Lore talk:Stormcloak Rebellion

The UESPWiki – Your source for The Elder Scrolls since 1995
Jump to: navigation, search

Schrödinger's Stormcloak[edit]

Either the Rebellion succeeded, or it didn't.

No nonsense about Elder Scrolls predicting two outcomes, puhleez. Bethesda will have to decide whether the Hero joined the Imperials or the Stormcloaks and write history from there. And then this lore page can take it from there. CapnZapp (talk) 17:00, 20 November 2012 (GMT)

The thing about the Elder Scrolls is pure nonsense. The page sucks, no doubt about it. It basically exists just to solve red links. I won't touch it with a ten-foot pole. Bethesda will probably use a dragon break, but we can't speculate on the page concerning what they'll do. Do you have some suggestions for improvement, or is this just about complaining? Minor EditsThreatsEvidence 17:12, 20 November 2012 (GMT)
I removed the Elder Scrolls prediction cleanup notice. But I'm not sure what to do about the Battles of Windhelm and Solitude. For the Battle of Whiterun one could just remove the outcome altogether, the battle takes place anyway. Another way Bethesda could resolve this, is to introduce events that make the outcome of the civil war irrelevant. --Alfwyn (talk) 17:28, 20 November 2012 (GMT)
Is it really even necessary to reference the Battle of Solitude or the Battle of Windhelm? There are several major wars listed on the Wars lore page that have little or no reference to specific battles. On another note, I see it all over various sites for the Elder Scrolls, but what's the actual source from the game that establishes that the Legion in Skyrim is the Fourth Legion?--DagmarH (talk) 01:05, 21 November 2012 (GMT)
Some wars reference few or no major battles because of a lack of information, not a lack of relevance. There appears to be no source for the claim that the Legion in Skyrim is the Fourth Legion. Nothing I could find in the game files, at any rate. It was added in this this edit by an anon shortly after Skyrim's release. Other sites probably ripped off the information from us. They tend to do that. Minor EditsThreatsEvidence 02:34, 21 November 2012 (GMT)

Last I checked, Lore articles that talk about the player's choice never specify the outcome, where the game specific articles do. For instance, this page says it is unclear whether or not the Dragonborn decided to kill Paarthurnax or not. This page should probably be cleaned up a bit. But that might have to wait until TES VI comes out. Schiffy (talk) 04:59, 18 December 2012 (GMT)

Major Battles[edit]

This entire section on the page should be deleted. Player-dependent events, etc. The Skyrim civil war page has gotten pretty good; we should trust it to do the heavy lifting on documenting events based on player choices. Minor EditsThreatsEvidence 18:56, 28 April 2013 (GMT)

Length of Stormcloak Rebellion[edit]

In Tending the Flames, Queen Elisif had banned the annual festival because she believed it was in poor taste, even though the Bards College had been putting it on every year since "time immemorial". I think we can reasonably infer that it was the first time the festival was to be celebrated since Torygg's death, the start of the Stormcloak Rebellion, and that therefore, the rebellion had been going on for less than a year before Ulfric was captured. I think that's worth noting on the page. Minor EditsThreatsEvidence 17:28, 9 April 2014 (GMT)

I'd support that. I'm certain I have read a source/dialogue that dates the rebellion to several months, but I can't find it right now. --Jimeee (talk) 17:43, 9 April 2014 (GMT)
You also have Roggvir's execution when you enter Solitude, with people referencing his opening the gate for Ulfric after Torygg's death as a fairly recent event. I looked through Tullius' and Ulfric's dialogue quickly and couldn't find a reference to a specific duration, but I also am sure I heard something about it somewhere. -- Hargrimm(T) 18:22, 9 April 2014 (GMT)
But if you talk to Solaf he will mention that he was a Stormcloak soldier "years ago". Perhaps a Stormcloak soldier is another term for one under Eastmarch's command, not necessarily a rebel? But Solaf also says he was wounded in a skirmish near Windhelm... 67.231.171.180 13:04, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
The Stormcloaks existed before the rebellion. They were Ulfric's own private army as far as I remember. —Legoless (talk) 21:13, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Start of the conflict[edit]

I disagree with the war being less than a year old. When you ask Solaf about him being a Stormcloak he says: "I was once, but not any more. I was wounded in a skirmish up near Windhelm. This was years ago, mind you." Vulwulf says about his daughter "Lilija joined the Stormcloaks many years ago, when the first of the skirmishes broke out across Skyrim". Now I'm not sure about this but I think Hadvar says that the war really only took off after Torygg died, so if that's what the article's getting at it could use some elaboration. Maybe just saying some minor skirmishes were fought between some early separatists and loyalists (because that's what the quotes seem to suggest). — Unsigned comment by 50.72.53.15 (talk) at 13:52 on 16 November 2014

Ulfric first founded the Stormcloaks several years before the beginning of the war as a private army to carry out his agenda. The skirmishes which Stormcloaks were involved in before the murder of Torygg were not technically part of the Stormcloak Rebellion. Without knowing the purpose of these early Stormcloak missions, I assume they would be roughly comparable with skirmishes in the United States' western territories in the mid-19th century, which were fought on and off for many years before the actual start of the American Civil War. Insignificant RevisionsThreatsEvidence 20:34, 16 November 2014 (GMT)

Burning of King Olaf[edit]

This note has no relevance to the Stormcloak Rebellion. If we had no other information regarding how recent Torygg's death was, the cancellation of the Burning points out two things: If this is the first Burning that has not occurred, it means one has occurred in 4E 200. If Torygg died any time between then and the beginning of Skyrim, so could have the cancellation of the Burning, including in 4E 200. This note proves nothing other than the fact the cancellation occurred some time after Torygg's death, it does not prove he was killed in 4E 201. --Rezalon (talk) 23:05, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure where you are getting your timings from but they are all wrong. While we don't have a source specifically stating he died in 201, every source says he died "a few months prior" to the game start, which is in Last Seed, which is the 8th month of the year. In order for the festival to have been banned for more than one year, Torygg must have died at least a year prior to the game start. Viarmo states that Torygg was "recently" killed and that Elisif banned the festival because of Toryggs death. Everything about the festival's cancellation proves that Torygg has been dead less than a year ago. It doesn't matter when the banning occurred (which doesn't fit your 4E 200 timing anyway as Torygg died in 201), what matters is the time the festival is due to take place.
To be honest I cannot fathom what your objection is. The statement on the page is true, and the note itself is true. Why would you want to remove a source from a page that validates and explains the accuracy of the note? Silence is GoldenBreak the Silence 00:57, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, upon reading through the statement multiple times and working it around my head, I understand where I have confused myself. I'll drop this now non-issue. --Rezalon (talk) 02:12, 7 October 2018 (UTC)