Board Thread:Lore Discussion/@comment-27007772-20140611204941/@comment-26356342-20150610155347

Ottoman Hold wrote: Honestly, like many of us, I would prefer a third option, such as you as high king, and you saving The Empire. There's a good post a little earlier by A Wikia contributor 50.190.125.182. He really goes in depth of a good third option. I agree that Ulfric is greedy. People can have their opinions, so I am not going to rebuke you, but I am wondering how Tullius and Rikke are jerks. I just want to know. I could see where some people could view Tullius as a "jerk" for his comments about nords and their "honor" but I've never seen/heard of Rikke being a jerk, So I'd like to hear more on that as well. As for the third option Idea, personally I don't agree there should have been a third option. Having a third "clearly better" and "everyone wins" option hinders the overall story. Having just 2 options, and neither of which is clearly better than the other is what makes the decision harder to make and makes you feel like the decision mattered. It's the consequences of your decision that make it matter to the player. It also helps start these informative debates. I started with siding with the Stormcloaks, it seemed right based on the limited info I had at the time. But after trying to get my "imperial playthru" out of the way, visiting each Jarl so I could become Thane in each hold, I got to see the consequences of siding with the Stormcloaks. I personally felt Skyrim (not just specifically the Empire) was better off with these Jarls in charge. They weren't sycophants, they were (for the most part) Jarls who loved Skyrim as I loved Skyrim.