Ulfric's Duel

[Zephiris]

I always wondered about the details and rules of the duel.

1. Given Torygg was clearly not a fighter, I don't think he would've assented to the duel willingly, so theoretically bilateral consent is not necessary for a duel to take place for the throne.
2. There wasn't also any other criteria specifically listed for the challenger by the "old nord ways," and shouts are allowed.
3. So... If I help ulfric - regardless of how terrible his policies are - support the "old nord ways," and then challenge him in a duel for the throne (which does not require his consent), theoretically I can "shout him to pieces" with my superior shout after he wins civil war and become high king of skyrim, then reshape his flawed ultranationalistic policies as I see fit?

Is there anything I'm missing in my reasoning?

p.s. Since I play as a altmer, it'd mean that if the reasoning hold valid, I'll eventually become the first mer high king of skyrim~ Take that traditions~

[Baloth-Kul]

1. Oh, he did. I totally forget who says it, but he didn't have a choice. Either refuse the duel, and look weak, giving Ulfric more strength to his claim...or accept, and die with some honour.
2. Apparently.
3. Nuh...no. The Dragonborn may be an important figure, but you're no noble. I don't think the province would support the Dragonborn as High King/Queen, even if they were a Nord.

[Br3admax]

Thanes are nobles. The Dragonborn just has no claim to jarlship.

[Zephiris]

So, if thane is not noble enough to challenge, then my options would be to grab some jarlship first...
1. Challenge poor-ol' Dengeir for his Jarlship as a thane of falkreath, and send him to an early grave.
2. Plot with elisif by "marrying the widow," as elisif hopefully will be more than happy to join hands with someone who would get revenge against ulfric for her lovely torygg~... though it would've been easier to side with the imperials if I plan to become high king by marriage => Dark Brotherhood contract to murder elisif => claim right by marriage as elisif has done?

I guess since Ulfric probably wouldn't want to look weak himself after becoming high king from a terrible civil war, he will probably accept the duel?

p.s. If the jarls dont recognize me, who's with me for a dovahkiin rebellion? ;p I'm sure itll be more acceptable by the empire if I pledge nominal fealty to the emperor, probably will get imperial help XD

[Baloth-Kul]

1. He could refuse the challenge, though. And the people might not accept or recognize you.
2. ...Even for revenge, I don't think Elisif would marry. I don't think she'd ever remarry. Pretty sure she truly loved Torygg.

Though he's also very concerned with himself. He could refuse.

...Or you could just side with the Empire to begin with. Heheh.

[Br3admax]

2. ...Even for revenge, I don't think Elisif would marry. I don't think she'd ever remarry. Pretty sure she truly loved Torygg.

So? This isn't about love. This is about power.

That being said, Bethesda would never allow this.

[CBR JGWRR]

Your character winds up being a demi-god/goddess who can do anything Tiber did and have an easier time of it. Why settle for just the position of High King/Queen, when becoming an Eleventh Divine is on the table for taking?

A brief non-mod word of warning - no one turn this into the typical Imperial/Stormcloak thread. Those never end well

[Pilaf The Defiler]

I always wondered about the details and rules of the duel.

1. Given Torygg was clearly not a fighter, I don't think he would've assented to the duel willingly, so theoretically bilateral consent is not necessary for a duel to take place for the throne.

He did. He admitted it himself, to the Last Dragonborn, who had the opportunity to speak to him in Sovngarde.

2. There wasn't also any other criteria specifically listed for the challenger by the "old nord ways," and shouts are allowed.

Not that we're explicitly told about in the game, although I assume having the support of the other Jarls and being a noble yourself doesn't hurt.

3. So... If I help ulfric - regardless of how terrible his policies are - support the "old nord ways," and then challenge him in a duel for the throne (which does not require his consent), theoretically I can "shout him to pieces" with my superior shout after he wins civil war and become high king of skyrim, then reshape his flawed ultranationalistic policies as I see fit?

Maybe. We don't know enough about what those supposed ways are to comment, but Ulfric has a huge amount of support and a bit of legitimacy in that he's a hereditary ruler of a Hold. The LDB, depending on the point in his or her career, is either a nobody or is even more popular. So it depends.

p.s. Since I play as a altmer, it'd mean that if the reasoning hold valid, I'll eventually become the first mer high king of skyrim~ Take that traditions~

The original ruler of the northern lands of Skyrim (called Mereth originally) must have been a Mer, since the Falmer lived there when the Nords arrived. So no. Not the first.

[logansrun]

3. Nuh...no. The Dragonborn may be an important figure, but you're no noble. I don't think the province would support the Dragonborn as High King/Queen, even if they were a Nord.

Um, why don't you explain that to Tiber Septim, or the entire Dragon-blooded Septim Dynasty and line? If the Last Dragonborn doesn't have a claim or right to the throne, not only the throne of High King of Skyrim, but the throne of the Emperor as well, then who, exactly, does?

[Br3admax]

The family that's actually running the empire?

[logansrun]

Oh, you mean the Medes? ROFLMAO! And just exactly how long do you think one of those poser wannabes would last in such a duel with a true dragonborn?

[Archer]

A duel≠A claim to the throne. The dragonborn has absolutely no valid claim to any throne, let alone the seat of the Empire.

[logansrun]

So what constitutes the "legitimacy" of a claim? Being a noble? What legitimacy did Titus Mede have to the throne? I would argue that it very much depends on the local customs and traditions as to how the politics are conducted. In the case of Skyrim, a duel absolutely does qualify as a legitimate claim to the throne as the custom and tradition of the Nords was that the high king had to be strong enough to defend his throne and title from any and all challengers.

[AKB]

I actually discuss the issue with the Mede dynasty's legitimacy to some length in a recent blog post. I figure that the Dragonborn would have a legitimate claim on the Empire, if he merely tried to reform it to the standards of the Septim Dynasty.

But to return to the original topic. The challenge for the duel was accepted, as already pointed out it was a Morton's Fork, both option were bad for Torygg. As far as how a duel between Ulfric and the Dragonborn would go, it'd destroy any hope for stability in Skyrim as it'd split the already fractured nation into even more separated camps. But, of course, the game doesn't allow for any of this. It's sort of like how the game defines a small part of Dohvakiin's basic character by making the killing of children impossible (so no matter what, the main character from Bethesda's perspective did not kill children). The Dragonborn is uninterested in becoming a king himself, since the game doesn't provide any option for you to do so in official content.

[Baloth-Kul]

All of this aside, there's a much larger problem between your Dragonborn and being High King; being Dragonborn.

Your destiny is more important, higher, than being a king, and your responsibilities simply deny any chance of being High King. Sit and rule? The Dragonborn has wrongs to right, dragons to kill or command...All heroes and champions vanished, having some other purpose to fulfil elsewhere. The Dragonborn would be no different. Whether it'd mean fighting the Thalmor, or dragons, or some other distant threat, the Dragonborn would not, will not, cannot sit pretty and rule Skyrim. There's just no way. Tiber Septim is a different case altogether. The world needed him to be emperor, and later as a divine. Dovahkiin is a more active hand. You can't compare a champion and a god. Each has their duty, each has their place, and the Dragonborn's place is not on the throne, or in the sky. (Excepting, perhaps, on the back of a dragon.)

And yes, AKB, that's true. Skyrim needs order and stability. There are only two options for that; the Stormcloaks, or the Empire. Realistically, you have to choose one or the other. Anything else is chaos. But that's not a good topic to get into, here.

[CBR JGWRR]

All in good time AKB. Tiber didn't build his empire in only one year...

[AKB]

That's just because he took a nap after each victory. None of his aids were willing to wake him up to continue the warring, because would you be willing to?

[CBR JGWRR]

That's just because he took a nap after each victory. None of his aids were willing to wake him up to continue the warring, because would you be willing to?

The Dovahkiin? Needing aides?

He/she's an unstoppable one man/woman army.

[logansrun]

Ugh, these arguments are ludicrous. Tiber Septim did everything every other dragonborn has been called on for. His "duties" were the same as every other dragonborn, up to and including the last, "destiny" and "fate" aside, simply because the devs, like other "loremasters", can't seem to make the basic distinction of were "destiny", "fate" or predeterminism-predestination ends and free will begins. The free will to write one's own destiny. The game alludes to this many times, up to and including Azura's Star, which is where all this really began.

Ulfric's claim and duel was legitimate. The Empire lied. Ulfric did not "murder" the high king. Torygg's position was only precarious (the previously mentioned "Morton's Fork") because he lacked the strength to defend his throne and his title, which according to the doctrine of manifest destiny would make him illegitimate as high king. His only legitimate claim to the throne was election by the Moot.

Finally, to state that the dragonborn claiming the throne would only serve to further divide both Skyrim and the Empire is pure conjecture and speculation, and to state that the only two options are Stormcloak or Imperial allegiance is a false dichotomy. It's only true from a game mechanics perspective, but if the Dragonborn doesn't have the power to both put down the Stormcloak rebellion and uprising, and to liberate Skyrim from the Empire, both of which we know he is fully capable of in game, is a false dichotomy.

First, we know he has the power to do both, so if he challenged and beat Ulfric then the Stormcloaks would be forced to recognize his legitimacy under the same auspices that they support Ulfric, and to defeat a corrupt Empire is equally within the grasp and reach of the dragonborn, so in reality, it is the dragonborn that is ultimately truly capable of uniting both Skyrim and the Empire and rebuilding both into an entirely new and unified establishment.

[AKB]

Torygg's position was only precarious (the previously mentioned "Morton's Fork") because he lacked the strength to defend his throne and his title, which according to the doctrine of manifest destiny would make him illegitimate as high king.

Yes, the Dragonborn is the true High King due to the belief in the American right to conquer the western regions of the Americas.

[logansrun]

"A witty saying proves nothing."
Le dîner du comte de Boulainvilliers (1767): Deuxième Entretien
Voltaire

Sarcasm aside, that IS the Nordic custom and tradition according to both game and canon lore whether or not you agree or approve.

[AKB]

Quoting Voltaire doesn't make you right. The Nords do not believe in the concept of "Manifest Destiny". It is the American idea of expansion across the continent, it has nothing to do with kings. I believe you are thinking of the "Divine Right of Kings" (which would mean Ulfric would have absolutely no right to challenge Torygg, as he ruled solely by right of the Gods) or the "Mandate of Heaven" (which is a Chinese concept used to explain why dynasties have to fall), and either way, are also not part of the setting. I think you are infusing too much of your fanon into the actual game for me to argue this with you further.

[logansrun]

That is an incorrect assessment. The Nordic custom and tradition that the high king’s “right” and rule depends on his strength and ability to defend his title and throne is a prime example of the concept behind manifest destiny, which at it’s basis and core is the fundamental belief and philosophy of “might makes right” or “survival of the fittest”.

[AKB]

Alright, I would highly recommend you look up those phrases. I'm not going to discuss this further with you.

[logansrun]

I have.

I also comprehend, grasp and understand the philosophy aside from the time periods from which they are derived. The naming conventions we place on these ideas and ideals might be specific to a specific time or place, but the mentality behind them, driving and motivating them are nothing new and have repeated themselves down through history.

Please bear in mind that this game is but a fictional representation, and that much of the "culture" found in the game is someone's modern interpretation of another culture. While the culture described in the game might "predate" it's modern equivalent, the interpretation does not.