154 replies to this topic

[Ser Hippie]

Bright Blue Eyes, on 12 April 2012 - 11:03 AM, said:

Tywin is a Hand of the King in his fifties, Joffrey the King in his teens.  The power balance between those two would have shifted before the next spring.

Why? Tywin outlived Joffrey, after all.

Quote

And Stannis/Renley were not part of the question

Of course they are. Even if Robb isn't explicitly aware of Stannis declaring himself king, he's aware that Renly has and knows Stannis has the stronger legal claim (And later he learns of Stannis' claim anyway); the decision to keep fighting for independence is made anyway.

Quote

"offer your defeated opponent your hand". Big difference. The Starks needed to lose first. Otherwise the King would be the loser.

The Lannisters were willing to make peace; they (Tyrion, specifically, if I remember right) assumed that the execution of Ned would make it impossible. Robb's unacceptable peace terms probably only confirmed it, but if he'd offered reasonable ones, you don't think Tywin would have accepted to focus on Renly (and then Stannis)?

Quote

Yes, not throwing in with a Baratheon was his problem. But as Tyrion said, Joffrey broke the peace between Lannister and Stark for good and all. One had to lose, because the other needed to win to survive.

I don't think that's really accurate, since Catelyn advocates for peace even after Ned's execution; if she was willing to put her feelings aside, clearly a peace was possible. The chances for a peace were more undermined by

(1) Failure to form a Stark/Baratheon (either Renly or Stannis) alliance
(2) Renly's death leading to the Tyrell/Lannister alliance
(3) Robb's intentionally unacceptable peace terms

As time goes on, the southern picture clarifies itself outside of Robb's control and, unsurprisingly, he pulls the short straw.

The desire/need for vengeance is completely understandable, but it was a self-destructive motivation.

Edited by Ser Hippie, 12 April 2012 - 11:21 AM.

[Knez Snow]

Cat sang a different song when she captured Tyrion, starting the war. And when she talked Ned into going to KL.  And so on.

Also, at that point, peace was simply bad strategy. Unlike earlier points mentioned above.

Lannisters had lost position, with Tyrells, Baratheons, Tullys against them, Martells neutral, Vale Neutral. Lost a few battles. Jamie captive. Ned no longer hostage. If Stannis did not screw Renly up (and there was no logical indications that will happen), It would have been a stalemate at best, Robb pillaging West, Tywin Riverlands, Renly can't siedge KL without Tywin coming down, Robb can't siege Harenhall without Tywin coming out for open battle.
Stark vs Renly confrontation would not have happened before Lannisters were wiped out, if it would took place at all. Stannis was too weak to be taken seriously, and actions he took were VERY unlikley(killing his brother?).

Robb made mistakes, but that was not one of them.
-letting Theon go (+ for Cat)
-placing Rose Bolton in charge of 2nd army (- for Cat; breaking the rule "keep your friends close and your enemies even closer")
-Jayne
-not telling Edmure his plans
I don't think he is responsible for becoming King in the North. He had no choice. It was logical since Targaryens and dragons are gone. Just a matter of time, and kingdom easy to defend. King of the Riverlands, that would be harder to manitain tho. And he had a better reason for war than just "Ned went south and got himself killed, and now i want to avenge my father, and free my sisters" You have to offer your vassals something in return, its not old school slavery it's feudalism.

So Cat was wrong.
But hey I admit i am biased, i just don't like her.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

The Lannisters needed a subjugated North and Riverlands to stay on the throne for an extended period. The Starks needed guaranties not to be subjugated during the next ~20 years, till feelings had time to cool down. That is an unsolvable clash of interests.

And Tywin outliving Joffrey: Do you truly propose to base your politics and survival as a house on his bride poisoning the king? Especially if you can't influence the bride?

[Ser Hippie]

Bright Blue Eyes, on 12 April 2012 - 11:28 AM, said:

The Lannisters needed a subjugated North and Riverlands to stay on the throne for an extended period. The Starks needed guaranties not to be subjugated during the next ~20 years, till feelings had time to cool down. That is an unsolvable clash of interests

More accurately, the Riverlands need assurances, not the Starks (the North really isn't severely threatened by a Lannister invasion), but that's not why Robb or the others don't want peace; they refuse it because they want to do onto the Lannisters what the Lannisters did onto them. It's understandable, but counterproductive (And, again, doesn't explain the refusal to bend the knee to Renly or Stannis)..

Quote

And Tywin outliving Joffrey: Do you truly propose to base your politics and survival as a house on his bride poisoning the king? Especially if you can't influence the bride?

You misunderstand. You implied that because Tywin was an old(er) man and Joffrey young that any agreement would have necessarily failed, but in the "real timeline", Tywin ends up outliving Joffrey.

[Corm]

Knez Snow, on 12 April 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:

Cat sang a different song when she captured Tyrion, starting the war. And when she talked Ned into going to KL.  And so on.

Also, at that point, peace was simply bad strategy. Unlike earlier points mentioned above.

Lannisters had lost position, with Tyrells, Baratheons, Tullys against them, Martells neutral, Vale Neutral. Lost a few battles. Jamie captive. Ned no longer hostage. If Stannis did not screw Renly up (and there was no logical indications that will happen), It would have been a stalemate at best, Robb pillaging West, Tywin Riverlands, Renly can't siedge KL without Tywin coming down, Robb can't siege Harenhall without Tywin coming out for open battle.
Stark vs Renly confrontation would not have happened before Lannisters were wiped out, if it would took place at all. Stannis was too weak to be taken seriously, and actions he took were VERY unlikley(killing his brother?).

Robb made mistakes, but that was not one of them.
-letting Theon go (+ for Cat)
-placing Rose Bolton in charge of 2nd army (- for Cat; breaking the rule "keep your friends close and your enemies even closer")
-Jayne
-not telling Edmure his plans
I don't think he is responsible for becoming King in the North. He had no choice. It was logical since Targaryens and dragons are gone. Just a matter of time, and kingdom easy to defend. King of the Riverlands, that would be harder to manitain tho. And he had a better reason for war than just "Ned went south and got himself killed, and now i want to avenge my father, and free my sisters" You have to offer your vassals something in return, its not old school slavery it's feudalism.

So Cat was wrong.
But hey I admit i am biased, i just don't like her.

Peace wasn't a bad strategy, they were never going to win. Even though they won every battle, they had three much larger, wealthier foes to contend with. They may have held for a time, maybe even kept the North on its own if they had retreated to defend from the Neck but an open war would never have had a good outcome for them.

The problem was that as long as Robb wanted to remain King, he could never make a peace. So Cat was wrong but only if Robb refused to kneel.

He certainly had a choice, fight to remove Joffrey and the Lannisters, remain a part of the Seven Kingdoms, do what he did. It wasn't the logical choice because he would never have peace as King in the North.

[Qhorin Halfhand and Yoren]

Knez Snow, on 12 April 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:

I don't think he is responsible for becoming King in the North. He had no choice. It was logical since Targaryens and dragons are gone. Just a matter of time, and kingdom easy to defend. King of the Riverlands, that would be harder to manitain tho. And he had a better reason for war than just "Ned went south and got himself killed, and now i want to avenge my father, and free my sisters" You have to offer your vassals something in return, its not old school slavery it's feudalism.

Not a bad post but in regards to Robb, I also agree that he had more reasons for not going for peace rather than just vengeance. In regards to King of the North, I think it was possible for another outcome to come out of that meeting.

He had the choice to follow Renly. Follow Stannis. Or not know what to do.

“Renly is crowned,” said Marq Piper. “Highgarden and Storm’s End support his claim, and the Dornishmen will not be laggardly. If Winterfell and Riverrun add their strength to his, he will have five of the seven great houses behind him. Six, if the Arryns bestir themselves! Six against the Rock! My lords, within the year, we will have all their heads on pikes, the queen and the boy king, Lord Tywin, the Imp, the Kingslayer, Ser Kevan, all of them! That is what we shall win if we join with King Renly. What does Lord Stannis have against that, that we should cast it all aside?”
“The right,” said Robb stubbornly. Catelyn thought he sounded eerily like his father as he said it.
“So you mean us to declare for Stannis?” asked Edmure.
“I don’t know,” said Robb. “I prayed to know what to do, but the gods did not answer. The Lannisters killed my father for a traitor, and we know that was a lie, but if Joffrey is the lawful king and we fight against him, we will be traitors.”


And after his indecisiveness came Catelyn's offer for peace came and then Greatjon's offer for independence.  Restricting yourself from options was a problem as is not knowing what to do.

Could he after being declared King of the North to say no, I won't be so? Then it was rather hard, I don't know to what extend it was possible to decline there, where his bannermen declared him King of the North. But afterwards I actually believe that had Renly survived or Stannis won that yes Robb would have given up a kingdom for peace so ultimately what caused his defeat was both Baratheon brothers losing and Lannisters getting the Tyrells.

Edited by Qhorin Halfhand and Yoren, 12 April 2012 - 11:50 AM.

[Knez Snow]

Corm, on 12 April 2012 - 11:36 AM, said:

Peace wasn't a bad strategy, they were never going to win. Even though they won every battle, they had three much larger, wealthier foes to contend with. They may have held for a time, maybe even kept the North on its own if they had retreated to defend from the Neck but an open war would never have had a good outcome for them.

The problem was that as long as Robb wanted to remain King, he could never make a peace. So Cat was wrong but only if Robb refused to kneel.

He certainly had a choice, fight to remove Joffrey and the Lannisters, remain a part of the Seven Kingdoms, do what he did. It wasn't the logical choice because he would never have peace as King in the North.

He might had peace as King in the North. Lannisters fall. Winter comes, not a good time for war. And Only thing Renly had against him is "Wanting ALL of his 7 kingdoms" which is pretty lame reason for war. Even if Renly did insisted, he could have always bowed later and accept Renly as King after Lannisters are gone. His vassals might understand it better. Or more likely Renly takes Riverlands, Robb keeps North. North is easily defended, dragons were only reason Starks bowed to king in the South, + later Ned being Robert's friend.

[Corm]

Knez Snow, on 12 April 2012 - 11:47 AM, said:

He might had peace as King in the North. Lannisters fall. Winter comes, not a good time for war. And Only thing Renly had against him is "Wanting ALL of his 7 kingdoms" which is pretty lame reason for war. Even if Renly did insisted, he could have always bowed later and accept Renly as King after Lannisters are gone. His vassals might understand it better. Or more likely Renly takes Riverlands, Robb keeps North. North is easily defended, dragons were only reason Starks bowed to king in the South, + later Ned being Robert's friend.

The Lannisters were never going to fall though, just look what happened. Wanting ALL of the Seven Kingdoms is the reasson Aegon came over, and why every King after him remained King

[DannySpud]

Robb should never have made common cause with the riverlands, they are pretty much trapped between KL and Casterly Rock. Without removing the Lannisters from the Iron Throne they'd be surrounded. If he wasn't with the riverlands he could have retreated back to the north once Ned was dead, traded Jamie for Sansa and Arya (and when he only got Sansa she'd tell him Arya had escaped) and keep the other Lannisters as hostage. Then they could quite easily defend the North from Moat Cailin, especially if they renovated it a bit, and declare themselves an independent kingdom.
But being stuck with the riverlands he should have declared himself ready to make common cause with whoever would allow him to be King in the North. Who knows how things would have turned out if he did that.

[Dreadwolf]

Qhorin Halfhand and Yoren, on 12 April 2012 - 10:06 AM, said:

...
When I ask if she was right, I am interested in both the strategy (what if they decided to do everything for peace, whether it was feasible, the long term effects of it, whether for example Tywin would have respected it ) and also other issues such as if peace is better than vengeance. Of course your priorities might vary.

I think she was right. And probably Tywin would have accepted quick peace if not for other reason just because he (IIRC) had had other concerns by that time. After the Blackwater battle (and Winterfell fall) the only terms he would accept from the North would have been absolute capitulation.
Othrewise - I think there were references later in the books that no one (from the main and real players such as Tyrion, Cersei and Tywin) actually expected that Robb would exchange Jaime for the girls. Robb silently let Catelyn know that sad truth still before his coronation.  In the same time I am almost sure that had his father ever been placed in a similar situ – he would have most probably exchanged Lyana for (let’s say) Rhaegar.
Other part of your question is also interesting i.e. if peace is better than vengeance. Asked like that the answer would be yes (all the times) I guess. But it is also true that not every peace is better than a war. I just firmly believe that not every end justifies any means. And sometimes the peace at any rate just doesn’t work.

[Corm]

DannySpud, on 12 April 2012 - 12:26 PM, said:

Robb should never have made common cause with the riverlands, they are pretty much trapped between KL and Casterly Rock. Without removing the Lannisters from the Iron Throne they'd be surrounded. If he wasn't with the riverlands he could have retreated back to the north once Ned was dead, traded Jamie for Sansa and Arya (and when he only got Sansa she'd tell him Arya had escaped) and keep the other Lannisters as hostage. Then they could quite easily defend the North from Moat Cailin, especially if they renovated it a bit, and declare themselves an independent kingdom.
But being stuck with the riverlands he should have declared himself ready to make common cause with whoever would allow him to be King in the North. Who knows how things would have turned out if he did that.

Well we know that he had to make cause with the riverlands, they're his family, he was never going to leave them to die. He did make common cause with anyone who would allow him to remain King in the North: no one. Not one person would allow him to remain King.

[Lady Hodor]

She was likely right, but, if the North had done as she said and simply done everything to gain peace by bending the knee and granting lands and riches and ignoring the murder of all their own men and liege lord, they would live with it for the rest of their lives. The North would never be seen the same way again, just like "The-King-Who-Knelt" they would be seen as weak, and that way, conquerable. So the North would fall for their supposed weakness.

[Knez Snow]

Corm, on 12 April 2012 - 11:57 AM, said:

The Lannisters were never going to fall though, just look what happened. Wanting ALL of the Seven Kingdoms is the reasson Aegon came over, and why every King after him remained King

The Lannisters were in great position to fall, and only reason they did not are OTHER Robb's mistakes, and Stannis wild carding/deus ex machina-ing/like wtf??-ing Renly. Which was unpredictable at the time, and no course of action could have prevented it.

It would have been better if he had just supported Renly without considering stupid line of succession rules, but still it was possible to tough it out as King in the North, probably giving up on Riverlands at some point when they were not in danger of Tywin's wrath. Tullys could just bow to Renly.

DannySpud, on 12 April 2012 - 12:26 PM, said:

Robb should never have made common cause with the riverlands, they are pretty much trapped between KL and Casterly Rock. Without removing the Lannisters from the Iron Throne they'd be surrounded. If he wasn't with the riverlands he could have retreated back to the north once Ned was dead, traded Jamie for Sansa and Arya (and when he only got Sansa she'd tell him Arya had escaped) and keep the other Lannisters as hostage. Then they could quite easily defend the North from Moat Cailin, especially if they renovated it a bit, and declare themselves an independent kingdom.
But being stuck with the riverlands he should have declared himself ready to make common cause with whoever would allow him to be King in the North. Who knows how things would have turned out if he did that.

Robb had no choice about Riverlands at that point, he needed allies. And he was bound by blood to Tullys. He couldn't have just betrayed his own blood for cowardice, and that is not good strategy (very bad for reputation), even if he did not cared about his own (mother's) family.

Lady Hodor, on 12 April 2012 - 12:48 PM, said:

She was likely right, but, if the North had done as she said and simply done everything to gain peace by bending the knee and granting lands and riches and ignoring the murder of all their own men and liege lord, they would live with it for the rest of their lives. The North would never be seen the same way again, just like "The-King-Who-Knelt" they would be seen as weak, and that way, conquerable. So the North would fall for their supposed weakness.

I agree with the second part, she was NOT right. In addition, It would be hard not to chose sides in Renly vs Lannister conflict, and Lannisters are natural enemies, by virtue of beheading Ned. When your enemies are in such a bad position, best thing to do is strike. Taking Renly's side was better, but King in the North was better than peace with the Lannisters. That is my point.

[Corm]

Knez Snow, on 12 April 2012 - 01:02 PM, said:

The Lannisters were in great position to fall, and only reason they did not are OTHER Robb's mistakes, and Stannis wild carding/deus ex machina-ing/like wtf??-ing Renly. Which was unpredictable at the time, and no course of action could have prevented it.

It would have been better if he had just supported Renly without considering stupid line of succession rules, but still it was possible to tough it out as King in the North, probably giving up on Riverlands at some point when they were not in danger of Tywin's wrath. Tullys could just bow to Renly.

How were they in a great position to fall? They faced the largest amount of resistance possible and yet still survived. Stannis would have done the same thing to Renly either way, that was independent of Robb. From his perspective at the time he should have pulled a Renyl and try to wait out Stannis and Tywin before making his decision, maybe even just pretending to be a part of the Baratheon/Lannister rule until he had a good opportunity.

Overall I do agree that Catelyn was wrong but only due to Robb. A peace in general would have worked but not what she was proposing.

[Knez Snow]

Lannisters had only their lands and crownlands. Alone VS everyone else (except Vale and Dorne). Caught in the middle. That is VERY bad. Luck saved them (Stannis).

[Bright Blue Eyes]

Corm, on 12 April 2012 - 01:17 PM, said:

How were they in a great position to fall? They faced the largest amount of resistance possible and yet still survived. Stannis would have done the same thing to Renly either way, that was independent of Robb. From his perspective at the time he should have pulled a Renyl and try to wait out Stannis and Tywin before making his decision, maybe even just pretending to be a part of the Baratheon/Lannister rule until he had a good opportunity.

Overall I do agree that Catelyn was wrong but only due to Robb. A peace in general would have worked but not what she was proposing.

They lucked through. Or rather, GRRM needed them to luck through. From mid Game to the Battle of the Blackwater, the Lannisters were by far the most unlikely to pull through.
After Robb beat Jaime, it was 80,000 North&Riverlands against 35,000 Lannister against 100,000 Renley with 30,000 Dorne, 40,000 Vale, 25,000 Ironborn and Stannis sitting on the fence, but definitely not joining the Lannisters. During Clash, it was 80,000 North&Riverlands against 20,000 Lannister against 35,000+ Stannis against 25,000 Ironborn with 60,000 Tyrells, 30,000 Dorne and 40,000 Vale sitting on the fence. And the Lannisters were straight in the middle and spread very thin.
It was pure luck (or plot armor) that saved the Lannisters.

[Corm]

where are you puling those numbers from? I don't believe that there could be three times as many forces in the North and Riverland than would support the Lannisters. There is also a point where Robb says that they are outnumbered by the Lannisters

[bloodymime]

Qhorin Halfhand and Yoren, on 12 April 2012 - 11:37 AM, said:

Not a bad post but in regards to Robb, I also agree that he had more reasons for not going for peace rather than just vengeance. In regards to King of the North, I think it was possible for another outcome to come out of that meeting.

He had the choice to follow Renly. Follow Stannis. Or not know what to do.

“Renly is crowned,” said Marq Piper. “Highgarden and Storm’s End support his claim, and the Dornishmen will not be laggardly. If Winterfell and Riverrun add their strength to his, he will have five of the seven great houses behind him. Six, if the Arryns bestir themselves! Six against the Rock! My lords, within the year, we will have all their heads on pikes, the queen and the boy king, Lord Tywin, the Imp, the Kingslayer, Ser Kevan, all of them! That is what we shall win if we join with King Renly. What does Lord Stannis have against that, that we should cast it all aside?”
“The right,” said Robb stubbornly. Catelyn thought he sounded eerily like his father as he said it.
“So you mean us to declare for Stannis?” asked Edmure.
“I don’t know,” said Robb. “I prayed to know what to do, but the gods did not answer. The Lannisters killed my father for a traitor, and we know that was a lie, but if Joffrey is the lawful king and we fight against him, we will be traitors.”


And after his indecisiveness came Catelyn's offer for peace came and then Greatjon's offer for independence.  Restricting yourself from options was a problem as is not knowing what to do.

Could he after being declared King of the North to say no, I won't be so? Then it was rather hard, I don't know to what extend it was possible to decline there, where his bannermen declared him King of the North. But afterwards I actually believe that had Renly survived or Stannis won that yes Robb would have given up a kingdom for peace so ultimately what caused his defeat was both Baratheon brothers losing and Lannisters getting the Tyrells.

I don't think that could be an option for Robb once he let them declare him king. Reputation is a precarious thing and stepping down like that would be seen as nothing but a sign of weakness and make no mistake just because Roose was the worst doesn't mean many other lords wouldn't see that weakness and try to take advantage and they'd be right to do it, what good is a weak Lord. Robb would either be spending the rest of his life fighting northern rebellions or watch his house fall.

[WinterWarrior]

Cat and the Starks in general did so many stupid things, even though they are my favorite house. I agree that Cat should never have grabbed Tyrion, and absolutely she should never have let Jaime go....what a stupid thing to do. I believe she caused Robb's death by doing that, Tywin would not have assisted in the RW if they still had Jaime. I think Jeyne's mother being allied with Tywin and plotting her daughter's seduction of Robb in order to break the alliance between Stark and Frey was one of the most trecherous things in COK not revealed until the later book (4 or 5?), and then feeding her daughter moon tea each morning so she would not bear Robb's child. What a creep, she needs to get her due as well. And Cat is totally unaware of that. Cat did not know what she started when she went up against Tywin Lannister by grabbing Tyrion, and then having Jamie (her one trump card) and letting him go....

So Cat was not right asking for peace while doing things to the Lannisters that would result in war.

And the Northmen made Robb their King, he did not crown himself King.

Edited by WinterWarrior, 12 April 2012 - 03:31 PM.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

Corm, on 12 April 2012 - 02:25 PM, said:

where are you puling those numbers from? I don't believe that there could be three times as many forces in the North and Riverland than would support the Lannisters. There is also a point where Robb says that they are outnumbered by the Lannisters

There are several threads with detailed roosters. I'm not repeating everything, but the Starks and the Lannisters had roughly the same numbers (50,000-60,000) prior to the war, with the Riverlands being a bit lower (40,000). After Robb beat first Jaime and later Stefford, costing the Lannisters close to 30,000 men and Tywin fighting the small war around Harrenhal and losing more, the balance shifted even further. The problem is, 40,000 of these Northmen were up north, cut off by the Ironborn. And Robb couldn't cross the Trident to siege Tywin in Harrenhal, because, well, Harrenhal would be too large an advantage for Tywin. So, the Lannisters managed to hang on long enough to be saved by Stannis, the Ironborn and the Tyrells. All three combined.