skyrim plays this dynamic masterfully and this is partly why I loathe that the main storyline game was about Dragons and not about the larger conflict in Tamriel. The Civil War is on its face a much better story but just doesn't get the treatment it deserved. I keep holding out for a DLC that will conclude the story for us but apparently that's not happening.

Also, I wouldn't say that racism is standard in TES. The Empire, a major power, seems to be largely free of it. Just look at this guy.

The Empire is racist. Being a Khajit, Orc, or Argonian in the Empire is like being a young black kid in 1970's Detroit. People might not arrest you on sight, but you can probably rest assured they don't like you and automatically assume you're doing drugs or about to steal something. Unless your an Orc, in which case people just don't like you (Orcs in Oblivion started out with almost 0 approval from non-Orc NPC's).

Though in usual video game fashion, Skyrim undermines this by making the Khajit caravans so shady you'd be an idiot not to suspect them of something.

 Manchu wrote:
You could uninstall the DLC but it might mess up your save. I'm not sure how uninstalling/disabling Dawnguard actually helps in your circumstances, however. Are you just weary of fighting the vampire threat on an ongoing basis?

Yes I am I guess I mostly don't want to have townspeople killed while I'm off killing dragons...

 LordofHats wrote:
Balgruf himself isn't much more confident in the Empire than Ulfric, he just doesn't like Ulfric or think that joing the rebellion is good for Whiterun.

I dunno, when he does side with them he's very open about the mutual advantages of joining them. He gets good trade, and the Empire gets tough warriors.

 LordofHats wrote:
Then we have Toryigg who himself was apparently open to the idea of declaring Independence but struggled with Skyrim's need for the Empire's resources.

I think it says something about Ulfric that his reaction to this was to murder Toryigg in an unfair fight instead of trying to win the man over.

 LordofHats wrote:
And that's not even mentioning the implications that Ulfric is some kind of Thalmor sleeper agent.

http://uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Thalmor_Dossier:_Ulfric_Stormcloak

Basically: he's not really in their agent at present, but they view him as an asset due to his attacking of the Empire.

 LordofHats wrote:
Likewise there's legitimate concerns with Ulfric and the Empire. The Empire is weak. Three provinces now answer to the Thalmor, Blackmarsh is in open rebellion (and the Hist are back in force), Morrowind has been all but destroyed and Hammerfell is in the middle of a war with the Thalmor with no support from the Empire itself. The Empire at this stage of the game consists of High Rock, a rebelling Skyrim, a economically devastated Cyrodill and Morrowind.

While the Empire is not at its best, they're still a far better option than the Stormcloaks for the overall situation. The Empire are pretty much the only force that can legitimately challenge the Tlamor, and a Stormcloak victory means a greatly weakened Empire and an even more divided opposition for the Thalmor. Also, Hammerfell isn't at war with the Thalmor anymore. They signed a peace treaty before the game starts.

 LordofHats wrote:
I keep holding out for a DLC that will conclude the story for us but apparently that's not happening.

Yeah, the end of the DLC is pretty sad. But apparently they weren't making enough money off of 'em, so that's our lot.

But still, Skyrim has a stupidly big modding scene, so we'll never be short of new content.

 Troike wrote:
doesn't legitimise their own racism.

You keep using the word "legitimise" but against what standard? Take a look at a map of Tamriel and you will see what the baseline position on racisim actually is in the TES world: a land for each of the races, except the dispossessed Orsimer. Now, who crosses that line: traditional Dunmer culture and the Thalmor. The Stormcloak rebellion is fighting for Nord dominance of Skyrim. The marginalization of non-Nords is an inescapable condition of that goal; even as it stands, there are no non-Nord jarls in Skyrim; cf., Count Andel Indarys. (At the same time, the rise of the Empire certainly marginalized non-Nibenese as to the power of Imperials in other provinces; e.g., General Tullius's role in Skyrim.)

The question really is, does the segregation of the Dunmer into the Grey Quarter rise above this baseline racism? I'm not so sure. For one thing, Windhelm is the only city in Skyrim that has a substantial non-Nord population. All we can do is compare it against Cyrodiil during the Oblivion crisis, which is hardly instructive given that the real driving force of racism in the Fourth Age (the White Gold Concordat) did not even exist yet.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
You could uninstall the DLC but it might mess up your save. I'm not sure how uninstalling/disabling Dawnguard actually helps in your circumstances, however. Are you just weary of fighting the vampire threat on an ongoing basis?

Yes I am I guess I mostly don't want to have townspeople killed while I'm off killing dragons...

It's not so bad. Those Vampire attacks are basically one Vampire running into the town and getting violent. The guards cut them down before any citizens get hurt.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:
You keep using the word "legitimise" but against what standard? Take a look at a map of Tamriel and you will see what the baseline position on racisim actually is in the TES world: a land for each of the races, except the dispossessed Orsimer. Now, who crosses that line: traditional Dunmer culture and the Thalmor. The Stormcloak rebellion is fighting for Nord dominance of Skyrim. The marginalization of non-Nords is an inescapable condition of that goal; even as it stands, there are no non-Nord jarls in Skyrim; cf., Count Andel Indarys. (At the same time, the rise of the Empire certainly marginalized non-Nibenese as to the power of Imperials in other provinces; e.g., General Tullius's role in Skyrim.)

The question really is, does the segregation of the Dunmer into the Grey Quarter rise above this baseline racism? I'm not so sure. For one thing, Windhelm is the only city in Skyrim that has a substantial non-Nord population. All we can do is compare it against Cyrodiil during the Oblivion crisis, which is hardly instructive given that the real driving force of racism in the Fourth Age (the White Gold Concordat) did not even exist yet.

You seem to be saying that Nord racism towards the Dunmer is not as bad, or even partially legitimised because other cultures have racist elements in the past. "Other people were doing it" is not really a justification for the Nordic abuse of the Dark Elves in Windhelm. We know that Tamriel can do better, we've seen the Empire's tolerance towards other races.

 Troike wrote:

I think it says something about Ulfric that his reaction to this was to murder Toryigg in an unfair fight instead of trying to win the man over.

The only thing unfair about the fight is that Toryigg never stood a chance at winning (but Ulfric clearly knew this).

Basically: he's not really in their agent at present, but they view him as an asset due to his attacking of the Empire.

Oh it goes deeper than that. Some of the Thalmor NPC's (the Embassy and the one in Markarth I think) if you ask them about Ulfric kind of play it as though Ulfric is a puppet tied to their strings. It's never overtly stated but there are lines in the game to the effect that Ulfric is unwittingly acting at the behest of the Thalmor to further weaken the Empire. It can be read as Ulfric just being a pawn on the game board who came about by convenience or as something more sinister.

While the Empire is not at its best, they're still a far better option than the Stormcloaks for the overall situation. The Empire are pretty much the only force that can legitimately challenge the Tlamor, and a Stormcloak victory means a greatly weakened Empire and an even more divided opposition for the Thalmor. Also, Hammerfell isn't at war with the Thalmor anymore. They signed a peace treaty before the game starts.

Hammerfell is at war with the Thalmor. They signed the treaty but there are overt resistance movements in Hammerfell and while the conflict has lapsed into a sort of Cold War during the events of Skyrim, its obvious that Hammerfell is ready to start a fight. If anything, Skyrim breaking from the Empire could cause mass uprising in Hammerfell and Elsywer and Ulfric could just say he's doing the Empire's job because the Empire won't. Nothing stops the provinces from forming an alliance against the Thalmor. Though undoubtedly the Empire would be more organized but the Empire doesn't inspire much confidence that they're really moving to solve this crisis.

But still, Skyrim has a stupidly big modding scene, so we'll never be short of new content.

There are some cool (but glitchy) mods for the Civil War. One does a total overhaul complete with epic scale battles and skirmishes when walking along the road.

You seem to be saying that Nord racism towards the Dunmer is not as bad, or even partially legitimised because other cultures have racist elements in the past. "Other people were doing it" is not really a justification for the Nordic abuse of the Dark Elves in Windhelm. We know that Tamriel can do better, we've seen the Empire's tolerance towards other races.

It's not justification but context. We can look back at the Roman Empire and see some pretty bad racism but seeing as how everyone in 100 AD was racist, it's not a very useful criticism. Same thing with the Nords. Every culture on Tamriel is racist and nationalist in some way. Pointing out that the Stormcloaks are racist nationalists isn't wrong so much as irrelevant because everyone else is too.

The Empire's tolerance only goes so far. They don't go to Morrowind and demand the Dunmer stop enslaving the Argonians (which the Dunmer are doing by the way by waging proxy war against another province) and the Empire certainly doesn't seem to have a problem with the rather slanted practice of enslaving Argonians more than the other races or the segregation and marginalization rampantly directed against the Orcs in High Rock.

 LordofHats wrote:
And that's not even mentioning the implications that Ulfric is some kind of Thalmor sleeper agent.

Keep in mind, that's based on the typical arrogant viewpoint of the Thalmor, who believe they are invincible and in control over everything. That viewpoint is the basis for defeatism in the Empire, with some spineless politicos seeing every Thalmor defeat as just another step towards their ultimate goal in some long game (e.g., the defense of Hammerfall). The Thalmor are no more invincible than their Ayleid forbears. They used Ulfric; and then Ulfric used them.

 Manchu wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
And that's not even mentioning the implications that Ulfric is some kind of Thalmor sleeper agent.

Keep in mind, that's based on the typical arrogant viewpoint of the Thalmor, who believe they are invincible and in control over everything. That viewpoint is the basis for defeatism in the Empire, with some spineless politicos seeing every Thalmor defeat as just another step towards their ultimate goal in some long game (e.g., the defense of Hammerfall). The Thalmor are no more invincible than their Ayleid forbears. They used Ulfric; and then Ulfric used them.

Yeah and my point I guess is that this is what makes Ulfric bad ass. He could be a racist douche, but the same set of facts could support him as an idealist trapped in the realities of the world around him. Or maybe he's just a pragmatist doing what he has to do to get his job done, walking the line of light and dark.

That ambiguity is why I love his character. I don't think Skyrim ever really gives us enough to say with absolute certainty what the truth of Ulfric Stormcloak really is.

 Troike wrote:
"Other people were doing it" is not really a justification for the Nordic abuse of the Dark Elves in Windhelm. We know that Tamriel can do better, we've seen the Empire's tolerance towards other races.

Not really. Andel Indarys was a member of House Hlaalu, which traitorously (from more traditional viewpoints) opened the doors of Morrowind to the Empire. His appointment as Count of Cheydinhal likely had a lot to do with that (just as Maven Black-Briar can finagle her way into becoming jarl of Riften). He was also the only non-Nibenese count, at least in that time period. And, as LoH already mentioned, prejudice against Khajit, Argonians, and Orsimer was common in Cyrodiil.

Again, I'm not dealing with legitimization or justification. The point is, the Stormcloaks are not clearly any more racist than any other important political group in Skyrim -- but they are obviously less racist than the Dunmer Houses and the Thalmor.

 LordofHats wrote:
That ambiguity is why I love his character. I don't think Skyrim ever really gives us enough to say with absolute certainty what the truth of Ulfric Stormcloak really is.

Agreed and also agreed on the matter, as you said, of this being a masterful portrayal. In one play through, you can rail against the racist, regicidal would-be tyrant of Windhelm. In the next playthrough you can loyally serve this great man of far-reaching vision who may be Tamriel's only hope against the genocidal Thalmor.

 LordofHats wrote:
The only thing unfair about the fight is that Toryigg never stood a chance at winning (but Ulfric clearly knew this)

Indeed. It would have been easy enough for him to fight honourably and to not use his Shouts, but he didn't. Rather than diplomacy with a ruler who was supposedly sympathetic to his views, he preferred to just go kill and the man.

 LordofHats wrote:
Oh it goes deeper than that. Some of the Thalmor NPC's (the Embassy and the one in Markarth I think) if you ask them about Ulfric kind of play it as though Ulfric is a puppet tied to their strings. It's never overtly stated but there are lines in the game to the effect that Ulfric is unwittingly acting at the behest of the Thalmor to further weaken the Empire. It can be read as Ulfric just being a pawn on the game board who came about by convenience or as something more sinister.

Eh, I'd interpret that as them having been responsible for releasing Ulfric and thus making him an active drain on the Empire. Certainly, Stormcloak troops have no qualms about killing Thalmor Justiciars on sight.

 LordofHats wrote:
Hammerfell is at war with the Thalmor. They signed the treaty but there are overt resistance movements in Hammerfell and while the conflict has lapsed into a sort of Cold War during the events of Skyrim, its obvious that Hammerfell is ready to start a fight. If anything, Skyrim breaking from the Empire could cause mass uprising in Hammerfell and Elsywer and Ulfric could just say he's doing the Empire's job because the Empire won't. Nothing stops the provinces from forming an alliance against the Thalmor. Though undoubtedly the Empire would be more organized but the Empire doesn't inspire much confidence that they're really moving to solve this crisis.

Sure, but they wouldn't be working together. A Stormcloak-led Skyrim would certainly not be happy about working alongside the Empire, whereas an Empire-led Skyrim would mean a united front against the Thalmor. Also, pretty sure that Elsywer is still fairly loyal to the Thalmor, since they think that the Thalmor saved the moons for them. Valenwood on the other hand is known to have a resistance.

Oh no. Elsywer more than Valenwood or the Summerset Isle is pretty pissed (from what we can tell anyway). The Thalmor played some dirty tricks to annex Elsywer without a fight and the Khajit do not appreciate it. They aren't currently engaged in rebellion or even resistance like Valenwood or Hammerfell but the Thalmor wore out their welcome pretty quick.

The Thalmor is fighting and winning an ongoing psychological war with the Empire in Cyrodiil -- but it is losing that war, as surely as it is losing the physical fight on all fronts, in Hammerfell and Skyrim. Toryigg, like Titus Mede II, was beginning to bend under Thalmor propaganda -- and Ulfric saw Toryigg's weakness just as he saw Igmund bow to the Thalmor in the wake of the Markarth Incident.

 Manchu wrote:
Not really. Andel Indarys was a member of House Hlaalu, which traitorously (from more traditional viewpoints) opened the doors of Morrowind to the Empire. His appointment as Count of Cheydinhal likely had a lot to do with that (just as Maven Black-Briar can finagle her way into becoming jarl of Riften). He was also the only non-Nibenese count, at least in that time period. And, as LoH already mentioned, prejudice against Khajit, Argonians, and Orsimer was common in Cyrodiil.

And the Empire is still far better at tolerance than the Stormcloaks. And really, do you think that a Dunmer from any other house would want to be a ruler in Cyrodiil? Of course Count Indarys is a Hlaalu, they've always been reputed for being willing to work with other races. And regarding the racism towards Khajit, Argonians, and Orsimer, isn't that usually from other races? In the Imperial city alone, we see all of those races in ordinary, if not prominent statuses.

You keep pointing to the actions of others to justify Nord/Stormcloak racism, and I just can't accept that as valid. We've seen that it can be better than what happens in Windhelm. Hell, all it takes is a Jarl who gives a crap about non-Nords to improve the situation in Windhelm.

 Troike wrote:
In the Imperial city alone, we see all of those races in ordinary, if not prominent statuses.

We also see a prominent Argonian insulted for being an Argonian cause he must have cheated his way to fame and people calling a Wood Elf shop keep a typical sneaky elf (something that that effect anyway, though they were kind of right). Most high profile citizens are still Imperial with their servants/cronies rather regularly being Argonian or Orc. Being an Argonian might be slightly better in Cyrodill but that's not much of a consolation cause you're still probably on the bottom of the social later.

As a cosmopolitan center, it is typical for the Imperial capital to be more tolerant than the far flung reaches where the population is less diverse and the races have less interaction with one another, but even in the Imperial City we get a healthy does of underlying racism and of course all those off handed comments about other races rather commonly said by NPC's throughout the last three Elder Scrolls games.

You'd be surprised how effectively Elder Scrolls mimics history (for a video game that is).

 Manchu wrote:
The Thalmor is fighting and winning an ongoing psychological war with the Empire in Cyrodiil -- but it is losing that war, as surely as it is losing the physical fight on all fronts, in Hammerfell and Skyrim. Toryigg, like Titus Mede II, was beginning to bend under Thalmor propaganda -- and Ulfric saw Toryigg's weakness just as he saw Igmund bow to the Thalmor in the wake of the Markarth Incident.

Well. whether or not the Empire loses the fight in Skyrim is entirely up to the player...

And Titus Mede II hardly bent under Thalmor propaganda. He signed the White-Gold concordant because he knew that the Empire was badly worn out, and needed to recover before fighting again. It was a practical move, not an example of bending to Thalmor propaganda. I don't doubt that he (or his successor, if certain things happened...) will hesitate to rip up the Concordant once the Empire is ready to fight the Thalmor.

Fact is, you don't know what things are like in Cyrodiil since the Battle of the Red Ring. I doubt Altmer are very welcome after the atrocities committed in the Imperial City by the Aldmeri forces. It's nothing new. Since the beginning of recorded history, the mer have made conflict a matter of race and they continue doing right into the Fourth Era. The Dunmer of Windhelm are reaping what their own history has sewn. Yes, it is unfair for the individuals who had no personal part in the enslavement of other races and development of an arch-xenophobic culture. What you cannot pretend, however, is that the Stormcloaks are uniquely or arbitrarily racist.

 LordofHats wrote:
We also see a prominent Argonian insulted for being an Argonian cause he must have cheated his way to fame and people calling a Wood Elf shop keep a typical sneaky elf (something that that effect anyway, though they were kind of right). Most high profile citizens are still Imperial with their servants/cronies rather regularly being Argonian or Orc. Being an Argonian might be slightly better in Cyrodill but that's not much of a consolation cause you're still probably on the bottom of the social later.

As a cosmopolitan center, it is typical for the Imperial capital to be more tolerant than the far flung reaches where the population is less diverse and the races have less interaction with one another, but even in the Imperial City we get a healthy does of underlying racism and of course all those off handed comments about other races rather commonly said by NPC's throughout the last three Elder Scrolls games.

True, but other races are also perfectly able to climb to prominent positions. While underlying racism does inevitably exist, it's still miles better than what the Stormcloak mindset. Also, don't think that Glarthir is racially abused once he stops being detrimental to the other businesses. Don't remember who the prominent Argonian is, though. It's not Gin-Wulm, is it?

 Troike wrote:
It was a practical move, not an example of bending to Thalmor propaganda.

And yet, as part of his "practical" move, Thalmor agents legally march up and down the Skyrim countryside violently persecuting the worship of Talos. Is that what you call sovereignty? It's hardly practical, considering it caused civil war in Skyrim. The Emperor made a major miscalculation for no apparent reason.

 Manchu wrote:
Fact is, you don't know what things are like in Cyrodiil since the Battle of the Red Ring. I doubt Altmer are very welcome after the atrocities committed in the Imperial City by the Aldmeri forces.

http://uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Legate_Fasendil

 Manchu wrote:
What you cannot pretend, however, is that the Stormcloaks are uniquely or arbitrarily racist.

I never said that they were unique or arbitrary in their racism, just that their treatment of the Dark Elves in Windhelm is wholly wrong. Which is certainly is.

Fasendil has nothing to do with conditions in Cyrodiil.

As to "wholly wrong" -- it seems you're applying real values to this fantasy world.

 Manchu wrote:

 Troike wrote:
It was a practical move, not an example of bending to Thalmor propaganda.

And yet, as part of his "practical" move, Thalmor agents legally march up and down the Skyrim countryside violently persecuting the worship of Talos. Is that what you call sovereignty? It's hardly practical, considering it caused civil war in Skyrim. The Emperor made a major miscalculation for no apparent reason.

Actually, the civil war was a result of the Markarth incident.

http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Markarth_Incident

Before that, the Empire was still, presumably, in good control of Skyrim. It wasn't a "major miscalculation", just a unlikable term that he had to accept, in order to end the war.

Read that article on the Markarth Incident.

 Manchu wrote:
Fasendil has nothing to do with conditions in Cyrodiil.

Sure he does. It shows that the Empire is willing to let its Legion be led by an Altmer. If High Elves were that hated, then they would obviously be very unwilling to do this.

 Manchu wrote:
As to "wholly wrong" -- it seems you're applying real values to this fantasy world.

Doesn't really disprove anything I've said. Why is Nord racism against others partially legitimised because other racism has occurred in Tamriel? We can quite clearly see that Tamriel can do better than overt racism against minorities, and Brunwulf Free-Winter as Jarl shows that Windhelm specifically can do better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:
Read that article on the Markarth Incident.

?

Elaborate, this doesn't particularly add anything.

Fasendil was stationed in Hammerfall, not Cyrodiil. His experience tells us nothing about conditions in Cyrodiil.

I wish you would stop using the world "legitimise" as that is nothing to do with any point I've made. The correct word is "contextualize." Brunwulf has time to deal with Windhelm's ethnic anxieties because he has nothing else to do; and apparently little vision when it comes to high level politics.

You say the civil war in Skyrim was started by the Markarth Incident and not the prohibition against worshipping Talos in the White Gold Concordat. That is an oxymoronic position, hence my suggestion that you read the article.

 Manchu wrote:

 Troike wrote:
It was a practical move, not an example of bending to Thalmor propaganda.

And yet, as part of his "practical" move, Thalmor agents legally march up and down the Skyrim countryside violently persecuting the worship of Talos. Is that what you call sovereignty? It's hardly practical, considering it caused civil war in Skyrim. The Emperor made a major miscalculation for no apparent reason.

The other option was to face another war.


Anyways, I like the Thalmor. They're like Umaril the Unfeathered and his Aurorans.
I loved those. Brutal, arrogant, and rather damn evil. I like.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:
Fasendil was stationed in Hammerfall, not Cyrodiil. His experience tells us nothing about conditions in Cyrodiil.

I wish you would stop using the world "legitimise" as that is nothing to do with any point I've made. The correct word is "contextualize." Brunwulf has time to deal with Windhelm's ethnic anxieties because he has nothing else to do; and apparently little vision when it comes to high level politics.

You say the civil war in Skyrim was started by the Markarth Incident and not the prohibition against worshipping Talos in the White Gold Concordat. That is an oxymoronic position, hence my suggestion that you read the article.

When Markarth followed laws on Talos worshipping, Ulfric began ti complain about it. Until then, there were no Thalmor anywhere in Skyrim. After his complaining, there were. That's when the enforcement of the Talos ban began.

It's stated in-game by the blacksmith of Riverwood.

The Markarth incident is significant because it explains both how the Thalmor became an Inquisition and how Ulfric developed his ultimate outlook on the Empire.

He went to Markarth to drive out the Reachmen who had taken over the city and was promised by an Imperial official that once this was done he and his men would have free Worship of Talos. They took the city and started their worship anew and the Thalmor stepped in, starting the Thalmor presence in Skyrim. Ulfric looked to the Empire to support him and fulfill the promise they made, but unfortunately the official had neither the authority or intention to keep that promise. So Ulfric decided the Empire was finished not just because they stabbed him in the back but because they completely cowtowed to the Thalmor.

The White-Gold Concordant, and the both legal passing and enforcement of the Talos ban by the Thalmor with de facto approval of the Empire, is inextricably connected to the Markarth Incident and the Stormcloak Rebellion. Ulfric can hardly be blamed on this front for being rather PO'd. The Empire has surrendered its sovereignty as a state to what should effectively be one of its clients. Instead the client has taken over the business and is telling everyone else what to do. That's a rather open weakening of power for the Empire.

 thenoobbomb wrote:
The other option was to face another war.

Which neither side could have afforded. The Emperor's failure was twofold: he underestimated what the Thalmor aimed to accomplish with the ban on Talos worship and he underestimated what Talos worship could mean to Skyrim.

 thenoobbomb wrote:
It's stated in-game by the blacksmith of Riverwood.

Alvor supports the Empire and his nephew is an Imperial soldier -- remember, the one who was a little sad about executing you for no reason at the beginning? I'm not saying Alvor is a liar; I don't have the information to back that up. All I know is, he has an anti-Stormcloak perspective.

The perspectives in the game play a pretty big roll. You'll see NPC's who talk about how Ulfric doesn't protect non-Nord settlements, but no one else ever mentions it. And well, there aren't many non-Nord settlements on the game map making the statement a little bizarre (in the larger game). The major non-Nord settlements are Orc camps and they don't look like they need or want any help from Ulfric.

There's a lot of POV pushing on both sides with little actual evidence for many of the claims in the game as part of the developers to make both sides sympathetic.

 LordofHats wrote:
That's a rather open weakening of power for the Empire.

Exactly. This is why I conclude that the Thalmor is waging a successful psychological campaign against the Empire, whether against Titus Medes II personally or the Elder Council matters little I suppose.

Ulfric's real ambiguity lies not so much in his "racism" but in his killing of Torygg. Did he truly think the High King too weak to claim Skyrim's independence or did he simply crave Torygg's crown? I think the answer has to be a bit of both.

 Manchu wrote:


Ulfric's real ambiguity lies not so much in his "racism" but in his killing of Torygg. Did he truly think the High King too weak to claim Skyrim's independence or did he simply crave Torygg's crown? I think the answer has to be a bit of both.

Personally I get the sense Ulfric didn't know Torygg very well. Torygg himself seems to have been very wary and cautious of the Thalmor and of course couldn't allow himself to be seen as associating with a radical like Ulfric.

I don't think Ulfric knew this but also don't think it matter. Ulfric killed Torygg to achieve two things imo. 1, to show how weak the High King was and by extension how weak Skyrim and the Empire had become. 2, to clear the way for his Rebellion. Killing Torygg was his rallying cry and his declaration of war.

Personally, I never got the sense that Ulfric had anything against Torygg in particular.

Me either. But I get the definite sense that Ulfric believes he alone can bear the crown these days. I think the design and background of Windhelm subtly pushes that angle. He would not be content to follow someone else, even someone with his same political outlook.

My own opinion is that Ulfric did not know Torygg but was pretty sure he'd just grow up into a man like Balgruf or worse. Balgruf is the only jarl in Skyrim who even approaches the cunning of Ulfric. But Balgruf's cunning is a rather craven thing.

I openly admit to being baffled that for a game that achieves a level of political realism uncommon in games, Skyrim has a lot of dense to incompetent guys in charge (but then that isn't that far from the truth either)

In part though my own favor for Ulfric is probably a mirror of my view that Tullius is a rather bland fellow. Ulfric has both mystery and charm that makes following his character exciting. Tullius is... Tullius.

 Manchu wrote:
This is why I conclude that the Thalmor is waging a successful psychological campaign against the Empire, whether against Titus Medes II personally or the Elder Council matters little I suppose.

Eh, not really. Again, that was a tactical move. The Empire was exhausted by that point in the war, and would very likely had broken had they been pushed to fight further. Mede is playing a long game. Sign the treaty now, rebuild power, deal with the Thalmor once the Empire is healthy again.

 Manchu wrote:
Fasendil was stationed in Hammerfall, not Cyrodiil. His experience tells us nothing about conditions in Cyrodiil.

It tells us that the Empire, one of its most prominent generals, and presumably the troops under him, have no problem letting an Altmer be a Legate.

 Manchu wrote:
I wish you would stop using the world "legitimise" as that is nothing to do with any point I've made. The correct word is "contextualize." Brunwulf has time to deal with Windhelm's ethnic anxieties because he has nothing else to do; and apparently little vision when it comes to high level politics.

Basically, I said that what the treatment of the Dark Elves in Windhelm was bad. You replied with your posts about racism in other parts of Tamriel. I acknowledged that racism existed in Tamriel, but said that the racism in Windhelm was still wrong. You replied to that with more posts about the other examples of racism, as if this to some extent justified the treatment of the Dark Elves.

Yes, I understand that there's important historical factors there, but it's still wrong, and could be much better.

 Manchu wrote:
You say the civil war in Skyrim was started by the Markarth Incident and not the prohibition against worshipping Talos in the White Gold Concordat. That is an oxymoronic position, hence my suggestion that you read the article.

The Markarth incident was quite clearly the trigger. Was there a civil war before that? Nah.

It's not justification but context. We can look back at the Roman Empire and see some pretty bad racism but seeing as how everyone in 100 AD was racist, it's not a very useful criticism. Same thing with the Nords. Every culture on Tamriel is racist and nationalist in some way. Pointing out that the Stormcloaks are racist nationalists isn't wrong so much as irrelevant because everyone else is too.

Errr.. Wrong on the Roman Empire at least. They were pretty much one of the least racist out of all the states back then, I'll let this describe it though.

But despite Hollywood's near-complete refusal to acknowledge it, ancient Rome was the original melting pot. See, back then, color and prejudice weren't linked -- unlike racism and stupidity today. Rome even had at least two African emperors, Severus and Macrinus. Rome was unique in the ancient world for its inclusive citizenship. In the past, a city-state like Sparta might have conquered a people and enslaved or slaughtered them all. Rome, on the other hand, blew ancient people's minds by assimilating or even naturalizing the conquered. The ancient Romans didn't even force conquered peoples to give up their own languages or customs.

The important thing for the Romans was that people followed the law, paid taxes, and, oh yeah, fought in the Roman army. The Romans were no dummies: Little old Rome was never going to be able to populate the world it conquered, let alone defend it, so absorbing other peoples like a giant legionary sponge was the only way to keep enough bodies in the military and on its farms. Rome enrolled northwest Africans, Moors, Gauls, Celts, Jews -- pretty much anyone who could swing a sword or throw a spear -- which is how an Ethiopian soldier could find himself fighting in Britain (maybe that's why every film Roman speaks with a British accent).

Read more: http://www.cracked.com/article_20536_5-ridiculous-lies-you-believe-about-ancient-civilizations.html#ixzz2b8bXaD3c

 Troike wrote:

Eh, not really. Again, that was a tactical move. The Empire was exhausted by that point in the war, and would very likely had broken had they been pushed to fight further. Mede is playing a long game. Sign the treaty now, rebuild power, deal with the Thalmor once the Empire is healthy again.

That is the point. The Empire was exhausted because it's become to weak to keep the Thalmor in check. This isn't an attack on the Empire's decision but rather pointing out the reality of why the Empire had to make it.

Basically, I said that what the treatment of the Dark Elves in Windhelm was bad. You replied with your posts about racism in other parts of Tamriel. I acknowledged that racism existed in Tamriel, but said that the racism in Windhelm was still wrong. You replied to that with more posts about the other examples of racism, as if this to some extent justified the treatment of the Dark Elves.

Yes, I understand that there's important historical factors there, but it's still wrong, and could be much better.

Well we took you as saying you chose to support the Empire over the Stormcloaks because the Stormcloaks are racist. Fact is that the Empire is also racist. It's not a justification of the Stormcloaks racism its pointing out that their racism isn't a very good reason to support someone else. Granted within only the context of Skyrim the Legion isn't particularly racist. Not in the same way the Stormcloaks are.

The Markarth incident was quite clearly the trigger. Was there a civil war before that? Nah.

Machu was arguing that the banning of Talos Worship led to the Civil War and it did because the ban is a major part of the Markarth Incident. Wars don't spring from any single trigger but from multiple triggers. The Markarth Incident is but one link in the chain.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
But despite Hollywood's near-complete refusal to acknowledge it, ancient Rome was the original melting pot. See, back then, color and prejudice weren't linked -- unlike racism and stupidity today. Rome even had at least two African emperors, Severus and Macrinus. Rome was unique in the ancient world for its inclusive citizenship. In the past, a city-state like Sparta might have conquered a people and enslaved or slaughtered them all. Rome, on the other hand, blew ancient people's minds by assimilating or even naturalizing the conquered. The ancient Romans didn't even force conquered peoples to give up their own languages or customs.

The important thing for the Romans was that people followed the law, paid taxes, and, oh yeah, fought in the Roman army. The Romans were no dummies: Little old Rome was never going to be able to populate the world it conquered, let alone defend it, so absorbing other peoples like a giant legionary sponge was the only way to keep enough bodies in the military and on its farms. Rome enrolled northwest Africans, Moors, Gauls, Celts, Jews -- pretty much anyone who could swing a sword or throw a spear -- which is how an Ethiopian soldier could find himself fighting in Britain (maybe that's why every film Roman speaks with a British accent).

Read more: http://www.cracked.com/article_20536_5-ridiculous-lies-you-believe-about-ancient-civilizations.html#ixzz2b8bXaD3c

 LordofHats wrote:

That is the point. The Empire was exhausted because it's become to weak to keep the Thalmor in check. This isn't an attack on the Empire's decision but rather pointing out the reality of why the Empire had to make it.

Right, but the whole point in signing it was to rebuild so that they were strong enough to beat the Thalmor. Again, Mede is playing a long game. They won't stay weak forever.

 LordofHats wrote:
Well we took you as saying you chose to support the Empire over the Stormcloaks because the Stormcloaks are racist.

That's one of my reasons, yes.

 LordofHats wrote:
Fact is that the Empire is also racist.

Not really. All that's been posted here is evidence of Imperial citizens being racist, while the Legion and Imperial government are most certainly not. The Stormcloak soldiers meanwhile waltz around quite openly abusing non-Nords.

 LordofHats wrote:
It's not a justification of the Stormcloaks racism its pointing out that their racism isn't a very good reason to support someone else.

Sure it is. Racism? Never seems to work out too well in the end. The alternative choice, meanwhile, has a reputation for tolerating other races. Long-term, the Imperials are a far better cultural influence.

 LordofHats wrote:
Machu was arguing that the banning of Talos Worship led to the Civil War and it did because the ban is a major part of the Markarth Incident. Wars don't spring from any single trigger but from multiple triggers. The Markarth Incident is but one link in the chain.

Before the Markarth incident, things were calm. Civil war was certainly not brewing. After the Markarth incident happened, a charismatic, popular leader began inciting rebellion and succeeded.

To take a historian's view, when examining historical events like this factors leading to an event are classed as long-term causes, short-term causes and triggers. The banning of Talos worship is definetely a short-term cause. On its own, however, it did not cause Ulfric to begin pushing for open rebellion against the Empire. The Markarth incident, the trigger, is what did that.

@troike

I differ from LoH a bit on the subject of the White Gold Concordat. While I agree that the Empire was negotiating from weakness, I don't think it was necessarily weaker than the Aldmeri Dominion. The Thalmor threw itself into conquering Cyrodiil and Titus's forces utterly defeated them at the Battle of the Red Ring. The cost of his victory, however, was the strength of the Legion then-mobilized in the Niben vale. The Thalmor, over-committed as they were, could not afford to negotiate at that point unless it was indeed the only thing they could afford at all. It must be the case that both sides had bled each other white.

In that light, negotiating the Concordat would be especially tricky -- how do you draw concessions when the counterparty knows you must walk away with a truce? Both the Empire and the Aldmeri Dominion found themselves in this position. The Thalmor therefore did something very clever: they made a demand that the Emperor could interpret as empty saber rattling. The ban on Talos worship would draw ire only from blowhards because after all how could you even enforce such a provision? The Emperor could sell it as the triumph of the pragmatic over the symbolic.

This is where Titus Medes II made a terrible miscalculation. The Thalmor were setting him up for the next turn of the wheel. There is no indication that either side would regain its strength substantially more quickly than the other. Open war would therefore not be an option for some time. The Thalmor needed to slow the Empire's recovery down so the Elves could re-establish the overwhelming force with which they began the Great War. The key was Ulfric Stormcloak, whom they had already captured and primed for this task.

As far as Ulfric was concerned, the Concordat came down to one provision only: the seemingly symbolic ban on Talos worship. This summed up everything for the Jarl of Eastmarch. Importantly, this was not merely a Thalmor trick -- and that is where they, too, miscalculated. But first, let's deal with the twofold failure of the Emperor: as I said, he failed both to understand what the Elves truly aimed for with the provision and he failed to understand how much he was in effect giving up.

With Hammerfall all but formally autonomous and the heartland decimated, the Legion's hope lay in Skyrim. The Thalmor not unwisely concluded that a civil war in Skyrim could indefinitely forestall the recovery of Imperial forces so long as the grievance was deep enough. That way, even if the Empire did swiftly put down the rebellion there would always be a lingering threat that would keep at least some of the Legion busy. The deep grievance they found was religious persecution.

Now, the Elves are clever indeed but they managed to get caught in their own web this time. The Thalmor machine runs on xenophobic hatred and so, however the plan was initially conceived, the elimination of Talos's cult quickly became one of their actual goals. As surely as Ulfric did exactly as they expected by bringing the religious issue to a head, the Thalmor too proceeded predictably -- arrogating upon the population of Skyrim a ruthless and haughty inquisition. From their point of view, the Ulfric strategy was paying off: the Emperor had to concede to the presence and authority of the Thalmor Inquisition, which amounted to an abdication of sovereignty.

From the viewpoint of some in Skyrim, enough was finally enough. It was at that point that Ulfric went from being a reliable if unwitting tool to a radical challenge to both side's strategies. Realizing his place in the Thalmor plots, his next move was to kill Torygg and shock the jarls into choosing sides. From the Thalmor's strategy to undermine the Empire, Ulfric forged Nord nationalism. The Thalmor, like Titus Medes II, underestimated the forces they had set into motion. Although the Nords have always been a proud people, that pride never manifested itself so powerfully. The Empire was totally untested against Skyrim, which as Tiber Septim's cultural homeland had always been one of its strongest supports.

On one hand, this might look like exactly what the Elves intended: the Empire tearing itself apart as the Aldmeri Dominion recovers. On the other hand, perhaps this is exactly the opposite: the destruction of a system that has been in decline since the extinction of the Septim line? What if the Elves' early successes actually relied on the declining institutions of the Third Empire? In Hammerfall, they had already been fought to a stand still and then driven out. How? Because Hammerfall had found its own native dynamism in autonomy. In Skyrim, the Thalmor might not find a tarpit for the Legion but instead a second front in a war suddenly turning against them.

 Troike wrote:

Right, but the whole point in signing it was to rebuild so that they were strong enough to beat the Thalmor. Again, Mede is playing a long game. They won't stay weak forever.

Time the Empire growing stronger is time for the Thalmor to grow stronger which is why they proposed the idea. It heavily favored them not the Empire in the long run. In the Time since the White-Gold Concordant the Empire has only grown weaker not stronger. Ironically the Thalmor have also arguably become weaker. Both sides got the opposite of what they were expecting XD.

Really though looking through the Empire's recent history the White Gold Concordant was a terrible treaty. The Empire still had most of its provinces at the time, the Legions had the momentum of retaking the Imperial City, and agreeing to peace on the terms of outlawing worship of a a major deity was horribly short sided. Since then, the Empire has lost Elsyer, Blackmarsh, and Hammerfell and Skyrim is in rebellion pitying Imperial resources against Imperial resources. The Thalmor are domestically weak in and of themselves but they've done a marvelous Job of weakening the Empire by a thousand cuts.

All the while the Empire is bidding its time, its people are being oppressed by a foreign power. It's not a very well played long game but then we can probably rest assured the Empire has plot armor on its side so they'll win anyway EDIT EDIT: Actually wouldn't be shocked if we got a Dragon Break on this on.

Not really. All that's been posted here is evidence of Imperial citizens being racist, while the Legion and Imperial government are most certainly not. The Stormcloak soldiers meanwhile waltz around quite openly abusing non-Nords.

The Empire never stopped or even made issue of the mass enslavement of Argonians or the prejudices against the Orcs. Equality never seems to be very high on the Empire's list of priorities. While Skyrim never characterizes the Legion in such a way, and I understand that, it doesn't really make the rest of the lore in the series disappear. And the Stormclaoks themselves don't openly abuse anyone. The Stormcloak NPC's have about all the same dialogue as the other guards. Its the people surrounding and supporting the Stormcloaks that really characterize this aspect of the movement for us. Actual Stormloak soldiers are rather stoic fellows

Sure it is. Racism? Never seems to work out too well in the end. The alternative choice, meanwhile, has a reputation for tolerating other races. Long-term, the Imperials are a far better cultural influence.

What if someone doesn't think the Empire can win? Ulfric certainly doesn't, and I doubt people in Hammerfell are holding out much hope either. The Empire has abandoned people and entire provinces to the Thalmor to bid its time. While it might be their only shot at winning long term, it can't really expect the people to stand on the sidelines and watch waiting for the Empire to come down from on high to rescue them.

 LordofHats wrote:

Before the Markarth incident, things were calm. Civil war was certainly not brewing. After the Markarth incident happened, a charismatic, popular leader began inciting rebellion and succeeded.

If you can call the Empire needing to hire a private citizen to deal with an internal rebellion that took over a major city 'calm' and if you want to look at the Markarth Incident as though it exists in a vacuum devoid of any other context. Ulfric fought in the Imperial City when the Thalmor invaded and saw what they did. He was angry when instead of fighting the Legions were ordered to stand down for the White-Gold Concordant and further angered when the White-Gold Concordant was forced against him after he fought for the Empire not once but twice to support it. Ulfric has no reason to believe the Empire can ever oppose the Thalmor. It's already been 20 years. The Thalmor still seem to him as strong as ever, while the Empire seems to just keep getting weaker.

The banning of Talos worship is definetely a short-term cause. On its own, however, it did not cause Ulfric to begin pushing for open rebellion against the Empire. The Markarth incident, the trigger, is what did that.

You have it a little backwared. Markarth is definitely the trigger but the banning of Talos Worship is more of a long term cause not a short term cause since it was an issue of tension even before Markarth. Even as a mere symbolic banning without enforcement it played a role in the Markarth Incident before and after. You can't look at the Markarth Incident as a trigger without looking at what caused it; the weakening of the Legion to the point it needed a private army to settle civil unrest, and the banning of Talos worship that the Empire allows the Thalmor to enforce against its own people.

EDIT: Actually gonna concede to Machu's post above on those points. Much better said than I.

 LordofHats wrote:
In part though my own favor for Ulfric is probably a mirror of my view that Tullius is a rather bland fellow. Ulfric has both mystery and charm that makes following his character exciting. Tullius is... Tullius.

The personality of General Tullius is a meditation on what happens when might has no choices: dogged commitment to a very technical sense of duty. Ulfric is his opposite, a meditation on what happens when a man chooses to be mighty, which is why he is ambiguous. Right or wrong, he is the man who will define this moment in history. Finally, Balgruf is poised between them: he has a choice but not the courage to take it. He's too caught up in the Imperial past to catch a glimpse of the future Ulfric can see. While Tullius has no choice and Ulfric irrevocably makes his choice, Balgruf wants to preserve his. But it's Ulfric's world now: everyone must choose.

I just love how massive and deep Skyrim debates get.

 Manchu wrote:
the elimination of Talos's cult quickly became one of their actual goals.

Oh, it's always been an actual goal of theirs. Apart from their often stated issue with a man being a god, there's also a popular theory that they're actively trying to destroy Talos, and by extension Mundas, by stopping worship of him.

 Manchu wrote:
On one hand, this might look like exactly what the Elves intended: the Empire tearing itself apart as the Aldmeri Dominion recovers. On the other hand, perhaps this is exactly the opposite: the destruction of a system that has been in decline since the extinction of the Septim line? What if the Elves' early successes actually relied on the declining institutions of the Third Empire?

I've heard this said before, that Ulfric winning could result in an improved Empire, but I just don't see it. If he wins, it's not like the Empire is going to bow down to him or he's going to be able to invade the Empire to take charge. Ultimately, it'll just be a further divided Tamriel while the Thalmor remain as strong as ever.

 Manchu wrote:
In Hammerfall, they had already been fought to a stand still and then driven out. How? Because Hammerfall had found its own native dynamism in autonomy.

To be fair, Hammerfell was fighting a Dominion that had just come out of the Great War back then. The High Elves've had some time to recover since then.

 LordofHats wrote:

Really though looking through the Empire's recent history the White Gold Concordant was a terrible treaty. The Empire still had most of its provinces at the time, the Legions had the momentum of retaking the Imperial City

That momentum doesn't count for mucb when your armies are exhausted.

 LordofHats wrote:
All the while the Empire is bidding its time, its people are being oppressed by a foreign power. It's not a very well played long game

True, but it's probably the best they could do. If they'd refused the treaty, the Empire risked collapsing.

 LordofHats wrote:
The Empire never stopped or even made issue of the mass enslavement of Argonians or the prejudices against the Orcs. Equality never seems to be very high on the Empire's list of priorities. While Skyrim never characterizes the Legion in such a way, and I understand that, it doesn't really make the rest of the lore in the series disappear.

That was probably them not wanting to annoy the locals. I never said that they were moral crusaders for racial equality, just that they were the biggest source of progress in this matter.

 LordofHats wrote:
And the Stormclaoks themselves don't openly abuse anyone.

They do. They're quite overtly racist towards Adrianne Avenicci, being reluctant to buy from her because she isn't a Nord.

 LordofHats wrote:
What if someone doesn't think the Empire can win? Ulfric certainly doesn't, and I doubt people in Hammerfell are holding out much hope either. The Empire has abandoned people and entire provinces to the Thalmor to bid its time. While it might be their only shot at winning long term, it can't really expect the people to stand on the sidelines and watch waiting for the Empire to come down from on high to rescue them.

I can understand why an average citizen might go against the Empire, sure. But as a player who can see the whole picture, I can see that the Empire can potentially win, and be in a stronger overall position because of it.

 LordofHats wrote:
If you can call the Empire needing to hire a private citizen to deal with an internal rebellion that took over a major city 'calm' and if you want to look at the Markarth Incident as though it exists in a vacuum devoid of any other context.

It wasn't exactly an internal rebellion. The Forsworn certainly aren't an internal part of Skyrim or Markarth's government. They're their own, seperate force. And I'm not looking at it in a vacuum, I've said that the previous banning of Talos worship was an important factor there.

 LordofHats wrote:
You have it a little backwared. Markarth is definitely the trigger but the banning of Talos Worship is more of a long term cause not a short term cause since it was an issue of tension even before Markarth.

I'd still call it a short-term cause, in that it's been a factor for a relatively short period of time. I'd call Nordic nationalism a long-term factor, for example. Or racial tension against Elves.

 LordofHats wrote:
Even as a mere symbolic banning without enforcement it played a role in the Markarth Incident before and after. You can't look at the Markarth Incident as a trigger without looking at what caused it; the weakening of the Legion to the point it needed a private army to settle civil unrest, and the banning of Talos worship that the Empire allows the Thalmor to enforce against its own people.

I'm dubbing it the trigger in that it was what convinced Ulfric to go out and rebel. And yes, the Empire was quite weakened, but as I've said that won't be forever.

That popular theory sounds like people are projecting D&D-type mechanics onto TES. I don't think stymieing the worship of Talos would drain his divinity. Whether he is actually divine or not, after all, is a matter of faith rather than fact.

To clarify, I don't think Ulfric would be able to found a Fourth Empire. He's a man of vision and conviction but he's no Tiber Septim. The most he could accomplish is mobilizing Skyrim to ally with Hammerfall and ultimately confine the Aldmeri Dominion to the Summerset Isles. The main hypothesis there is that the Aldmeri Dominion may have been successful because they were fighting a centralized Empire in decline rather than vibrant independent states.

As for Hammerfall, the Elves did even more poorly there than in Cyrodiil. As LoH mentioned, the key takeaway is neither the Empire nor the Dominion have recovered to the extent they might have reasonably expected when negotiating the Concordat.

 Manchu wrote:
Whether he is actually divine or not, after all, is a matter of faith rather than fact.

Not to say that that theory is necessarily correct, but it seems that Talos is indeed divine. His shrines confer a tangible blessing like any other, and we meet what seems to be an avatar of him in Morrowind.

http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Wulf

 Manchu wrote:
As for Hammerfall, the Elves did even more poorly there than in Cyrodiil. As LoH mentioned, the key takeaway is neither the Empire nor the Dominion have recovered to the extent they might have reasonably expected when negotiating the Concordat.

Very true, but Hammerfell was fighting a Dominion that had just come out of the Great War. The Domionion may have recovered significantly since then. Or not. Suppose we don't really know for sure.

 Havok210 wrote:
So I am in the midst of Skyrim and I am torn on which faction to support. I know that High Elves have a tie to the Empire due to the Aldmeri Dominion, but is it unrealistic to have a high elf join the Stormcloaks?

Were all Southern people pro slavery? Did all Germans kill Jews? Of course not. Play what you want man, besides in the end, you're playing a video game

I don't think there is any reason to believe the Aldmeri Dominion is substantially recovered from its defeats in Cyrodiil and Hammerfall. If so, they should be attacking Cyrodiil again during the course of the game's story -- the height of the civil war in Skyrim would be the most opportune moment for them. The Elves' position strikes me as very weak, except vis-a-vis the Empire ... which in turn seems committed to the idea of Thalmor strength for the sake of maintaining Imperial unity.

Inspired by this thread, I thought about giving Skyrim another tryor rather get back into it. I installed the latest SKSE, started it up, then got the "Title Screen crash" thingy that is related to your installed mods. I'd have to go through all mods, check them, maybe deactivate a few to check which is the problematic one...yeah, screw that.

Can you just start fresh?

Ye, but that'd require deinstalling all mods (or deactivating them), then getting them back in, check the load order, check for any other conflicts, getting the DLC and savegames back in etc. Got a meeting soon, might give it a try afterwards. It's just...sigh. They release a game that is heavily dependant on mods and then don't further support implementing those.

My bet's that it's either Deadly Dragons or Wars in Skyrim that's causing the issue. Especially the former caused a lot of issues in the past despite being a darn simple mod.

What I really didn't like in Skyrim was the magic system...sure, even melee was very bland and after Dark Souls and Chivalry, it's a joke of a "system", but in Skyrim, I basically used 2 damage spells (single target / AoE) and the healing one, later on, I only used the AoE variant as I had enough mana. It just was so boring to play. My favorite playthrough was with an Aragorn sort-of guy, focussing Greatweapons and Archery. Great game, exploring is awesome, but the gameplay and story are really, really bad.

Yeah, I've read your opinion on Skyrim around here many times now ... and your experience sounds nothing like mine. My current character, for example, focuses on light armor/two handed without resto; so combat is plenty interesting.

 Manchu wrote:
Yeah, I've read your opinion on Skyrim around here many times now ... and your experience sounds nothing like mine. My current character, for example, focuses on light armor/two handed without resto; so combat is plenty interesting.

I have never used Restoration magic in my Skyrim playthroughs, and I have to agree with Manchu, combat is plenty interesting. And there is just a satisfying crunch when I embed Wuthrad into a guy's skull

I've never done the whole mage thing in Skyrim... I'm half tempted to give it a whirl and go Vampire Lord with it.

 Manchu wrote:
I don't think there is any reason to believe the Aldmeri Dominion is substantially recovered from its defeats in Cyrodiil and Hammerfall. If so, they should be attacking Cyrodiil again during the course of the game's story -- the height of the civil war in Skyrim would be the most opportune moment for them. The Elves' position strikes me as very weak, except vis-a-vis the Empire ... which in turn seems committed to the idea of Thalmor strength for the sake of maintaining Imperial unity.

I dunno, seems like the Elves are very much seeing the civil war as a way to bleed the empire dry. A Stormcloak victory does end with Tullius, Rikke and most of the Third Legion being killed. I'd wager that their ultimate plan is to let the civil war weaken the Empire as much as possible, and then swoop in to attack a weakened Empire.

 Sigvatr wrote:
What I really didn't like in Skyrim was the magic system ... but in Skyrim, I basically used 2 damage spells (single target / AoE) and the healing one, later on, I only used the AoE variant as I had enough mana.

Personally, I really enojyed the magic system. My main character is a pure mage, and makes use of a wide variety of spells from all of the schools. Dragonhide to armour up before a fight, invisibility to sneak around or escape, incinerate for doing damage, fast healing for healing and summon Dremora Lord for quick meatshields. Paralyse is also a very fun spell to use.

I played a high level VampLord last go. Fighting a fire-breathing dragon at noon was ... frustrating.

 Manchu wrote:
I played a high level VampLord last go. Fighting a fire-breathing dragon at noon was ... frustrating.

Also looking for a reason to actually complete that side of the Dawnguard DLC. I'm on my second playthrough and both of my characters have been "Good." I need a reason to actually be evil

I came up with the character that became the vamplord in a Dakka discussion about being "heroic" in Skyrim. He was an Imperial one-handed/shield/resto (a.k.a., "paladin") and my goal was to see if he could resist the evil quests. Well, he fell spectacularly (Namira's/Boethia's quests) so the road to vampirism was easy enough. Truth is, though, the vampire side of Dawnguard doesn't feel that evil.

My vision of combat is just altered now after playing both Dark Souls / Demon Souls and Chivalry as both games use a heavily skill-based, realistic way of fighting whereas Skyrim's fighting is very one-dimensional and the AI is subpar as well, not being able to properly reacto what you're doing, even on Master with Higher Difficulty mod.

I really liked Skyrim's combat system as well when I first played it (and the second time I played through...), it's just that expectations grow over time and in retrospective, Skyrim's combat system is just bad as in one-dimensional and predictable.

Skyrim with a battle system like Chivalry? Yes please. Oh dear lord, I'd orgasm.

@Sigvatr
There's mods you can get to improve the combat AI dramatically. Maybe try one of those if you plan on another playthrough?

 Manchu wrote:
I came up with the character that became the vamplord in a Dakka discussion about being "heroic" in Skyrim. He was an Imperial one-handed/shield/resto (a.k.a., "paladin") and my goal was to see if he could resist the evil quests. Well, he fell spectacularly (Namira's/Boethia's quests) so the road to vampirism was easy enough. Truth is, though, the vampire side of Dawnguard doesn't feel that evil.

Heh. At the moment, I have the opposite thing. An evil character who I can't decide whether or not they'd join the Vampires.

The Higher Difficulty mod included some AI fixes and improvements, I'll check Nexus for any newer mods on said matter.

It wasn't exactly an internal rebellion. The Forsworn certainly aren't an internal part of Skyrim or Markarth's government. They're their own, seperate force. And I'm not looking at it in a vacuum, I've said that the previous banning of Talos worship was an important factor there.

It's internal in the sense that it happened within the Empire's borders where they would presumably be capable of maintaining order.

came up with the character that became the vamplord in a Dakka discussion about being "heroic" in Skyrim. He was an Imperial one-handed/shield/resto (a.k.a., "paladin") and my goal was to see if he could resist the evil quests. Well, he fell spectacularly (Namira's/Boethia's quests) so the road to vampirism was easy enough. Truth is, though, the vampire side of Dawnguard doesn't feel that evil.

I keep hoping Bethesda would take a few more ques from Bioware in questing. Sure, in a Bioware game the functional differences between option 1 and 2 are kind of shallow, it at least feels like the choice mattered. In Skyrim I don't ever really feel like what few choices are presented really matter in the end (outside of the Civil War storyline).

The difference between siding with the Dawnguard and the Vampires is practically nil in the main storyline. The side stories make the vampires more evil but more laughably evil. Laughable like "how are you nitwits still in charge around here anyway."

EDIT: And actually while were all here and on the subject, where do other posters want to see Elder Scrolls VI go? On the one hand I'd love a game to conclude the story started in Skyrim between the Empire and the Thalmor. On the other, I wouldn't be shocked if this conflicted were concluded for us behind the scenes and the series moved on.

If we got to continue the game from the current story I'd live it to be focused in Valenwood just because the scenery could be awesome (cities built atop massive walking trees? Please take my money!) but with small slivers of Elyswer and Cyrodil (Anvil/Kvatch) to give the conflict a more 'large' feel.

I'd also love a game focused in Hammerfell or High Rock/Daggerfall (Including Orsinium).

First of all: give us an ending! Skyrim's "ending" was a HUGE letdown and Bethesda should be ashamed of themselves for ruining the game's end so much.

Secondly: improve the combat system, sth. similar to Chivalry would be awesome.

Thirdly: Give us a storyline! Skyrim had nothing you could call a story. The potential was there, but it all felt very shallow and in the end, it was quite a letdown.

Fourthly: As with every current-gen TES, mods will fix it.

..and all in all: give us Skyrim 1.5. Skyrim was a 7.5/10 game without mods and a solid 9/10 game with mods. Keep most of the stuff we got with this awesome game, improve its weaknesses and release a nigh-perfect game.

Shame it won't take place in Skyrim again, as I am not really interested in most other provinces and if it's a desert one...please don't >.<

Well, that is one area in which I do agree with Sigvatr regarding TES: there should be a stronger persistent event dimension.

I predict the "official story" will be that the Thalmor succeeded in destroying the Third Empire but were themselves defeated by a coalition of the resulting independent states, including Skyrim. Apart from that, I have no clue what Bethesda will do in TES VI.

What I would really like to see is (1) a game set in Hammerfell and (2) a game where the player is the "great (wo)man of history" rather than that person's helper. In Oblivion and Skyrim, Martin and Ulfric were the main characters. In Morrowind, the player was the main character. Without saying one way is superior to the other, I'd like to see TES VI return to the character taking on the main role even if the effect s/he has on the world is ultimately open-ended within the game world itself, as with the Neveraine.

In that sense, my initial thought is that TES VI should be about the next Tiber Septim, i.e., the founder of the Fourth Empire. But as grand as it sounds, I think that's ultimately a bad idea: TES VI should focus on deeply exploring one area, as Skyrim does, and a dynastic founder would probably need to be all over the place. So instead, I'd like to see the ideas of nationalism and ethnicity as well as empire and independence explored in even greater depth. I think a main story centering around the struggle to re-establish Orsinium could be awesome.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sigvatr wrote:
and if it's a desert one...please don't >.<

Why? Hammerfell seems really interesting. In many ways, it would be a perfect setting to pick up where Skyrim left off. Hammerfell has already gained its independence from the Empire (having rejected the White-Gold Concordat) and even overcome a civil way, between the Crowns and Forebears, in order to drive out the Second Aldmeri Dominion.

Just personal preference. I hate games that take places in desert, I'm a forest / snow guy.

 Sigvatr wrote:
I'm a forest / snow guy.

Me too. I just think we've seen that in the past two TES. Plus, I doubt Bethesda would make a desert as boring as what other game companies seem to.

 Manchu wrote:
I predict the "official story" will be that the Thalmor succeeded in destroying the Third Empire but were themselves defeated by a coalition of the resulting independent states, including Skyrim.

Not sure myself. What is very interesting here is that it's the first time in a TES game that a player has been free to make their own choice on how to decide the future of Tamrielic politics. It'll be very interesting to see how Bethesda handles it. Though I don't see them doing save porting like in Mass Effect, so it'll probably be one choice or the other. Personally, not sure which side it'll be.

 Manchu wrote:
Ulfric was the main characterI

Have to disagree with that. He's just a side you can pick in the war, really not that significant to the main plot. Meanwhile, your character is the Dragonborn, a heavy focus of prophecy and history, and ultimately the only one capable of dealing with Alduin.

 LordofHats wrote:

It's internal in the sense that it happened within the Empire's borders where they would presumably be capable of maintaining order.

Bear in mind, this was happening while The Empire was losing the war against the Dominion.

http://elderscrolls.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline#4E_174

They were hardly in the best position to help.

In Skyrim, you either work for Ulfric or oppose him. He's the definitive personality of the game. He doesn't feature very much in the main quest -- but then again, neither does anyone! As LoH pointed out, the threat of Alduin pales in comparison to the civil war. While Alduin is certainly a greater danger to Nirn than either Ulfric or the Thalmor, the "culture" of the game itself is less defined by the return of dragons than by the politics of Man and Mer.

To the common man, dragons are something that are rarely seen and things that have not been seen for hundreds of years. Compare that to the fact that the way of life in Skyrim has been affected greatly by the Empire and the death of High King Torygg means that to the average citizen, Ulfric and his war is far more important to the average citizen than dragons.

With that being said, I wouldn't mind seeing destructable locations in the next game. Village attacked by w/e the big bad is? People are injured/dead and rebuilding. As the game goes on and you level up, more things are destroyed. Perhaps it is well known that the main character has the ability to stop what is going on, and people begin to treat you different based on x number of villages that have been attacked/destroyed. Idk, perhaps to give some urgency to it.

But you could say the same thing about Tullius. In the civil war, you either opppose what he's doing or side with him. And "definitive" personality is rather subjective. One could take view that they, the player are the "difinitive" personality as it is their decisions that drive and shape events.

I'd certainly disagree that Alduin pales in comparison to anything. He's called the World-eater! If he's not stopped, then the civil war hardly matters. I'd say that the game's focus is very much on the Dragons returning, since they're an ever present and deadly threat while the civil war can basically be ignored and left in the background.

 Alfndrate wrote:
I wouldn't mind seeing destructable locations in the next game.

Things should be destructible and repairable. I always thought it was a terrible shame that Kvatch was never rebuilt during TES IV -- or Helgen in Skyrim for that matter.

 Troike wrote:
But you could say the same thing about Tullius.

No you can't. Tullius is just an employee doing his job.

 Troike wrote:
I'd say that the game's focus is very much on the Dragons returning

Not really. Wherever you go in Skyrim, people have much stronger feelings on the civil war than dragons (except Sky Haven Temple and High Hrothgar).

 Troike wrote:
But you could say the same thing about Tullius. In the civil war, you either opppose what he's doing or side with him. And "definitive" personality is rather subjective. One could take view that they, the player are the "difinitive" personality as it is their decisions that drive and shape events.

But Tullius is the status quo. He is stability, if not a little constriction, for the average Nord. Things were not terrible under Torygg from what we have gathered. Ulfric represents that stability being thrown off in an effort to free Skyrim, regardless of the far reaching effects this has on the greater world, Ulfric's actions affect everyone in the world just as much as Alduin's actions do.

I'd certainly disagree that Alduin pales in comparison to anything. He's called the World-eater! If he's not stopped, then the civil war hardly matters. I'd say that the game's focus is very much on the Dragons returning, since they're an ever present and deadly threat while the civil war can basically be ignored and left in the background.

Alduin is a backdrop piece. I never saw him attack places, I never got into fights with him, and I never saw him wreck havoc beyond Helgen... What a big baddie! Sure there are dragons everywhere, but that doesn't matter, I kill them all like I kill a wolf... one hack at a time. Alduin should be a presence in the world. You should hear about the world eater attacking places, not random dragon spawns.

Thing is, there's always this big problem that the player prevents in TES games. And that means the big problem never really becomes a big issue in history. The Neveraine defeated Dagoth Ur -- so guess what, Akulakhan did not make much of a splash. Same thing regarding Mehrunes Dagon invading the world in TES IV and Alduin's return in TES V.

 Alfndrate wrote:

But Tullius is the status quo. He is stability, if not a little constriction, for the average Nord. Things were not terrible under Torygg from what we have gathered. Ulfric represents that stability being thrown off in an effort to free Skyrim, regardless of the far reaching effects this has on the greater world, Ulfric's actions affect everyone in the world just as much as Alduin's actions do.

Why is the breaking of the status quo automatically more important than the enforcing of it? If anything, they are dependant on each other to be important. Tuillius winnign affects everybody too. The Empire keeps a province, ban on Talos worship is fully enforced and Elisif becomes High Queen.

 Alfndrate wrote:
Alduin is a backdrop piece. I never saw him attack places, I never got into fights with him, and I never saw him wreck havoc beyond Helgen... What a big baddie! Sure there are dragons everywhere, but that doesn't matter, I kill them all like I kill a wolf... one hack at a time. Alduin should be a presence in the world. You should hear about the world eater attacking places, not random dragon spawns.

He is, ultimately, the game's main antagonist. And of course you never see him wreck havoc much beyond Helgan, besides seeing him at Kynesgrove and in a random encounter. That's the case with a lot of video game antagonists, you're introduced to them in the first part, see them a few times throughout and finally meet for a massive showdown at the end. Ulfric, rather, will only ever be in Windhelm or attacking Solitude if you're feeling rebellious.

 Manchu wrote:
Thing is, there's always this big problem that the player prevents in TES games. And that means the big problem never really becomes a big issue in history. The Neveraine defeated Dagoth Ur -- so guess what, Akulakhan did not make much of a splash. Same thing regarding Mehrunes Dagon invading the world in TES IV and Alduin's return in TES V.

I wouldn't call Dagon's invasion a small issue historically by means. Firstly, it was entirely unprecedented. A plane of Oblivion tried to outright invade Mundas. And I'd say that it was a big damn issue in history. The Oblivion Crisis caused the Empire to over-extend, and start losing control of the Provinces. The Thalmor and An-Xileel were easily able to take control of their respective lands with the Empire so weakened. The Thalmor especially rode to power on the back of the Oblvion Crisis, claiming it was they who restored the barrier between Mundas and Oblivion and the Legion not being strong enough to discourage them from taking power.

As for Alduin, I'll wager that quite publically nearly ending the world, and bringing Dragons back into existence will make something of a splash historically.

 Manchu wrote:
Thing is, there's always this big problem that the player prevents in TES games. And that means the big problem never really becomes a big issue in history. The Neveraine defeated Dagoth Ur -- so guess what, Akulakhan did not make much of a splash. Same thing regarding Mehrunes Dagon invading the world in TES IV and Alduin's return in TES V.

I've never beaten Morrowind or Oblivion (I should fix this), but there doesn't seem to be much about the previous games and their endings in Skyrim so I don't know how much of an effect those world threatening issues are noted in history. Which is why I would love to see a war torn skyrim with destroyed villages, hubs of humanity struggling against the Dragons, with a few major cities surviving the attacks (like Solitude, Windhelm, the College with the rest of Winterhold being destroyed and a magical barrier being put up around it).

I think showing the effect of Alduin and the dragons could have an effect on Skyrim would make for a better game.

Like, there just doesn't seem to be ANY sort of urgency to my questing, but like I'm pushing through dawnguard to stop all these damn vampire attacks.

I guess I'm not being clear enough. It's not that the Oblivion Crisis or the return of dragons are historically insignificant. It's that Mehrunes Dagon and Alduin did not destroy the world. So even though there were these massive threats, what ends up being important is not the threats themselves but their context. Only a handful of people in the world know what Alduin is up to. It's just not as culturally important as the civil war. The fact is, Alduin came back and was slain, the end. The effects of the civil war will be felt for decades yet to come at least.

 Manchu wrote:
I guess I'm not being clear enough. It's not that the Oblivion Crisis or the return of dragons are historically insignificant. It's that Mehrunes Dagon and Alduin did not destroy the world. So even though there were these massive threats, what ends up being important is not the threats themselves but their context. Only a handful of people in the world know what Alduin is up to. It's just not as culturally important as the civil war. The fact is, Alduin came back and was slain, the end. The effects of the civil war will be felt for decades yet to come at least.

Sorry if it feels/reads like I'm disagreeing with you (in case you're responding to my post). I agree that the Civil War has longer lasting effects than Alduin's presence, but this is why I wish that the BBEG had more of an effect on the world than he does. If it was Alduin came back, destroyed 5 of the 9 holds and then was slain, but was also the cause of the Empire and the Stormcloaks stopping their war to fight back, then he might end up as something more than a footnote .

Nah, I was responding to Troike -- should have been more clear.

You could connect the Oblivion Crisis to the gradual fall of the Empire beyond the collapse of the Septim Dynasty. It seems that the Legions all got recalled to Cyrodill during the Crisis, which forced some of other provinces (namely Morrowind as mentioned by characters) to fight the Crisis themselves. In this way the Oblivion Crisis, while seeming localized in ESIV did have a global effect in Tamriel (more than Alduin thus far seems to). This no doubt brought some bitter feelings to the provinces and maybe even paved the way for the Thalmor to seize power in Summerset (actually Summerset would be a cool place to go next too).

Likewise, in Daggerfall the player character was a pretty big player. Sure he was doing what he did at the bequest of the Emperor but you could side with a whole bunch of people in that game's ending and the Dragon Break made it all canon which is cool. Unfortunately Bethesda seems to be moving away from Dragon Breaks.

Well, it's a pretty important part of the main quest story line ...

 Manchu wrote:
Well, it's a pretty important part of the main quest story line ...

I mean Dragon Breaks in regard to to giving the player character options and making all of them canon in the end XD Sry.

 Alfndrate wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Thing is, there's always this big problem that the player prevents in TES games. And that means the big problem never really becomes a big issue in history. The Neveraine defeated Dagoth Ur -- so guess what, Akulakhan did not make much of a splash. Same thing regarding Mehrunes Dagon invading the world in TES IV and Alduin's return in TES V.

I've never beaten Morrowind or Oblivion (I should fix this), but there doesn't seem to be much about the previous games and their endings in Skyrim so I don't know how much of an effect those world threatening issues are noted in history. Which is why I would love to see a war torn skyrim with destroyed villages, hubs of humanity struggling against the Dragons, with a few major cities surviving the attacks (like Solitude, Windhelm, the College with the rest of Winterhold being destroyed and a magical barrier being put up around it).

I think showing the effect of Alduin and the dragons could have an effect on Skyrim would make for a better game.

Like, there just doesn't seem to be ANY sort of urgency to my questing, but like I'm pushing through dawnguard to stop all these damn vampire attacks.

Morrowind was just a footnote at best in history, much like Alduin, few knew what was going on, since it was a really just a Blade operation. The bigger real impacts came afterwards when the triumvirate collapsed on itself, with two of the three dying, and that itself had bigger impacts to the regional politics then the main story line. It's almost like Skyrim, the main story, in which your working to save the world, ends up being a smaller affair then a side story overall.

Oblivion was differant in those regards. The Oblivion Crisis did have resounding impacts throughout Tamriel. The Septim dynasty was ended. The seeds for the war with the Altmer were planted. None of the side quests/expansions really played a huge thing like the story line did.

For the next ES's, I'm hoping for a continuation of the war. The Empire is invading Summerset Isle.

The thing is, the civil war seems really big in Skyrim because it's everywhere you go. And while the troops are there... as already mentioned, Ulfric himself is sat in Windhelm most of the time.
With the Dragons, everyone knows they've come back, the dragons themselves pop up all over the place. Alduin himself, though, can only be seen if you catch him waking up a Dragon from one of the burial mounds until the time comes to confront him (twice).

Spot the similarity? Neither character is actually all that prevalent unless you make a mini-game out of stalking Ulfric (you creepy, creepy person). But the effects of their actions are felt across the game.

You also have to remember that the game is set in Skyrim, so the civil war will seem more important within its borders. Likewise with Dragons *if* they haven't been reawoken elsewhere, which there isn't really any mention of either way. When the next game comes, it's likely to be in a different setting so the civil war will be something only alluded to in comments or mentioned in the lore books. Just like how the events of the other games are barely mentioned in Skyrim.

 Manchu wrote:
I guess I'm not being clear enough. It's not that the Oblivion Crisis or the return of dragons are historically insignificant. It's that Mehrunes Dagon and Alduin did not destroy the world. So even though there were these massive threats, what ends up being important is not the threats themselves but their context. Only a handful of people in the world know what Alduin is up to. It's just not as culturally important as the civil war. The fact is, Alduin came back and was slain, the end. The effects of the civil war will be felt for decades yet to come at least.

Of course noboy ends the world. Would be kinda hard to make sequels otherwise! And I'd argue that the Dragons will have a bigger cultural impact in the long run. If they're in the next TES game, they will have outlasted the civil war, remaining a constant threat that civilisation must adapt to. All because of Alduin.

And yet who will know Alduin's name? Ulfric, meanwhile, is already (in)famous and if his rebellion canonically succeeds his fame will only grow. Alduin is dead no matter what Bethesda chooses as the "official ending" of TES V. But we're kind of off-topic. The issue is, Ulfric is more important to the setting than Alduin in TES V itself. Alduin may be hypothetically more important but in actuality he's doomed from the start and long before any but a handful know what/who he is and what he's up to. By that point, every man, woman, and child of Skyrim is living in an era that Ulfric more than any other person has shaped.

I can't find the exact wording, but Viarmo of the Bard's College says the exact opposite... about how kings and their reigns come and go, but tales of Dragons will last for eras. He's kinda got a point...

If that was indeed his point then he's being ironic: the Bard's College quest is about remembering King Olaf, who imprisoned Numinex in Dragonsreach.

 Manchu wrote:
And yet who will know Alduin's name?

That all depends on how popular Tale of the Tongues gets.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJn22pzVNUQ

As the song shows, the people are well aware what was happening.

And yet even so no one anywhere is talking about Alduin.

LOL also, the song is about what happened in the First Age.

 Manchu wrote:
And yet even so no one anywhere is talking about Alduin.

LOL also, the song is about what happened in the First Age.

But they're all in the pub, hearing the bard play. It's a sure indication that it has entered into common knowledge. That and the guards will thank you for saving the world in some of their greetings.

Also, I know the song is from the First Age, but it's specifically bought back because of what the player does. Mikael and Karita even dedicate the song to the Dragonborn before playing it.

But that doesn't mean they know Alduin is back -- it just means they know the Dragonborn is supposed to be a dragon slayer.

 Manchu wrote:
But that doesn't mean they know Alduin is back

I don't see how it doesn't. It's only after you the player kill Alduin for the good that the bards start playing the song (which is about Alduin's defeat) and dedicating it to you, and the guards start saying "You have vanquished a great evil from this land".

Even in the most charitable reading, they still aren't even mentioning Alduin and no one else is talking about him. Face it, the civil war is much more important to the game.

But the song indicates that the news has entered into popular culture, and the guards mention it regularly. Therefore, it can be reasonably inferred that Alduin and his defeat are common knowledge.

The existence of sweet roll theft is also common knowledge. The subject to hand is, Ulfric's civil war is the most important in-game topic.

I disagree. Lots of NPCs talk about it, but Alduin is very much the focus of the plot.

And hey, you don't get a new song for deciding the civil war.

Which NPCs talk about Alduin? Besides the secret society members and the isolated monks, I mean.

Bards 'n Guards.

Er, as we established, neither group mentions him by name as a current event topic. The bards dedicate singing some old song about ancient times to the Dragonborn while the Guards mention a great evil. As I said, even if we were to assume they know that Alduin himself had returned and that he was killed, it has no more bearing on the culture of the setting than Ragnar the Red or stolen sweet rolls.

Hey man. Sweet Rolls is serious business.

I give that meme 10/10.

 Manchu wrote:
Er, as we established, neither group mentions him by name as a current event topic. The bards dedicate singing some old song about ancient times to the Dragonborn while the Guards mention a great evil.

The Bards technically do. The song has Alduin's name in it, and they start singing it once you beat Alduin. What's more, they dedicate it to you for what you did. And the guards are obviously referring to Alduin, as they only say it once you've killed him. You can kill all the Dragons you want and they don't say it, but it's your final defeat of Alduin that triggers it. Therefore, they're aware of what happened and therefore of Alduin.

Lol wow this thread has taken off! I did not expect this many pages!