Spoiler Best & Worst Character of Skyrim !

[feliciano182]

The Markarth Incident did, obviously, happen. Forsworn were captured and killed; that much can be taken as fact. Ulfric was clearly involved. But The Bear of Markarth is the only piece of evidence against Ulfric's supposed merciless massacre of innocent men, women, and children. Jarl Igmund doesn't say anything of the sort when you speak to him about the Markarth Incident. Neither does Madanach, in Cidhna Mine, strangely enough; he was the leader of the Forsworn in the Reach at that time, after all, so you'd think that he might have something to say about Ulfric's brutal execution of his people. But nope, not a word.

This is not how in-game lore works, The Bear Of Markarth is historical accounting, it's a description of events of which there's no contradicting evidence whatsoever except for subjective claims, there's not a single objective reason to believe any of the events were not true except for what is basically the "lack of supporting evidence", which is nothing but complete fallacy in the form of appeal to ignorance.

I'm more inclined to believe what I see than what some potentially biased person writes in a book that isn't backed up by any other secondary source. But that's just me.

This is not indicative of anything but game design and mechanics preservation at work, it'd be a rather game-breaking event if the entire Battle-Born family was put to the sword while playing the stormcloak questline, you'd lose a ridiculous amount of NPC's and wouldn't be able to complete many quests, you were never going to see Ulfric put anyone to the sword because it was unfeasable in terms of gameplay design.

Still, it's possible that Ulfric did do all those horrible things in Markarth. I'm not denying that. But, even if he did, his motive was not necessarily rage and bloodlust and sadistic cruelty. He was, after all, hired by the Jarl of Markarth to retake the Reach; isn't it possible that the Jarl also gave him the order to kill anyone who didn't take up arms to help? Or perhaps Ulfric had gone off the deep end after all he suffered in the Great War, killed innocents in an incident of post-traumatic stress dissociation, and later deeply regretted his actions. Or maybe the supposed innocents weren't so innocent after all; most of what we see of and hear from the Forsworn indicate that they themselves are brutal and indiscriminate killers. I don't think it's completely out of question that even the sweet little old ladies could have risen up against the militia—just look at Nana Ildene.

First, you have a misunderstanding of what "The Forsworn" are, the latter are the remnants of the reachmen that managed to escape Ulfric's attack after he was hired to retake The Reach, people who were simply there at the time of Ulfric's attack can only be referred to as "Natives of The Reach", most people at the time, like Braig, had nothing to do with Madanach or those who were part of the uprising in Markarth.

Second, there's no evidence that Igmund ordered him to do such a thing, the accounting specifically states Ulfric Stormcloak gave him the order to put any men capable of raising a sword to be executed were they not to heed to his call of battle, and whatever his motivations had been, he still killed people who didn't support his cause, which is perfectly consistent with his murder of High King Torygg, and his attack on Whiterun; all three sharing a single common trait from Ulfric:

Intolerance.

Do you think Ulfric should have strode into the Blue Palace and challenged Torygg to a game of chess? Of course he went in with the intent to kill him. That's what single combat means. That's the goal of challenging a High King for the right to rule. If he'd snuck into the keep and stabbed Torygg in the back with a dagger, then you could say that it was murder. But it wasn't murder. Ulfric declared his intent, and Torygg accepted knowing that he could (and likely would) very well be killed.

He could've talked to him.

Sybille Stentor reveals that Torygg admired Ulfric and even had thoughts about having Skyrim secede from The Empire, at the time of the duel, Ulfric had entered Solitude under the guise of "discussing" the terms of precisely seeking a way for Skyrim out of The Empire.

But no, Ulfric had to kill a young boy, dishonorably at that, and with the intention of murdering him, only to be used as nothing more than a statement for his political agenda.

Clearly you understand why duels are illegal these days, right ?

If Ulfric had been born with the natural ability to use the Thu'um, I would agree with you. But he spent ten years learning how to Shout—something any Nord could choose to do. It's a learned skill, just as much as swordsmanship or pyromancy is. You don't go into a fight with a handicap so you're at the same level with your opponent's skills and abilities. If Torygg didn't know how to use a sword, what then? Would you expect Ulfric to throw down his weapons and just use his fists? And if Torygg did have much strength in his arms, should Ulfric resort to slapping him a few times across the face instead of throwing punches? You know, just to ensure that he wasn't entering a knife fight with a gun, as you put it.

First, once again, law > tradition.

Second, to be clear, do you actually believe that Bruce Lee would've been the best president of the US ? Because that's what this entire absurdity of a "tradition" suggests, that a bandit with better skill using a greatsword would make for a better ruler than an intelligent scholar without knowledge in martial skills.

Third, Ulfric made a personal choice to train with The Greybeards, that does not mean he's entitled to cheating in a duel that's known to be grounded in honorable and fair combat, if Ulfric truly believed he was the best warrior and ruler, he should've demonstrated that by fighting with his opponent in equal terms, your suggestion that Ulfric would have to "handicap" himself is absurd, Torygg knew how to use a sword, but he was given no chance to defend his throne since the other guy had a weapon that cancelled duels and rational solutions like talking rather than killing.

how are any of these choices different from using a Shout to get the advantage? Because Torygg didn't have the luxury of using Shouts, too? Please refer to my last paragraph.

You're not bound by honorable and fair combat outside of a duel, the latter having clear boundaries about what is "supposedly" accepted behavior within the fight.

Are you sure you're not thinking of Darth Vader? I'm pretty sure he's used that line...........

.........clearly, it was an empty threat, because Ulfric makes no move to attack Whiterun while Balgruuf is still deciding where his allegiance will lie.

.........In any case, Ulfric leaves Balgruuf and Whiterun alone as long as Balgruuf remains neutral; it's only after Balgruuf declares for the Empire that Ulfric moves to take the city. So, no, Ulfric didn't refuse Balgruuf's claim for neutrality; he responded to Balgruuf's declaration for the Empire.

I don't need him to speak that line, it's his mindset and the way he sees people, you're either with Ulfric Stormcloak, or you're only deserving of a sword to the chest.

It's not an empty threat, if I tell you I'm going to punch you throughout the week and I punch you on sunday, then the threat is completely validated, that Ulfric didn't turn his inmediate attention into Whiterun as soon as Balgruuf asked for neutrality does not mean Ulfric wasn't a bully.

What ?! Balgruuf never sides with The Empire at any point throughout the civil war questlines, if you play stormcloak, he refuses Ulfric's claim for High King, yet he does not garrison imperial troops within the city, and in the imperial questline, he still refuses to let The Legion enter his city until Ulfric tells him that he will not leave Whiterun alone, Balgruuf is forced after the entire "axe ordeal" to then seek the help of The Empire, but even after they kick the stormcloaks back into Windhelm, The Legion still leaves Whiterun.

I suspect you've never played the civil war on the side of the Stormcloaks. If you had, you would have heard Ulfric make several statements about the importance of having Whiterun: "Things hinge on Whiterun," "Whiterun is only a means to an end," and after taking the city, "We now control the center. It's a powerful position." Simply put, Whiterun is prosperous, influential, and the most strategically located city in Skyrim. To bypass it, especially after Balgruuf declares for the Empire, would be a downright idiotic move.

I've seen videos, which is more than enough.

And those are nothing but his own subjective comments on what everyone and Galmar's mother already know, Whiterun is a strategically sound position for any of the factions.

That does not mean Ulfric has the right to coerce people into siding with him, would you like it if someone drafted you against your own wishes ? Would you like to be threatened with violence should you refuse ?

Treating a person in a way that follows your own moral code does not equal imposing your moral code onto others. On the contrary, setting aside your own moral code in order to appease that of someone else's is, in a way, allowing that someone else to impose their morality on you. If you expect Ulfric to treat Tullius based on what Tullius believes, then Tullius should in turn treat Ulfric based on what Ulfric believes... and that certainly doesn't happen, does it?

Very nice, so you would be okay with people torturing were they to believe such methods were morally aceptable to achieve their goals ?

Tullius isn't forcing anyone to accept surrender in battle, he is simply surrendering on his own will, and is asking for his decision to be respected, something that Ulfric denies him out of his warped, barbaric frame of morality, he has to ask the Dragonborn to kill him because of course, "it would make for a better song".

He's not hesitant to go to war with the Empire because he fears the Empire. He's hesitant to waste time and resources on a war with the Empire when the real threat is the Aldmeri Dominion, with whom he expects to soon be at war once Skyrim secedes from the Empire.

So we agree that his claims are empty then ? That The Empire is not weak as he so often likes to say, and that the real enemy is indeed the Aldmeri Dominion ?

Excellent way of justifying Ulfric's misguided, violent way I'll say !

He killed the High King while the Empire still controlled Skyrim but is worried about what killing Elisif might do to his political position after driving the Empire out of the province and securing the control and support of every single hold? Right.

So it's impossible that further resentment towards Ulfric, as well as the possibility of more in-fighting within Skyrim would come from Elisif's execution ?

Will the Moot vote for Ulfric to be High King? Yes, most likely. But as I said before, what would be the point of fighting for control of a country but then not putting your own people into power? But he certainly didn't kill everyone that could threaten his position. He didn't kill Elisif. He didn't kill Balgruuf. He didn't kill any of the other Empire-aligned Jarls he deposed. Really, the only person he who might have threatened his position that he did kill was General Tullius.

Aside from Elisif, you could very well argue that they simply escaped.

And it's the principle itself what matters, Ulfric trusts that the moot would vote for him, because he has made sure of it, and if that wasn't the case, if by some freak accident the moot didn't choose him, what then ? Another goddamn duel ? War Of Succesion all over again baby.

And in what world do you see a free Skyrim with Balgruuf sitting on the throne? Balgruuf, who had sworn fealty to the Empire and who believes that Skyrim should remain a part of her? What makes you think that, should he become High King in Ulfric's stead, he wouldn't call the legion back in to retake Skyrim? Certainly not out of fear that Ulfric would just kill him, too, because as High King, Balgruuf could very easily have Ulfric arrested and perhaps even executed for treason, thus removing that threat entirely, and opening the doors to allow the Empire back in unimpeded.

Tough luck, that would be the decision of The Moot, and if Ulfric actually was the "true nord" he claimed to be, he would most surely respect the traditions of Skyrim, he can't simply dump the customs he dislikes while adhering to the ones that suit his causes.

What does any of that have to do with it?

Tullius is not pursuing a political agenda, he is re-instating order within Skyrim to do that, he needs to make sure traitors are not in positions of power.

He's removing Jarls who have sided with a traitor, and Ulfric is removing Jarls who have sided with what he believes to be a corrupt Empire who has by and large abandoned Skyrim and her people. They are both doing what they think is right, and they are both making choices that serve their own purposes. There's no difference.

One argues what he himself does not even believe, the other is doing his job.

.............................

f*** that was long !

 

[imaginepageant]

This is not how in-game lore works, The Bear Of Markarth is historical accounting

Oh, that's how it works? I didn't know. Wow. I'm going to look at a lot of books within Skyrim differently now that I know they're historical accounts and therefore completely true.

Like Dunmer of Skyrim, for example, which states, "So now, 'children of Skyrim,' you have the truth of it. You may call this province home, but you can no sooner claim to own it than a cow can claim to own its master's field. You are just another breed of domestic animal, grazing stupidly while higher beings plot your slaughter." I had no idea that Nords were actually domestic animals. And here all this time I thought they were humans!

Or The Alduin/Akatosh Dichotomy, whose author claims, "And so, it is my conclusion that the Alduin of Nord legend is in fact mighty Akatosh, whose story grew twisted and deformed through centuries of retelling and embellishment." Whoa! Alduin is one of the Nine Divines? People in Cyrodiil are going to be pretty upset with the Dragonborn when they discover that he killed one of their gods.

Or Children of the Sky, which says, "The further north you go into Skyrim, the more powerful and elemental the people become, and the less they require dwellings and shelters." I could've sworn that people lived in houses in Winterhold and Solitude. I guess I was hallucinating, since in-game lore is completely accurate historical accounting and people that far north don't require dwellings or shelters.

First, you have a misunderstanding of what "The Forsworn" are, the latter are the remnants of the reachmen that managed to escape Ulfric's attack after he was hired to retake The Reach, people who were simply there at the time of Ulfric's attack can only be referred to as "Natives of The Reach"

Whatever you call them, they're a group of Reachmen who believe they're the true owners of the Reach and aim to wrest control of it back from the Nords. This was just as true before the Markarth Incident and the creation of the term "Forsworn" as it was afterward.

he still killed people who didn't support his cause, which is perfectly consistent with his murder of High King Torygg, and his attack on Whiterun; all three sharing a single common trait from Ulfric: Intolerance.

Ulfric Stormcloak, so intolerant that his city boasts the highest percentage in Skyrim of three different non-Nord races, so intolerant that he allows refugees of two other provinces who believe in two other pantheons to live and work in his hold, so intolerant that he allows an Altmer who makes no secret of his worship of the Eight Divines to not only live in a prominent area of his city but also run a business there. Oh, that Ulfric Stormcloak! He's so intolerant!

Second, to be clear, do you actually believe that Bruce Lee would've been the best president of the US ? Because that's what this entire absurdity of a "tradition" suggests

He'd be a damned sight better than George W. Bush, I'd bet.

But that doesn't matter, because that's the United States, not Skyrim. The United States government is a democracy, wherein its people vote for a leader based on various factors, like promises that the candidates make but usually don't fulfill, or who gets the most money from sponsors to throw the showiest campaign. Skyrim, however, has something akin to a monarchy, wherein the rule passes to the High King's heir upon his death, or, if he dies without any heirs, the Jarls—not the citizens—of Skyrim convene to vote in a new leader, which has happened exactly three times since the First Era.

So you see, Skyrim and the United States have very different manners of choosing leaders, and, for that matter, of living life. You can't really compare modern-day, real-life law amongst civilized societies to quasi-medieval fictional traditions of a society of warriors and barbarians.

your suggestion that Ulfric would have to "handicap" himself is absurd

But I'm not suggesting that at all. You are, by saying that Ulfric should not have used the skill he worked long and hard to acquire, a skill which anyone could make the "personal choice" to learn just as well as they could learn to use a sword, because it made the battle imbalanced and unfair.

Nothing in the game suggests that Torygg asked Ulfric not to use the Thu'um in their battle. Oh, I'm sure you could argue that he would never have even imagined Ulfric would dream of using it because that would have been unfair... but, well, if that's the case, it's Torygg's fault for being so naive and trusting instead of playing it safe and setting rules for a battle that was literally a matter of life or death.

It's not an empty threat, if I tell you I'm going to punch you throughout the week and I punch you on sunday, then the threat is completely validated

Well, sure it would. And if Ulfric had killed Balgruuf, his threat would have been completely validated, too. But, and I can't believe I have to say this again—Ulfric did not kill Balgruuf nor any of the other Jarls who didn't side with him.

Balgruuf never sides with The Empire at any point throughout the civil war questlines

...Have you even played Skyrim? Seriously.

Whiterun is a strategically sound position for any of the factions.

Right... which is why Ulfric wanted control of the city and why it's ridiculous to even suggest that he skip it and just take the other holds instead.

Very nice, so you would be okay with people torturing were they to believe such methods were morally aceptable to achieve their goals ?

No, I wouldn't be okay with that, but it wouldn't be up to me, would it? It would be up to the people doing the torturing. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't ask my permission before they started cutting my fingers off.

I never said Tullius had to be okay with Ulfric killing him, though. I said that Ulfric shouldn't be expected to treat Tullius based on Tullius's beliefs instead of his own. Here's an example: a pregnant woman goes to her doctor and asks for an abortion, but the doctor is a Christian who believes abortion is a sin against God. Should the doctor go ahead and perform the abortion anyway, because the patient believes abortion is perfectly acceptable? Of course not. The doctor has a right to his own beliefs and should not be expected to set them aside whenever someone disagrees with him.

That The Empire is not weak as he so often likes to say, and that the real enemy is indeed the Aldmeri Dominion ?

The Empire is weak, and the Aldmeri Dominion is the real enemy. One being true does not make the other false.

Aside from Elisif, you could very well argue that they simply escaped.

You seriously think that four Jarls, their stewards, and their housecarls could all manage to escape Stormcloak custody, on entirely different occasions, and make it all the way to Solitude on foot without being recaptured? ...Really?! You're hilarious. Thanks for the laugh, I enjoyed that.

Tullius is not pursuing a political agenda, he is re-instating order within Skyrim to do that, he needs to make sure traitors are not in positions of power.

And Ulfric is reinstating the independence and right to rule of Skyrim's people, and to do that, he needs to make sure that the Emperor's (and by extension, the Thalmor's) puppets are not in positions of power. I really don't understand how you think Tullius is totally justified in doing these things, yet you condemn Ulfric for doing the exact same things. Know what that's called? A double standard.

With that, I'm done with this discussion. Your argument, though interesting at first, has degraded into something laughable.

 

[feliciano182]

Oh, that's how it works? I didn't know. Wow. I'm going to look at a lot of books within Skyrim differently now that I know they're historical accounts and therefore completely true.

Uhm...........not all books in Skyrim are historical accounts, certainly not any of the ones you've quoted.

Whatever you call them, they're a group of Reachmen who believe they're the true owners of the Reach and aim to wrest control of it back from the Nords. This was just as true before the Markarth Incident and the creation of the term "Forsworn" as it was afterward.

Uhm.........no, the native people of the reach are not necessarily those who want to wrestle that territory from the nords, many are just native people of the reach and not forsworn, Braig, whom I mentioned earlier, is a clear example of this.

The point, is that you can't simply "strawmanize" the people Ulfric chose to kill, many were non-combatants who most likely wanted no part in the fight, and which unfortunately were executed by the whims of a man who cannot tolerate disention of any kind.

Aside from that, it's how I also said before, it's telling that Ulfric believes Talos Worship to be important enough to wage a war against The Empire, and yet cares little for the freedom of the reachmen who also want the freedom to worship their own gods.

Ulfric Stormcloak, so intolerant that his city boasts the highest percentage in Skyrim of three different non-Nord races, so intolerant that he allows refugees of two other provinces who believe in two other pantheons to live and work in his hold, so intolerant that he allows an Altmer who makes no secret of his worship of the Eight Divines to not only live in a prominent area of his city but also run a business there. Oh, that Ulfric Stormcloak! He's so intolerant!

How you twist this is a testament of how far people can go to defend Ulfric Stormcloak.

Argonians live outside the walls of Windhelm, forbidden to enter the city itself, working for sub-standard wages, and forced to sleep, not in actual residences with adequate conditions, but in tight rooms filled with beds.

Dark elves are segregated and forced to live in a slum, their requests for better services and quality of life go unheard of in Ulfric's court, most of them do not own businesses and work as underpaid laborers, even those that do own locales and shops involve themselves in drug-dealing and contraband, all of that, without even mentioning the harrasment they get from many of the citizens in Windhelm.

Brunwulf Free-Winter mentions how non-nord caravans don't even receive the attention of the guards.

As for Niranye, she may very well be in her position because of how well connected she is, her comments indicate fairly clear that she's had to "play dirty" to get where she is, and that has nothing to do with Ulfric letting her have a place in the market.

So you see, Skyrim and the United States have very different manners of choosing leaders, and, for that matter, of living life. You can't really compare modern-day, real-life law amongst civilized societies to quasi-medieval fictional traditions of a society of warriors and barbarians.

This has nothing to do with the point, the question was simple, and it touched upon the idea that traditionalist nords like Ulfric have about what makes a good ruler, the latter is part of those who believe that, if you are martially more skillful than your opponent, then you are inherently more qualified to rule a kingdom, which is something that, in our more enlightened and educated age, we would find to be completely absurd, there's a reason why duels are illegal these days.

But I'm not suggesting that at all. You are, by saying that Ulfric should not have used the skill he worked long and hard to acquire, a skill which anyone could make the "personal choice" to learn just as well as they could learn to use a sword, because it made the battle imbalanced and unfair.

It wasn't me who came up with the whole "Ulfric slapping Torygg" bizarre exaggeration.

And you don't handicap yourself when you enter a karate conquest without your katana, the entire point of the duel is that it has to be honorable and fair, it has to work on terms that demonstrate that one of the parties is up to snuff by nord standards, and that said party will win under equal conditions that will allow the most skilled to emerge victorious; when Ulfric shouted away he demonstrated not only that he had malicious intent, but also that he is simply not honorable, if the latter had been the case, he would've challenged Torygg to an actual fight.

Nothing in the game suggests that Torygg asked Ulfric not to use the Thu'um in their battle. Oh, I'm sure you could argue that he would never have even imagined Ulfric would dream of using it because that would have been unfair... but, well, if that's the case, it's Torygg's fault for being so naive and trusting instead of playing it safe and setting rules for a battle that was literally a matter of life or death.

Of course, certainly Ulfric isn't an oportunistic cheater who kills people who admire him and that are willing to talk to him, surely shouting him away was the only path for Skyrim to get it's freedom.

Well, sure it would. And if Ulfric had killed Balgruuf, his threat would have been completely validated, too. But, and I can't believe I have to say this again—Ulfric did not kill Balgruuf nor any of the other Jarls who didn't side with him.

I could bet my left ball that I actually never said anything of the like.

What I said was that Ulfric threatens people with violence, which is exactly what he did with Whiterun.

...Have you even played Skyrim? Seriously.

To my knowledge, this conversation has been pretty civil and polite, despite our obvious disagreements.

I'm going to give this a pass for now, just so you know that my intention is not to seek to belittle you or treat you to unnecessarily condescending comments, this may be the internet, but I see no reason for this kind of behavior to appear in this discussion.

And Balgruuf never fully "sides" with The Empire after Ulfric threatens him, Balgruuf's position is that he believes Skyrim is a part of The Empire, but he will not support the efforts of The Legion to uphold the White-Gold Concordat since he hates the Thalmor and worships Talos secretly, the only time The Legion fights at his side is when Ulfric sieges Whiterun, and after the battle the legionnaires simply leave the city.

Right... which is why Ulfric wanted control of the city and why it's ridiculous to even suggest that he skip it and just take the other holds instead.

Would you like it if someone drafted you against your own wishes ? Would you like to be threatened with violence should you refuse ?

No, I wouldn't be okay with that, but it wouldn't be up to me, would it? It would be up to the people doing the torturing. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't ask my permission before they started cutting my fingers off.

The point is that there is such a thing as imposing your morality unto others, Tullius is within his right to surrender, and as a soldier and a human being, his wishes should be respected, obviously Ulfric, not being the open-minded kind, summarily executes him because "that's the nord way", and me ? I just can't help but laugh the soul out of my body because I also remember Ralof complaining about Ulfric not getting a trial.

I never said Tullius had to be okay with Ulfric killing him, though. I said that Ulfric shouldn't be expected to treat Tullius based on Tullius's beliefs instead of his own.

He should, it's called morality, it exists in civilized society.

a pregnant woman goes to her doctor and asks for an abortion, but the doctor is a Christian who believes abortion is a sin against God. Should the doctor go ahead and perform the abortion anyway, because the patient believes abortion is perfectly acceptable? Of course not. The doctor has a right to his own beliefs and should not be expected to set them aside whenever someone disagrees with him.

As vehemently as I disagree with your analogy, I'm not sure it's even well structured, it's practically impossible to find a doctor unwilling to perform an abortion in an abortion clinic, which is the place where a pregnant woman would actually go to have the medical procedure.

In any case, there's behaviors and proper ways to conduct oneself that are guided by morality, respect for the beliefs and wishes of others is one, and were Ulfric actually respectful of the idea that soldiers that surrender do not deserve to be killed, then he would do as much to not dismiss this claim of Tullius and just sheathe his sword, but alas, this never happens, this is Ulfric Stormcloak we're talking about.

The Empire is weak, and the Aldmeri Dominion is the real enemy. One being true does not make the other false.

It's not weak, if it was, then Ulfric wouldn't be afraid of raiding Solitude in the presence of The Emperor, but alas, he knows his claims about The Empire not being strong are horker dung, and thus he remains content with just expelling a couple of legions in Skyrim.

As for the Aldmeri Dominion being the real enemy, it goes to show how criminal the entire war is, Ulfric doesn't attack the Thalmor or The Dominion, he simply goes against his people, he attacks his own cities, kills his own kinsmen, and all because they simply are in his way, it's monstrous.

You seriously think that four Jarls, their stewards, and their housecarls could all manage to escape Stormcloak custody, on entirely different occasions, and make it all the way to Solitude on foot without being recaptured? ...Really?! You're hilarious. Thanks for the laugh, I enjoyed that.

Another pass, I shall give this comment.

Actually, that was a theory I "stole" from DrunkenMage, which seems more than likely to me given how Titus Mede II did that when he escaped The Imperial City during The Great War.

I really don't understand how you think Tullius is totally justified in doing these things, yet you condemn Ulfric for doing the exact same things. Know what that's called? A double standard.

As I've told you before, it's simply because Tullius isn't manipulating a future moot vote, for all that Ulfric claims about Skyrim needing to preserve it's culture and traditions, he sure has a way to dismiss those traditions that don't suit him at all, which is why he won't tolerate a moot that has a chance of not electing him as High King.

 

[Bourn]

Best:
Serana
Mjoll
Vicero
Astrid
Isran
Florentus
Ulfric

Worst:
Harkon
Tulius(?)
Jarl Skald
Dirge

 

[Nighthiker77]

I think Rifton by far is the best developed town. IMO Maven is the most despicable NPC in Skyrim, Mjoll most endearing, and almost everybody else I either feel like I need to kill or rescue. Too bad the degenerates are essential and no Destroy The Thieves Guild option. That would be epic even if it took 100 hours.

 

[-Mir-]

Well, for me:

Best as far as my character being in love with him: Gwilin of Ivarstead.
I feel so sorry for the passive, kind, modest, friendly sorta guy that always gets picked on by a big fat meany b***h, lol. Plus, he's the only other Bosmer I can find who--like me--does not hunt. If it hadn't been for the whole hunting thing, I would have picked Faendal of Riverwood.

Best as far as character depth and development: Cicero. This needs no explaining, really. He has the most awesome lines and a great backstory, and everyone loves the crazy little jester...
Fine. 2nd place goes to Ulfric.

Best as far as overall epicness: Jarl Balgruuf. He is super awesome no matter what, and actually cares about his city more than the war, unlike the other jarls.
The other best for general epicness would be Paarthurnax. But I agree with you: I really like Arngeir too. He is awesome.
Another best for epicness: Sheogorath!!! And most guards..... xD And M'aiq the Liar!!!

Now, Worst as far as being an evil drunken loser: Rolff Stone-fist.

Worst as far as being a stupid condescending jerk: Nazeem.

Worst as far as being an annoying bully: Braith.

Worst as far as most annoying voice: (no, surprisingly I don't pick Cicero) Karita the bard and General Tullius.

Worst attitude: LYDIA!!!

Agh! How could I forget this one?! WORST PARENT: LEMKIL.

I can't really think of any specific worst for character development though..... :/

*edited

 

[-Mir-]

My Hall of Fame:
Hold Guards
Sheogorath

My Hall of Shame:
Jaree-Ra
Bandit dialogue

Oh God, how could I forget to put these in my list?!

 

[imaginepageant]

Didn't want to get into this again, but there are a few points I need to address.

Uhm...........not all books in Skyrim are historical accounts, certainly not any of the ones you've quoted.

Oh, so only the ones that suit your argument are accurate historical accounts, is that how it works? What gives you the authority to decide which book is true and which book is false? Unless you can provide at least one back-up source for what The Bear of Markarth claims, you can't use it as proof. It's one guy's account. In fact, the book's subtitle is "An account of Ulfric Stormcloak's short-lived independent reign over the Reach." An account.

As for Niranye, she may very well be in her position because of how well connected she is, her comments indicate fairly clear that she's had to "play dirty" to get where she is, and that has nothing to do with Ulfric letting her have a place in the market.

I was talking about Nurelion, actually, the Altmer alchemist who owns The White Phial.

But, speaking of Niranye. When you ask her if she's treated as badly as the Dunmer in Windhelm, here's what she says: "It was difficult at first. The Nords of this city are, at best, suspicious of outsiders. But in time I made the right friends and proved myself useful enough that they don't give me trouble anymore. The Dunmer are too proud and naive to see the way things truly are, and so they continue to dwell in that slum." She made connections with the city's influential people and proved her worth to them. How, exactly, is that playing dirty? That's playing smart.

There's also Ulundil and Arivanya, the Altmer couple who run Windhelm's stables—a very important job for intolerant Ulfric to trust elves with. And Ulundil is one of the cheeriest characters in the game. I wonder why he's so happy with his life when he's treated with discrimination and intolerance from all of those terrible racist Nords?

which is something that, in our more enlightened and educated age, we would find to be completely absurd, there's a reason why duels are illegal these days.

Right. These days. Skyrim isn't based on these days.

I could bet my left ball that I actually never said anything of the like.

No, you didn't say that Ulfric killed Balgruuf. However:

But, clearly, it was an empty threat, because Ulfric makes no move to attack Whiterun while Balgruuf is still deciding where his allegiance will lie.

It's not an empty threat, if I tell you I'm going to punch you throughout the week and I punch you on sunday, then the threat is completely validated

Well, sure it would. And if Ulfric had killed Balgruuf, his threat would have been completely validated, too.

You said you would punch me and then you punched me—the threat is validated. Ulfric said (well, not really, you're just assuming he meant it even though he didn't say it) that he would kill Balgruuf, but he didn't kill Balgruuf—the threat is not validated. Do you see the difference between the two scenarios?

I just can't help but laugh the soul out of my body because I also remember Ralof complaining about Ulfric not getting a trial.

Those are Ralof's words, not Ulfric's. You can't take one character's ideas and use it to paint another as hypocritical.

it's practically impossible to find a doctor unwilling to perform an abortion in an abortion clinic, which is the place where a pregnant woman would actually go to have the medical procedure.

The misunderstanding here is probably due to us living in different countries. In Canada, abortion is legal and can be performed in hospitals. However, doctors are not forced to perform them, and have the right to refuse if accordance with their personal or religious beliefs. Taking that into consideration, my analogy is sound.

 

[Panthera]

My favorite are:
- M'aiq The Liar even though there isn't much of background but he always makes me smile with humorous comments.
- Serana is most developed character and I love her voice. I'm kinda glad she friend-zone the player, because she would be mainstream when it comes to marriage. Just like Lydia, Aela and Mjoll the Lioness were.
- Alvor I like him because he is a reasonable man. Even though he is a Nord he sides with Empire. His opinion about war makes a lot of sense.
- Veezara he is the only one who gives me an aura of true, professional assassin. The rest of them belong to circus. I would say that I would wish for more background... but than it would loose his assassin attitude if he would be to talkative.

Most annoying is:
- Cicero even though he is also most developed and unique character, he is most annoying character in game. I just can't stand him.

 

[Docta Corvina]

It's been interesting to read people's votes here, and the accompanying reasoning. Here are my own:

Best Character - as much as it pains me to say so, I really have to vote Ulfric as the best overall character, for many of the reasons cited by imaginepageant and others. While I absolutely do not support him in his present role, and I bear considerable suspicion of his motivations, I can and must give credit where it's due for remarkable characterization. He is immensely controversial, existing as both a hero and a villain. Even among his own supporters are those who are admittedly uneasy about his past and his reputation. But they will follow him because they believe that he is ultimately right in his vision. And, conversely, a great many of his own countrymen see him as a vile traitor and fight to stop him. He embodies the tragic drama of the civil war, both in Skyrim and even in a broader historical sense. Nothing is ever all that it seems, and the demons of his past are something to consider when we muse about his character and judge it. I observe a real sadness in him, and I think that that is one of the most honest, sincere aspects to his character. I do find him to be egomaniacal and frustratingly apathetic toward things and people (including those in his own Hold and city) that don't immediately serve his interests. But as a result, he comes across as this multifaceted, comparatively fleshed out character in the tale at hand. There are most certainly other characters with complexity, but Ulfric stands out as a great mover and shaker - for better or for worse.

Worst Character - I must agree with feliciano182 in that I find Alduin to be really the worst, in terms of characterization. Seen comparatively briefly in the game, he is cast as this great and terrible villain that imperils the entirety of the world. While I can understand the relative lack of screentime, I find the glossing over of his complexities to be very unfortunate. What I have always loved about villains is the nuance of their character, their motivations, and their relationship with the environment in which they find themselves. Alduin, a very primal kind of threat, strikes me as almost a caricature of a "bad guy", rather the perpetually shadowed and one-note evil being with little to no agency apart from inflicting the apocalypse. I think he suffers from some eclipsing by Paarthurnax, whose characterization is arguably quite impressive - he's a highly sympathetic dragon who acknowledges his past "crimes" and in addition to aiding mortals, is actively doing all he can to counter and suppress his instincts to dominate. That kind of fascinating complexity is nowhere to be seen with Alduin, though this may well be partially a result of the player's reliance on interaction with Parthy. We simply have more time to spend with him, and for good reason. Alduin is also meant to be this divine being old as time immemorial, and in that way it's understandable that he's not necessarily put forward with "mortal" emotions and convolution. While I readily acknowledge this, it still leaves me unsatisfied with him as a villain. Because divinity does not have to mean a separation from or lack of such mortal aspects - the Greek gods are more than proof of that.

Runners-Up for Worst - Delphine and Esbern qualify for this. Their stubbornness (with regard to the "choice" you must make) is, while perhaps understandable, also something that strikes me as a wasted opportunity for characterization. I was hoping that maybe they would experience a change of heart, or at least a softening of stance regarding Parthy, after the world is saved. Because I find that well-written characters are not static, but dynamic. And I think that was underutilized in various areas of the game. Again, I realize that game mechanics may account for some of this when it comes to the Blades and others, but it's still disappointing.

 

[feliciano182]

Oh, so only the ones that suit your argument are accurate historical accounts, is that how it works? What gives you the authority to decide which book is true and which book is false? Unless you can provide at least one back-up source for what The Bear of Markarth claims, you can't use it as proof. It's one guy's account. In fact, the book's subtitle is "An account of Ulfric Stormcloak's short-lived independent reign over the Reach." An account.

Ad Ignorantiam Fallacy


That is all I will continue to say about this.

I was talking about Nurelion, actually, the Altmer alchemist who owns The White Phial.

Even in this case, this type of examples boggle my mind, there is a disconnection between the rulers of a hold and their citizens, were that not the case, then Elisif would be ignoring the WGC on account that Greta worships Talos; so as I see it, Elisif doesn't know Greta exists as much as Ulfric doesn't even know of his altmer citizens.

Right. These days. Skyrim isn't based on these days.

Irrelevant, the player is, and whatever content he/she sees through the game is mean to be judged according to an honest sense of morality that is only going to come from modern times, not from medieval times; it would be futile to include all that content otherwise.

that he would kill Balgruuf, but he didn't kill Balgruuf—the threat is not validated. Do you see the difference between the two scenarios?

Again, I did not say this, only what is guaranteed to happen before any "killing" is decided, that Ulfric threatens people with violence if they don't choose to side with him.

Those are Ralof's words, not Ulfric's.

They certainly are, but it's quite telling that whatever sense of justice that exists in Skyrim and Cyrodiil, is completely irrelevant to Ulfric, he does whatever the hell he wants for his "songs" and his own twisted sense of morality.

The misunderstanding here is probably due to us living in different countries. In Canada, abortion is legal and can be performed in hospitals. However, doctors are not forced to perform them, and have the right to refuse if accordance with their personal or religious beliefs. Taking that into consideration, my analogy is sound.

Not really, even if it's now well structured, you can't say anyone is forcing their morality on the other in that situation, it's just not happening.

If you were unjustly sentenced to death after you have given up arms in a war, would you be okay with someone telling you that you're undeserving of mercy because their beliefs are not the same as yours ? Is it sane and rational that said person would accuse you of forcing your morality on them ? Of course not.

 

[Nocte Aeterna]

Oh God, how could I forget to put these in my list?!

It happens.

 

[Riften Guard]

Personally, my favorite character has and always will be Cicero. He was one if the best scripted characters in the game. He made you step back and say "How many times did this guy fall off of the cabbage wagon?"

My least favorite character was Mercer Frey. This guy is the scumbag of the earth. He's worse than the sweet roll thief. He kills his mentor, betrays the guild, steals all of the guild's gold, tries to kill the player, and has a house with very little loot. I was very satisfied when his head rolled.

 

[feliciano182]

My least favorite character was Mercer Frey. This guy is the scumbag of the earth. He's worse than the sweet roll thief. He kills his mentor, betrays the guild, steals all of the guild's gold, tries to kill the player, and has a house with very little loot. I was very satisfied when his head rolled.

One could say those are the makings of a great villain !

 

[sticky runes]

Frea is pretty damn awesome. She's a bit boring when you see her sitting around in the village talking about how devastating the loss of that shaman bloke has been, but once you take her out there, she slaughters the f#ck out of everything with her duel axes. Likes to toughen herself up with alteration spells as well. Her battle quotes are quite nice.

 

[Thorn]

Mercer could be a good villain, but he had a great sword in his basement and he didn't use it?

 

[feliciano182]

Mercer could be a good villain, but he had a great sword in his basement and he didn't use it?

Overconfidence ?

 

[Thorn]

Overconfidence ?

Maybe he lost the key

 

[Mr Forz]

Maybe he lost the key

I admit... I fell off my chair when reading this.

 

[Thorn]

I admit... I fell off my chair when reading this.

I now realize that one would have to be extremely foolish, or overconfident to leave it there. Also I now realize that one would have to be an idiot to not use it because you lost the key...when you have the Skeleton Key