Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

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.

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.

 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.

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).

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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?

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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.

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.

 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.

 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.

@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.

 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.

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:

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:
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.

 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.

 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.

 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".

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.