The Prince Not Promised Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 Jon is younger and has had less training, and frankly may not even have as much talent as Loras to begin with. Loras is hard to judge since we haven't seen him actually fight, but I think if he and Jon were matched up he would end up winning a fair majority of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OberynBlackfyre Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 In westeros maybe, but not in reality. See my above posts. Other than that, I agree with your points. But to add to your point. Syrio is not a knight, and he kicked a few of their asses, so...... We still have no idea if he is dead or alive. Regardless of that scene, how do we classify Syrio? Sub par? Syrio verse Loras. Syrio makes some very important critiques about knights or westerosi styles of fighting. He is considered the First Sword of Brazos, but is he considered a knight? I would consider him as deadly as any of the KNights in Westeros....however I also personally believe that SYrio was a faceless man (Maybe there to kill Robert, provided by the Lannisters). That being said, wouldn't the FM be the most deadly...period? Also as a side comment, I completely and utterly agree with your screen handle. I firmly believe John is the Henry Tudor to come out of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Light a wight tonight Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 note that these guys are all KNIGHTS. Jon is not a KNight, and of course no Northerner is on there because the NOrth doesn't hold knighthood as sacred or important. Um, Sandor Clegane is not a knight and he'd be happy to tell you so himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OberynBlackfyre Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 Um, Sandor Clegane is not a knight and he'd be happy to tell you so himself. well of course, but the only thing missing from him being a knight is him taking the vows. He was trained in the style of a knight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonisHenryTudor Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 I would consider him as deadly as any of the KNights in Westeros....however I also personally believe that SYrio was a faceless man (Maybe there to kill Robert, provided by the Lannisters). That being said, wouldn't the FM be the most deadly...period? Also as a side comment, I completely and utterly agree with your screen handle. I firmly believe John is the Henry Tudor to come out of this. Yes they are deadly. I agree, I think Syrio is just as deadly with a sword as any in Westeros. He isn't considered a knight though is he? The Dothraki are not knights but are also considered the most fearsome warriors. I think Essos needs to be brought into this discussion as well. Especially if we are discussing knighthood. Doing so, I think, will begin to dismantle the concept that knights are the best fighters. If Loras is better than Jon because Loras is a knight, then Loras is also better than (or would have been) Drogo because Drogo was not a knight. I find that to be an unsettling argument.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OberynBlackfyre Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 Yes they are deadly. I agree, I think Syrio is just as deadly with a sword as any in Westeros. He isn't considered a knight though is he? The Dothraki are not knights but are also considered the most fearsome warriors. I think Essos needs to be brought into this discussion as well. Especially if we are discussing knighthood. Doing so, I think, will begin to dismantle the concept that knights are the best fighters. If Loras is better than Jon because Loras is a knight, then Loras is also better than (or would have been) Drogo because Drogo was not a knight. I find that to be an unsettling argument.... exactly. And even then are we supposed to just forget the sell sword companies who literally fight for a living? I mean technically wouldn't they have more experience than anyone else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonisHenryTudor Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 exactly. And even then are we supposed to just forget the sell sword companies who literally fight for a living? I mean technically wouldn't they have more experience than anyone else? Bronn may not be better than Loras, but he is fairly stout and I think he could better a number of Westerosi knights. Sir Dontos is a good example. He is a knight rather was. Joff stripped him of his knighthood. There is two things there. If by definition knights are better fighters than people who are not. Then it is a given that Sir Dontos of House Hollard would beat Jon Snow. Also if knighthood can be stripped, does that mean you lose your capabilities? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OberynBlackfyre Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 Bronn may not be better than Loras, but he is fairly stout and I think he could better a number of Westerosi knights. Sir Dontos is a good example. He is a knight rather was. Joff stripped him of his knighthood. There is two things there. If by definition knights are better fighters than people who are not. Then it is a given that Sir Dontos of House Hollard would beat Jon Snow. Also if knighthood can be stripped, does that mean you lose your capabilities? haha exactly. ANd Bronn I would actually put on par with Loras when it came to swords. I mean Loras even says that he is better with a Lance, but his brother Garland is the better actual fighter..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RavenKing23 Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 Loras, would this even be in doubt if he wasn't gay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonisHenryTudor Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 Loras, would this even be in doubt if he wasn't gay? Are you assuming that people have said Jon because Loras is gay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeyBanana Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 Loras. No doubt, the any given day rule applies here aswell, of course, but he's the better warrior. I can't even recall Jon doing anything apart from sword fighting and archery like training jousting, percussion weapons, polearms, on horse or in heavy armor. Loras excells at most of these things, archery/polearms excluded as that was never mentioned. All Jon has is his skill as a swordsman which isn't all that impressive considering he hasn't actually defeated anyone noteworthy without it being either training or "fixed". Halfhand really doesn't count. On a battlefield, Loras has easily twice the value of Jon. And we have been given no reason to believe that Loras has no leadership skills or is a bad commander. All we know of Dragonstone is from Cersei's POV and some relatively unreliable sources. Oh and i dislike Loras a lot for killing Robar Royce/trying to kill Brienne and generally being an arrogant little twat. His only redeeming quality is his loyalty to his family and Renly. So...yeah, Jon is definitely the better human being. That's something, i suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonisHenryTudor Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 Loras. No doubt, the any given day rule applies here aswell, of course, but he's the better warrior. I can't even recall Jon doing anything apart from sword fighting and archery like training jousting, percussion weapons, polearms, on horse or in heavy armor. Loras excells at most of these things, archery/polearms excluded as that was never mentioned. All Jon has is his skill as a swordsman which isn't all that impressive considering he hasn't actually defeated anyone noteworthy without it being either training or "fixed". Halfhand really doesn't count. And we have been given no reason to believe that Loras has no leadership skills or is a bad commander. All we know of Dragonstone is from Cersei's POV and some relatively unreliable sources. On a battlefield, Loras has easily twice the value of Jon. But Jon hasn't had to face anyone noteworthy. So you cannot be good unless you fight someone noteworthy? Loras has competed in tourneys, Jon has not. How do we know how he can do with various weapons? These are very subjective claims. It is like comparing two HoF athletes from different eras. Loras could be better, but unless they fight each other you cannot say for certain. On the battlefield, you realize that neither Jon or Loras are going to be running in with a personal armory right? IIRC doesn't Jaime only use a sword? Selmy? Dayne? Aren't these guys considered the best fighters in the realm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeyBanana Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 But Jon hasn't had to face anyone noteworthy. So you cannot be good unless you fight someone noteworthy? Loras has competed in tourneys, Jon has not. How do we know how he can do with various weapons? These are very subjective claims. It is like comparing two HoF athletes from different eras. Loras could be better, but unless they fight each other you cannot say for certain. On the battlefield, you realize that neither Jon or Loras are going to be running in with a personal armory right? IIRC doesn't Jaime only use a sword? Selmy? Dayne? Aren't these guys considered the best fighters in the realm? Loras is a better warrior than Jon. He is more experienced, versatile, and is widely renowned for his skill at arms. The author himself calls him one of the best warriors amongst other such as Oberyn, Jaime, Garlan, Hound, and Selmy. Jaime, the most talented swordsman of his time, admits despite his dislike and distrust of Loras how skilled and dangerous he is. It's safe to assume it takes a lot to impress Jaime Lannister of your battle prowess. Jon is considered an above average swordfighter, that's it. There is absolutely no evidence in the books to suggest that he is trained (being the keyword here) to use other weapons in a fight/battle or at jousting or that he can hold his own in a battle like Blackwater. Loras is in a completely different league and comparing the two doesn't even make sense. Btw, is this because of the show? It is, isn't it? They fucked up Renly and Loras so hard, it's just sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonisHenryTudor Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 Loras is a better warrior than Jon. He is more experienced, versatile, and is widely renowned for his skill at arms. The author himself calls him one of the best warriors amongst other such as Oberyn, Jaime, Garlan, Hound, and Selmy. Jaime, the most talented swordsman of his time, admits despite his dislike and distrust of Loras how skilled and dangerous he is. It's safe to assume it takes a lot to impress Jaime Lannister of your battle prowess. Jon is considered an above average swordfighter, that's it. There is absolutely no evidence in the books to suggest that he is trained (being the keyword here) to use other weapons in a fight/battle or at jousting or that he can hold his own in a battle like Blackwater. Loras is in a completely different league and comparing the two doesn't even make sense. Btw, is this because of the show? It is, isn't it? They fucked up Renly and Loras so hard, it's just sad. HUH? (bold) I can agree that comparing the two doesn't make sense. But I will also say that you only need to be good with a single weapon to stay alive. I am not doubting that Loras is good, only that the argument that this character can do this, that, and that makes them better. Loras is likely a better jouster, but jousting is a tourney game. But the reality is, if the two fought each other. Jon would be using Longclaw and Loras his sword likely. So it doesn;t really matter if Loras could swing his member in a vicious nature, because he will not be using that in the fight. Most of the other weapons are great tourney weapons, but the spear, sword, and ax are better battlefield weapons. Jon can shoot an arrow by the way. A spear is effective on horseback during a battle, but not so much as an infantry weapon (not counting the Greek/Roman style of warfare). AN ax is effective but heavier and more cumbersome to swing. Dismounted knights are going to go for a sword before most weaponry. Having said that if they met on the field of battle it would be with a sword. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamoDega Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 In westeros maybe, but not in reality. See my above posts. Other than that, I agree with your points. But to add to your point. Syrio is not a knight, and he kicked a few of their asses, so...... We still have no idea if he is dead or alive. Regardless of that scene, how do we classify Syrio? Sub par? Syrio verse Loras. Syrio makes some very important critiques about knights or westerosi styles of fighting. He is considered the First Sword of Bravos, but is he considered a knight? I agree, as long the duel is without armor a First Sword of Bravos is probably the scariest opponent you can get Unarmored the only fighter i can see be more dangerous is Oberyn, but because poison The fun thing is that for various reasons maybe Syrio was not even the best at it, remember that you don't become FSoB only with sword skill, sometime you have just to recognize a cat :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twenty of House Goodmen Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 HUH? (bold) The show has portrayed both Renly and Loras as wimps, which led lots readers to believe that they're also wimps in the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Northman Reborn Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 Loras is better than Jon. Jon is better than Bronn. Bronn is marginally better than the old guy fighting with the unfamiliar, heavy ceremonial sword in the Eyrie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barneyfife Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 loras id say for sure.but if jonh is dead and comes back im hoping hes more badass in everyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Marquis de Leech Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 Jon is better than Bronn. I'd doubt that. Bronn does what he needs to win, and he has the experience to know what he needs to do to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Northman Reborn Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 I'd doubt that. Bronn does what he needs to win, and he has the experience to know what he needs to do to win. Bronn is a no account, broke, drifting swordsman in his mid-thirties, with no reputation and no status in the sellsword world. If he was that great a warrior he would have made much more of himself by the time his prime was almost over - which it is when you get to around 35. He is vastly overrated by much of the fandom, based on very scant evidence to back it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.