In roleplaying, I almost always side with the Legion, for some ideological issues with the Stormcloaks which I will not go into now. One aspect I have not thought about much, however, is the most recent aggravating event (as of "Unbound"): The Death of Torryg. Skyrim seems somewhat split on the subject, with some saying that is was murder and others holding that Ulfric's actions were legal according to the customs of the Nords. Many also say that Ulfric literally shouted Torryg apart with his Thu'um. There are even many eyewitnesses who disagree on whether or not that happened. For me, there are a couple of unanswered questions. The first and most obvious is "Did Ulfric actually use The Voice?" If he did, it is implied (through the fact that Ulfrics supporters insist that he did not use the voice) that it would break the agreements of the duel for him to use a power like The Voice, and therefore be murder. Do you think he actually did? Cite the in-game sources that you think are the most credible and make an argument for their credibility. My second question is "Is is actually an accepted Nordic custom to have legal duels such as these. This one is more easily answered with citations from lore. Also, two pure questions of opinion: "Should this be legal and why?" and "Was Ulfric right to do that, regardless of legality and why?"
TL;DR: Was Ulfric Stormcloak within legal and moral bounds in his killing of High King Torryg?
You said "he could have made his point just as well without killing Torygg." I just don't really think it makes sense to ask why he didn't do X, when we know why he didn't do it- he thought Y was a better option.
You can certainly say he made the wrong decision, but there's no mystery in why he killed Torygg- we know why, and it was because he thought a Skyrim without Torygg was better off than one with him.
Gonna have to ardently disagree, then. I seriously doubt Ulfric left the Greybeards for any reason other than to help his countrymen in the Great War. While that may or may not have included use of the voice, I'm sure he always considered his arm his first weapon, and what he was really offering during the war.
I almost certainly would. If it happened that way, and the game still painted a civil conflict around them, I'd be more confused, as well. A straightforward duel between leaders, it just would have been more poetic, methinks, though granted, that symbolism of the old tradition superseding modern Imperial law/weakness would have been absent.
I think the main reason that has been driven at is the Voice as a symbol. Maybe when he left the Greybeards, he was thinking, "And this tool will prove useful," but I doubt he left specifically to exercise that power for killing. An argument could be made that it was called for in Markarth. It's a heavily defended city that needed taking back and he had the promise of having free worship restored to his people. In that instance, I imagined he'd do whatever it took to get in. We don't know what other efforts he may have used before resorting to the Voice. We know a little more about the duel, but the biggest factor was probably still just the symbolism of the "ancient Nord art."
@Shaun That's part of Ulfric's point, I'm sure. He's going back to tradition before the Greybeards and Jurgen Windcaller, when using the Voice in war was common practice among the Tongues. In some ways, its as much a denouncement of the Greybeards and Way of the Voice as it is of the Empire.
Whose tradition? The Greybeards? They are certainly respected in Skyrim, but nothing says to me that they have a monopoly on deciding how the Voice should be used. Jurgen Windcaller believed that the gods didn't want it used in battle, but that's just his interpretation.
Maybe if there had been more Voice-trained warriors among their ranks, the Legion would have repelled the Dominion with much greater ease. Pure speculation, of course, but it shows that there are certainly uses that the Voice could be put to beyond just personal glory.