Adam Yozza

Members
  • Content count

    433
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Adam Yozza

  1. Any descendent of Baelor's could be considered to have a superior claim to Dany, though no one is likely to support him/her. More to the point, such a descendent is impossible. Baelor died in Dunk's trial and both his sons died childless in the same sickness that killed Daeron II
  2. Actually, rereading Feast and Dance I've realized Jon didn't actually break any rules of the Night's Watch; unless the oath to not take part in the affairs of the realm means they can't defend themselves against an attack from the south; which is why it was literally only a handful of the brothers that were involved in the mutiny. If Denys Mallister and Cotter Pyke and other respected men like Iron Emmett and Edd don't support the mutiny then the majority of the watch won't either, particularly as most of the men have a lot of respect for Jon. It's really only the senior leadership in Castle Black itself that has a problem with him. The majority of the NW, even if they were unhappy with Jon's leadership, will still condemn Marsh for the murder of a brother and for mutinying their LC. Given that Melisandre is very much a supporter of Jon and that Jon was a) housing them, which Marsh or Yarwyk probably won't do, and b)advising them, then it's a good guess that the Queen's Men will choose neutrality or to take out the traitors. Even with all of the Queen's Men and the NW, they're still horribly outnumbered, and their is already a giant loose in Castle Black who owes his life to Jon Snow. This one won't fall as easily as Mag.
  3. Hahahahaha no. There is literally nothing to indicate that any surviving Stark would side with the Others. Jon is trying his damnedest to fight them and the Starks were not only the ones to stop them the first time and build the Wall to keep them out, they then manned that wall for thousands of years for the same purpose. There are other elements of your post that I disagree with; mainly that Jon has brought nothing but harm and that the wildlings are 'bad'; but overall the entire post just seems to be stretching the facts a bit. Also.... Do we have anything to prove that the farmer faked this? Because I can't recall catching anything about this being fake.
  4. I quite like the Targ's but I wouldn't say they were any more moral than any other house in particular. Like any family, they had their good people (Jahaerys I, Alysanne, Daeron II, Aegon I, Dany), their bad people (Maegor, Aerion, Aerys, Rhaenyra, Aegon II) and the rest somewhere in between. The good stuff the Targ's did just carries more impact because they did it on a larger scale than anyone else has ever done.
  5. Regent: Mace Tyrell Hand of the King: Mace Tyrell Master of Laws: Randyll Tarly/Mathis Rowan Master of Ships: Paxter Redwyne Master of Coin: Harys Swyft Master of Whispers: Who knows Grand Maester: Probably Gormon Tyrell Advisor: Nymeria Sand Lord Commander: I don't think that Jaime would die, but if he did then probably Balon Swann Of course, this is only what I think the council will look like towards the beginning of Winds, and whatever line up we have at the start will have been almost entirely replaced by the end.
  6. The point was made further up on the thread, but after Duskendale Aerys refused to allow any blades within his vicinity except for those of his Kingsguard, not even to shave or cut his hair/nails. Jaime was the only Kingsguard in the city at the time, and Tywin knew about this policy since he witnessed it being passed firsthand. It's a safe bet that paranoid, insane Aerys would have kept this going through the war when he suspected that anyone/everyone was a plotting traitor. Jaime, at the King's side, would have been fine. If Aerys had ordered Jaime killed there was no one to carry it out. Wartime reports can't really be trusted, and I don't think any source on Tywin's movements comes from anyone who was with him. He probably raised his banners at the start of the war, kept them on the border at Deep Den; ready to strike in any direction; and then started marching towards King's Landing when he heard news of Robert and Rhaegar moving for a confrontation at the Trident, most likely intending to side with whatever side won that fight much like Frey did.
  7. Except he didn't. He had knowledge that Mel was sending Mance to rescue a girl who was fleeing from a horrible fate. That's not the same as authorizing a kidnapping. Furthermore, Jon is well within his rights to defend the NW from a southern threat. He can't take part in the affairs of the south but defending against a southern attacker when aforementioned attacker has threatened to destroy the NW if Jon doesn't meet conditions that are impossible to meet. Whether Jon would have objected or not is irrelevant because he didn't know. And he had no authority over Mance or Mel, so he couldn't just say "F*** it, leave her," and even if he could why would he? Even if you're right and Jon knew about Mance going to Winterfell, authorized it and then somehow betrayed the watch in response to Ramsay's letter nothing he did was morally wrong. If you try and say that Jon and Mance were somehow morally wrong in this, then I'd suggest examining your sense of morality. He didn't though. Mance was sent to lead a fleeing girl back to Castle Black from Long Lake, not sneak into Winterfell, kill a bunch of people and steal Ramsay's wife (not that they were wrong to do so). That was all Mance.
  8. Dead wrong. He didn't send Mance to do anything, Melisandre did. Jon knew that Mance was going to Long Lake to intercept what they thought to be Arya, but knowing about it and ordering it are separate things. Plus, even if he had opposed Melisandre's decision to send Mance, he had no authority to stop him. So no, Jon provoked nothing. Jon's also not responsible for breaking guest right because as I said above, Mance didn't go on his orders. Even then, Mance's orders were to intercept fArya on the road. Mance went to Winterfell of his own volition. And what bigger treason? Defending the watch from the Bolton's isn't treason, but stabbing your Lord Commander to death most certainly is.
  9. Doctor's Consort got there first but like she said, Jon didn't start any war with the Bolton's. Ramsay; as far as Jon knows; sent a letter threatening to destroy the watch if Jon didn't hand over a bunch of prisoners, some of which he doesn't have (FakeArya and Theon/Reek). While his decision to fight the Bolton's might in part have been motivated by a desire to save his sister and avenge his brother, Ramsay had still openly declared his intention to destroy the NW and as such Jon did nothing wrong in responding to that threat. Nothing in the vows say the NW can't fight off an army from the south that clearly intends to destroy them. Also, I am 95-99% sure that R+L=J. Literally no other option makes sense, except perhaps FAegon being Lyanna's son, but even that is a bit convoluted.
  10. As someone who's writing my own book at the moment, I also completely ignored that rule. Always felt way too artificial and unrealistic that in a group of characters no two would share the first letter of their names. As for unfortunate names, anyone named Aenys. Also Haegon Blackfyre; it really seems like Daemon Blackfyre just got lazy, couldn't think of a new name and said "Screw it, I have an Aegon already so let's put a 'H' in front of his name!"
  11. Yet I've similarly seen no evidence that this union will bring harm. I can't find any textual evidence pointing to Jon being someone who's very existence will bring harm to the world.
  12. How has he? If Jon hadn't let Tormund and his free folk through the wall there'd just be more corpse's for the dead to throw at the living. If Jon hadn't helped Stannis then there's no way the North would be able to rally in time to face the Others. Jon has been reopening the abandoned forts along the wall, he's making deals with the Iron Bank. By contrast, he made the one mistake of trying to lead the Free Folk to rescue his sister. So tell me, how has he done more harm than good? As to the OP, it seems to me that ice and fire have always been at an imbalance. The Others marched when there were no dragons in Westeros, leading to ice domination. Thousands of years later, fire has dominance with the arrival of Aegon the Conqueror and now ice has dominance again. I think it's more likely that the union of ice and fire is designed to balance it once and for all.
  13. Except the Iron Islands have only been ruled by Pyke for 300 hundred years. Before that, the Hoare's ruled from Orkmont I believe and even earlier the Greyiron's ruled from the same place.
  14. Jorah's above average, I'd say. A third tier, not top. The top spots belong to Jaime and Barristan with very few others making it into their league, maybe Garlan based on what we've heard. Jorah's accomplishment's aren't actually that impressive compared to others. Wearing armour he defeated an unarmoured opponent who was using a weapon completely unsuited to fighting armour and still managed to take a wound doing it. Defeating Jaime at Lannisport in equally useless because it's jousting, and he didn't actually beat Jaime anyway. His only real achievement is being one of the first to engage the enemy at Pyke and living to tell about it; which is impressive, admittedly.
  15. I didn't say extraordinary. Free Northman probably worded it better than I did, but I meant pretty much the same thing. They are more used to harsh conditions and physical hardship than the south and thus have an edge of hardiness over them. It's not that they're generally better fighters (though they have some good fighters among them to be sure, just like any other Kingdom) but rather that they are a bit hardier. Plus they appear to have a 'go down swinging' mentality that other regions tend to lack. The only time a Northern force retreats is after the Green Fork and that was a controlled and planned withdrawal. By contrast, at Duskendale they stood their ground and inflicting heavy losses on a foe that was superior in every way. On the other hand, Stannis' army, the Riverlords and the force at Oxcross have all been shown to break and run when the odds are against them and that's just using examples from the main books.