Khal BlackfyreO

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Khal BlackfyreO

  • Rank
  • Birthday 09/03/1980

Contact Methods

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

752 profile views
  1. I can't argue that it is obvious, but it still is a valid response, if you are criticizing Robert taking violent action against his own family as the basis for his cruelty, it is important to remember that that violence was first threatened against him by that same family. Steffon was obviously a loyal and dedicated subject to Aerys, all the more reason to abhor the fact that Aerys demands the head of his second cousin, the son of his cousin and especially loyal subject, who died exercising his duty to the throne.
  2. This just struck me not too long ago as strange, isn´t Pycelle a Lannister lap dog essentially? Isnt she just about one of the few Lannisters left? Or could this be Qyburn´s move in solitary, but in tandem with her own at the Sept?
  3. This. I think its obvious that Thorne, being a loyalist, would not like either Starks or Lannisters. In this sense he seems to be living in the past. Plus he seems to have the general disdain for bastards that so many nobles possess. I think, from Thorne´s perspective, when the realm is at peace and the wall is normal, he still views Westeros the way it was when he was sent to the Wall. And that makes him as Anti-Lannister as he is Anti-Stark, and that leads him to be against Jon from the get-go, but as time passes, his concern shifts more to events at the wall that have him worried (Jon´s consorting with the Wildlings, killing Qhorin, eventually bringing the Wildlings over to the other side of the wall) this makes him see a clear and present danger in Jon, one he is willing to forget old hatreds to work to stop. Slynt is a means to an end for Alliser, he doesn´t like him especially, (other than being the one of those responsible for bringing down a personal enemy of his in Ned Stark) but he sees that he can help him achieve what he wants, and that fresh blood has a better chance of being LC than himself and putting a stop to Jon´s 'nonsense.' and the threat he represents.
  4. I think the easiest way out is to take Mormont's first statement with a grain of salt. That is the only fact that doesn´t really play too well with the rest, and it is easy to make that statement when Mormont had maybe joined the Night´s Watch, but wasn´t yet the Lord Commander (though maybe already groomed for it, much like Jon). He is probably mistaken and just gettng the times off by a few years, life in the Night´s watch is awfully repetitive and dull, probably hard to keep things straight outside of the big events.
  5. I'm totally going to start revealing spoilers from the show if you continue to fail to concede to me on any point!! XP I don't think the rebels were interested in the slightest in the continuance of the Targ dynasty, I think Robert's family history lent his claim legitimacy, but they couldn't be more anti-Targ if they tried. Aegon (if not dead) and Viserys both had better claims than Robert and they were both sold down the river. Simply because people were tired of a generation of a great king and a generation of a crazy/lecherous/war mongering/ cruel despot, I don't think the trade off was worth it to them anymore and they were ready to start over. I don't doubt that the lesser houses would vie for power, one doesn't have to look any further than the Boltons, Freys, and even the Florents to see that element, but that was no different under the Targs or in the age of the Seven Kingdoms either. The lack of a true Royal line doesn't matter, the Great houses are just that, the greatest houses of their regions, typically with the strongest castles, richest lands and the best ties to bannermen. If the central government fell apart, they would naturally be the focus points for each of their regions, and even if strong opposition arose (like the Reynes and the Tarbecks?) We could generally expect similar results. I don't doubt that the majority of great houses would be able to consolidate their local power, and even if any failed, it would only result in the rise of a new great house to take its place. You can argue all you want about relations meaning that its the same dynasty, but it is the name that makes the dynasty. Just look up Henry the III of France, the last French king of the Valois dynasty and Henry of Navarre, his successor, who was the first King of the Bourbon dynasty, both were distant cousins and direct male-line descendants of Louis the IX of the Capetian dynasty.
  6. True, I had my facts mixed up, though I find it confusing that they were still wards in the Vale at that age, I thought a wardship ended much sooner. I still resist the idea that they ever would have crowned another Targaryen, their claim was already better than Robert´s anyway. In the sense of Royal lines maybe that is all that is left, but each region is seeking power for itself and vying for the throne, The Lannisters through marriage to Robert (and an Incestuous takeover) The North through real rebellion, The Vale through total isolationism (maybe not a move towards power but still towards separation), Dorne through Doran´s plotting, The Reach through Margary´s many marriages. It's not a total return to the seven kingdoms, but it is a move towards that, through a total lack of unification. Barring interventions (which surely will come from one place or another) I could easily see Westeros falling back to its Pre-Conquest state. Everyone wants to be the ruler of all the seven kingdoms, but none of them are strong enough to win over the others. For me a dynasty is dead when it falls from power, otherwise its just a family. And you can maintain that the Targs live on through Robert and I can´t deny that in a sense that is true, but neither Robert nor the remaining Targs really believe that Robert is their true successor, and he does not take the Targ name. Baratheons are the new dynasty. Its connection to the Targs just gives it more validity and a nice backstory, like Rome pretending it was founded by survivors from Troy.
  7. Actually it makes Aerys an even worse criminal and barbarian...
  8. I don´t think they were sure themselves what 'their point was' in the beginning. The rebellion was based on resisting authority exercised for authorities sake, injustice, and to save the lives of what were little more than innocent boys at the time. Everything else probably just kind of evolved over time and circumstances. I don´t think there is any real interest in 'preserving the Targaryen line.' And while Robert´s link with that bloodline, may have given him the 'best claim' The fact is that anybody with the actual house name 'Targaryen' is either killed or totally removed from the equation. All in all there is a sense of devolution in all this, the seven kingdoms were constantly at war with each other, rising and falling in constant flux of power and dominions, and the Targs arrived with their superweapons and bent all the kingdoms beneath their yoke. They proved that their only real competition was themselves in the Dance of the dragons, but at the same time removed the real reason for their dominance in that strife and the years after. Then came the Blackfyre pretenders, people of Targ blood but not Targ legitimacy, that were defeated but not decimated, and finally Robert´s rebellion, where now forces from outside the family are once again exercising their power and influence, but still maintaining united under a non-Targ house (but with Targ blood) for just long enough. Maybe the next logical step is to go back to the original seven kingdoms, disjointed and scrabbling for power, or maybe it is time for a Targ to reassert themselves with some superweapons...we shall see. Either way, as far as I´m concerned, the Targ dynasty has ended, Dany sure doesn´t consider Robert family, and his own actions to stomp out dragonseed and keep his house name suggest as much from his perspective. Even if his ancestors give his claim more legitmacy, the line in the sand between Targ and Baratheon is pretty clear.
  9. Well, I can't say I have honestly put to much thought into it, but I always just saw it as a kind of blitzkrieg. The golden company is a highly professional organization, they are coming in when least expected, securing a castle, leaving a small force behind to hold it and moving on, almost before the word-of-mouth can seem real. They also don't seem to be bothering with securing wide swaths of land, just cutting a line through to Storm's End. The geographic distances between where they first land and SE don't seem like too much, and It may be a little plot help, but it seems like exactly the type of thing the GC is capable of. Has anyone been able to determine how much actual time passes between the beginning of the invasion and that WoW chapter?
  10. The Rebellion wasn't fought to end the line of House Targaryen and depose the entire dynasty. It was fought to put an end to the Mad King. That sounds good, and is quite possibly true, but a few things don't add up. Why does Rhaegar even fight at the Trident for his father? If he was already thinking about deposing his father and knows that is all the other side wants, then why doesn't he inform them that he wants the same thing they do? Probably because his actions sparked the whole thing and they want to remove him just as well... And why does Tywin think it is necessary to kill Elia and Aegon and Rhaella? (because we can be fairly sure he ordered it). It really amounts to the same thing doesn't it? Even if Robert is related to the Targs, the Baratheon name is now that of the king of Westeros, and that is a new dynasty by hook or by crook. There were few houses in medieval europe that weren't already related to each other some way, so it could be hard to find a house to rule that didn't have Targaryen blood, even if Robert was pretty closely related. And Robert conquered the throne as the undisputed military leader, the winner of the head to head between him and Rhaegar, and by winning the general popularity contest of the Rebels. If it were all about claims and not ending the rule of the Targs, Viserys would be sitting the Iron Throne.
  11. Your first point is an important one... The loyalist forces do seem to target Robert, but that could be for two reasons. 1. He is most accessible target for one thing, Robert has to raise the Stormlands to have a chance and he is surrounded by the Reach, Dorne and the Crownlands, all Loyalist kingdoms. He is an easy target, especially when Ned, Jon, and Hoster are far to the North with their forces consolidated in a united block. 2. Partly because of the first reason, Robert is the most successful of the rebel forces. They start throwing their forces at him, and he starts winning, battle after battle. That kind of success draws them after him after that, as he is the biggest threat to them and the brightest light in the rebellion. Tywin could have kept King's Landing for himself, but that would have been all he had. If he turns against the rebels, chances are the loyalists, who just lost their king due to his actions, would not be supporting him either. Because he came late, he didn't come in full strength, and King's Landing would be tough to defend, with the Westerlands on the other side of Westeros, and no support from the other 6 kingdoms. Jaimie had no interest in ruling, and I think he was still reeling from his actions and the repercussions to be deciding anything along those lines right then anyway.
  12. Quiathe is going to the Waste. I could do this all day... As a matter of fact: Loras is going to Lorath Mikken is going to Ibben Jace is going to Kayce Othor is going to Qohor A Tarth is going to Qarth Stannis is going to Lannis...port I had to do that last one. XD
  13. Arys is going to Lys.
  14. Nymeria is going to Valyria.
  15. Its all just rolling (rick!) around in our collective subconscious...