Dorian Martell's son

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Dorian Martell's son

  • Rank
    Council Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Hiding from the Mormonts
  • Interests

Recent Profile Visitors

2,318 profile views
  1. Stannis becomes king, gets drunk on power, then starts drinking to cope with cersei, the story continues as written
  2. /thread
  3. Kevan would take the lead as the family patriarch and the story would continue as written
  4. True. Love is the only real battlefield in these books.
  5. We would have a completely different book lacking so many of the characters that make the story go.
  6. That was as king, not as an operating general, which if you had read he bk wld know he was successful and never lost a battle. But since this has been discussed ad nauseum and you still can't accept what the author wrote, you are at an impasse. Not at all. Your argument is still deeply flawed. Robb left men to defend the north and winterfell. Winterfell was occupied by theon due a diversion, but it was the betrayal of a fellow northerner (sound familiar?) that caused winterfell to fall. If a person inside the rock let robbs men in, That would not be a lack of planning on tywin's part. It would be betrayal. Again, you have no idea what you are talking about. It wasn't "resources." He denied the Karstarks the vengeance they desired on the Lannisters for the death of Rickards three sons in the whispering wood. They disobeyed their king and for that treason Lord Rickard was executed. Lord Walder Frey expected to be the grandfather of the prince/princess of the north. It was his whole reason for joining Robb in rebellion to the IT. It had nothing to do with resources. The Freys are rich. Walder wanted to find a way into royalty. The 10k strong army had plenty of objectives. Roose marched them to their deaths at duskendale as a way to thin Robbs support and force him to return to the twins. Again, you seem to miss betrayal in every scenario. Why? Ah, the nitpicking begins when the argument falls apart. Just put general in that list and be done with it. Commanding his infantry to hold the line while the cavalry sorties is what generals do. And he didn't go off on adventures. He very successfully raided the westerlands, took gold and livestock and he took a few castles and smashed the western army. That is great general stuff Robb was making war. And yes, he was great at that. A great general, who never lost a battle. Checkers or Chess, Robb always won. There, I fixed it for you so it makes sense and is relevant to the discussion. Take note please First off, don't lie. Second, don't change the subject to all the immensely stupid what if's and theories based entirely on crackpot theories. Third, again, the responsibilities you describe are those of a kling and not a general. And you still ignore betrayal and put the results on the general. Robb lost due to betrayal and failure as a king, not from being a great kickass general who never lost a battle. Yes, it was a defeat on Tywin, who underestimated a great young general, failed to see the feint and maneuvering and thus committed he bulk of his forces to rout infantry leaving the camps at riverrun open to attack. That sounds like great strategy in Rbbs part. The stuff of a great general. It was, and t showed how great a general Robb was before he was brought down by betrayal due to his failure as a King That was as a King, not a commanding general. He was both, and concentrated on being the latter, while failing at being the former. That is several points but I digress, He, like almost everyone else in the realm trusted in the oldest tradition in the realm. Once he had the bread and salt he trusted to be safe with his own bannerman, even though he betrayed him. Again, this was his failure as a king Also, surprise is a great tactic. It is literally the best tactic that a general can hope to employ if said great general s lacking in troop numbers. Now, as a king, he should have been more war of dining with a bannerman he betrayed, but we never said Robb was a great king, just a great general
  7. she bled therefore she was good to g o
  8. His measure as a general is reflected in this tactical data. Losing the north reflects on his greatness as king. And most of his army died because he was betrayed long before he went to the twins. I don't understand them either but that isn't what we are talking about. Robb was an incredible general, Leading an army at 15, never being defeated in battle, outmaneuvering one of the greatest generals alive to retake his Mother's family seat, ravaging unopposed through the heartland of his enemy, and only being brought down by treason, treachery and the violation of the most sacred tradition on the continent.
  9. You are talking about being a leader and politician, not a general. A general is measured by one thing, victory, and Robb had it in spades. As Lady Blizzardborn has said :
  10. It is as accurate as a rabid fanbase can be We have learned a lot about a number of tribes of free folk. Some are good, some are bad. Most if not all follow the old gods. Some are cannibals and some like the Thenn are organized in a way very similarly to folks below the wall. Since the land beyond the wall is now almost fully depopulated by humans, I don't think so Everyone in westeros has a lot of andal blood. The free folk often raid and kidnap people from south of the wall and have children with them. Also, members of the watch will often father children with wildlings so yes, they do. GRRM does not go into detail about physical andal traits so we really can't tell Many will die in conflict before they bend the knee and assimilate into the culture of the north. Luckily, they keep the same gods of the north so they have that in common Tribal and area specific. The Thenn have established laws and leaders. The rest tend to follow strength
  11. It isn't condescending and It isn't obvious to me by by the nature of you espousing this theory.
  12. Hitler didn't have time. With that whole committing suicide when he realized he was a total failure Yes, when there are not enough breeding individuals available If dominant genes are not successful, they will eventually be bred out of the population Yes, eye color is also a result of natural selection Yes. If a gene is responsible for regulating something necessary for survival, it is purely positive. If a gene, when present expresses a trait that makes survival difficult, then yes, it is purely negative. This is why genetic diversity is very important to survival. Nope. Eventually, as the inbreeding continues, the dice all end up with nothing but 1s on them In the fantasy, maybe. In the real world, outbreeding offers an influx of viable genetic code that will improve offspring The issue would be the traits you are breeding for. Take Dogs. most inbreeding is to get dogs to look a specific way. These poor mutant dogs that are bred for appearance usually have behavior ignored
  13. "But one thing I will say, for what it's worth -- more than ice went into the raising of the Wall. Remember, these are =fantasy= novels. "
  14. The problem arises when I tell people exactly how I love their theories