Board Thread:Lore Discussion/@comment-209.7.3.188-20160303204000/@comment-26893431-20160510234854

WhenDovCry wrote: I generally lean towards the Empire because they have more Jarls that care about their Hold's people instead of their own personal gain (Siddgeir and Maven being the exception). Plus look at the state of Windhelm - a serial killer is stalking the streets, a orphan kid is performing the Black Sacrament in his old house, and no one in authority is doing a damn thing about it. If Ulfric can't keep his own capital city safe, how will he protect all of Skyrim?

A lot of the arguments I've seen tend to boil down to the duel between Ulfric and Torygg. Both sides seem to agree the challenge was issued and accepted, but while the Stormcloaks claim Ulfric won and therefore should be High King, the Imperials claim he used his Shout to murder the High King instead. I'd be interested in knowing the rules for this kind of duel - do they have certain codes of conduct that both combatants follow, or is it more of a "last man standing wins" kind of thing? I haven't found anything in the game canon that tells me one way or another, which makes it difficult for me to decide if Ulfric has a legitimate claim to begin with. Well the Way of the Voice became a commonly practised thing amongst Nords. So using the Thu'um in Nord culture for warfare basically died off.

Now, a duel is, both according to Imperial and Nordic rule, a fight to the death OR (as Admiral Richton stated) when the losing side surrenders. Some may say there's some sort of Old Nord duel but this is a myth, without evidence. Now, Ulfric killed Torygg, while you might say that it was a fight to the death so it was justified. In short, this is the duel:


 * Imperials and Nord alike recognize a noble's obligation to answer a challenge of honor.


 * Once a challenge is issued, the higher the rank of the party is, the higher the obligation to fight.


 * If the victim (in this case, Torygg) was bullied, intimidated, or goaded by a stronger party (in this case, Ulfric) with suspect motives, magistrates often convict the stronger party (Ulfric) of foul murder.

So according to the rules of engagement Ulfric did murder Torygg.

1. He goaded Torygg by challenging him in combat, had Torygg denied he would have lost his position and a lot of respect, this would also have caused a new Moot to be set.

2. Ulfric was (obviously) the stronger party, having fought against the Reachmen and the Dominion. While Torygg only had martial training.

3. Ulfric was suspected to want to usurp Torygg's throne. Later dialogue with Ulfric himself also adds up to -- but doesn't (directly) confirm -- this. Seeing as he already starts acting like the High King before the Moot occurs.