Why didn't Robb get more support for his cause?

[MidnightAurora]

With the excutions of Brandon Stark and his father along with Brandon Stark's men who accompanied him to KL and their fathers garnished a support to Robert's cause and the suposed kidnapping of Lyanna added to it. Robert and Eddard were able to garnish their bannermen to fight Aerys and got Jon because of them being fostered and through marriage got Hoster Tully. There was an outcry over the executions and they found support and were successful in their war. Even the smallfolk helped them. So why didn't Robb garnish more support for trying to help lift the seige of Riverrun and avenge his father's unjust execution? Why was there not as much outcry over Ned's execution as his father ad brother's were?

Everyone knew Ned and Robert were close friends and Ned was very loyal especially to Robert, so do you think them believing a lie is because they did not know Ned well or another reason?

Or is it things never happen the same way twice? Meaning peple saw how the war went last time and different people were with Robb then with Ned and those people saw opportunity rather than avenging their liege lord's death..?

Or was there other reasons why Robb could not garnish support for his cause other than the River lords and North?

[That Demon Monkey]

Well, a small point, but a lot of people probably believed Ned was a traitor and a liar. (He did admit that openly just before he was executed after all.)

So from that view, why would they bother helping his son?

[AC Angel]

Well, a small point, but a lot of people probably believed Ned was a traitor and a liar. (He did admit that openly just before he was executed after all.)

So from that view, why would they bother helping his son?

The North, Vale and Riverlands (and everyone really) knew that Ned wasn't a traitor, but they also knew that the Lannisters were making strong alliances and that even if they did support Robb, it probably wouldn't be enough.

[That Demon Monkey]

The North, Vale and Riverlands (and everyone really) knew that Ned wasn't a traitor, but they also knew that the Lannisters were making strong alliances and that even if they did support Robb, it probably wouldn't be enough.

Like I said, my point was just a small part of the problem.

While the nobles and high borns would trust Ned and his honour, the commoners would generally just believe whatever the people in control would tell them.

They even started believing the story Cersei made up about Stannis (The one about Patchface sleeping with his wife and fathering his daughter).

[Lady-Nymeria]

Ned was well known by the northern lords, but in the south he was a stranger. Besides, Aerys had shown his madness through the years, while Joffrey had just been crowned, and was a boy. There was nobody in King's Landing rooting openly for Ned, while Joffrey was considered to be the rightful king. In the North and the Riverlands the lords fought for his cause, but the others had their own causes (Stannis/Renly/Greyjoy), preferred to bend the knee (Tyrell, Martell) or preferred to stay away of the game of thrones (Arryn).

[SecretaryofEvil]

Being anti-Joffrey doesn't necessarily make you pro-Robb. The Iron Islands, The Stormlands, The Reach, and Dragonstone all rebel against Joffrey, they just don't necessarily support Robb. And why should they? How does Northern independence help The Stormlands?

[BlackBrother55]

The North, over the history of the Seven Kingdoms, has always been a bit of a wild card. They're culturally very differant from the south, and tend to do things their own way and be a bit isolated from the rest of Westeros, a bit like, say, Dorne.

[Queen Elsa]

was there other reasons why Robb could not garnish support for his cause other than the River lords and North?

Stannis and Renly maybe willing to help Robb, but the North declared its own king and wanted independence from the IT. This complicates North's seeking of alliances with the two kings vying to reign the 7K. Balon is also in for his own rebellion so he prefers paying the iron price than Robb giving him a crown (and he still holds grudge against those who defeated him in his first rebellion). Lysa who is in charged of the Vale just doesn't care (and she's kinda unstable). The Tyrells, well, they want power that the IT can give them so why help Robb destroy it? And Dorne? Not sure if they have ill feelings against Lyanna running off with Elia's husband.

[King Wayne-1st of His Name]

Cause the stubborn Northerners didn't want to make an allegiance with anybody. If any 2 of the 5 Kings got together, they could topple the other 3 Kings easily. Stupid power-hungry fools!

[mankytoes]

The North, Vale and Riverlands (and everyone really) knew that Ned wasn't a traitor, but they also knew that the Lannisters were making strong alliances and that even if they did support Robb, it

probably wouldn't be enough.

How on earth would they know that? People really forget how much less information most characters have than us. All Ned's side have as an argument is "Joffrey looks like his mother", he then confessed he was trying to usurp the throne. If you didn't know any of these people personally, why would you support Robb?

[Cold Hands Luke]

Cause the stubborn Northerners didn't want to make an allegiance with anybody. If any 2 of the 5 Kings got together, they could topple the other 3 Kings easily. Stupid power-hungry fools!

This. It is what drove me crazy about Stannis. A general rule is if you have a common enemy then you are natural allies, but Stannis especially was too power hungry. I think that a king in the North and then Stannis king of the South would have been a wise concession. The war would be over.

[King Wayne-1st of His Name]

Or the natural alliance, Renly and Stannis. If Stannis would've let his birthright go or Renly had accepted being Stannis' hand, the rest of Westeros would've bent the knee.

[King Wayne-1st of His Name]

This. It is what drove me crazy about Stannis. A general rule is if you have a common enemy then you are natural allies, but Stannis especially was too power hungry. I think that a king in the North and then Stannis king of the South would have been a wise concession. The war would be over.

Or the natural alliance, Renly and Stannis. If Stannis would've let his birthright go or Renly had accepted being Stannis' hand, the rest of Westeros would've bent the knee.

[Duncan the Lunk'n]

Because Robb had as much right to be a king as Renly or Balon did..

[Duncan the Lunk'n]

This. It is what drove me crazy about Stannis. A general rule is if you have a common enemy then you are natural allies, but Stannis especially was too power hungry. I think that a king in the North and then Stannis king of the South would have been a wise concession. The war would be over.

I don't think Stannis was so much power hungry as he knews joff was an inbred bastard, who had no business on the Throne Robbert won... and why would he give a large chunk of his kingdom to Robb? If anythink Robb and Renly needed to side with Stannis, like Ned tried to do

[Cold Hands Luke]

I don't think Stannis was so much power hungry as he knews joff was an inbred bastard, who had no business on the Throne Robbert won... and why would he give a large chunk of his kingdom to Robb? If anythink Robb and Renly needed to side with Stannis, like Ned tried to do

Stannis was the one who needed help the most as Blackwater proved. His whole not bend attitude. The easiest thing would've been to side with Rob and then gather strength and retake the north. But a north and south king to me seems reasonable.

[Duncan the Lunk'n]

Stannis was the one who needed help the most as Blackwater proved. His whole not bend attitude. The easiest thing would've been to side with Rob and then gather strength and retake the north. But a north and south king to me seems reasonable.

Easy yes, but would you really give up half your kingdom to someone you believe is a traitor?, not saying it's right or wrong but that's how Stannis saw things, plus the North hadn't been lost yet

Edit. He would have rather lost a war by himself, than let Robb win it for him

[Cold Hands Luke]

Easy yes, but would you really give up half your kingdom to someone you believe is a traitor?, not saying it's right or wrong but that's how Stannis saw things, plus the North hadn't been lost yet

Edit. He would have rather lost a war by himself, than let Robb win it for him

It's really hard for me to relate to Stannis and see things the way he does. The north had already sided with Rob so Stannis was taking on the north and the south, impossible. He should've seen that and made concessions, like I said, later when the dust settles take those concessions back. I could understand if his honor was on the line like Rob's was with the whole Ned thing but he talks about his honor like "No I'm the rightful king, they should follow me just because and if not then I will die trying." Let's not forget they all were usurpers, the incest could not be proven.

[That Demon Monkey]

It's really hard for me to relate to Stannis and see things the way he does. The north had already sided with Rob so Stannis was taking on the north and the south, impossible. He should've seen that and made concessions, like I said, later when the dust settles take those concessions back. I could understand if his honor was on the line like Rob's was with the whole Ned thing but he talks about his honor like "No I'm the rightful king, they should follow me just because and if not then I will die trying." Let's not forget they all were usurpers, the incest could not be proven.

Stannis does NOT make concessions.

[Cold Hands Luke]

Stannis does NOT make concessions.

That is his tragic character flaw and exactly why he would make a terrible king.