Would you be ok with the Boltons surviving the series?

[Valyrian Blade]

You can be sure no Bolton is surviving if Stannis takes winterfell.

Quote

 The north remembers, Lord Davos. The north remembers, and the mummer's farce is almost done

 

[Winter's Cold]

The Starks are not the only ones who suffered from the Bolton betrayal. All the other houses who had family members at the Red Wedding also suffered. If they learn the extent of the Bolton involvement in the Red Wedding, what reason would they have to accept the continued existence of House Bolton in the North. What does Lord Manderly say when an innocent Frey child dies? Though mayhaps this was a blessing. Had he lived he would have grown up to be a Frey. House Bolton is not just a Stark enemy, they are an enemy of the North and they will pay the price for their actions. If that means that innocents of House Bolton will be exterminated as vengeance for the deaths of the innocents of the other Northern houses, then that's a disaster of their own making.

[Paxter Redwyne]

Maybe Walda's child would be nice, but its sons, and grandsons would probably return to their bloody traditions. You cannot defy your ancestry. It will come to you sooner or later. If not in your generation, then next, or next after that, and so on.

 

Roose is cool, but for the sake of whole North it will be better if they all will be executed, no matter if they are old men or suckling babes.

[JonisHenryTudor]

3 hours ago, The Wolves said:

It is hypocritical, yet I don't care. 

Hahaha well that wins the best response on this forum for ages to come. 

[JonisHenryTudor]

1 hour ago, Narea said:

The problem here is that you don't need to kill even the yet unborn child to achieve the end of the Bolton lineage. All you need to do is sent the child to the Faith, the Citadel or even the NW and the line ends right there.

 

Not always. Those people could return as claimants to the throne or house. Exile is not always a steady solution, even if they were raised by the faith, etc. I am not suggesting the north should slaughter anyone tied to House Bolton, but sending the child off does not guarantee that they won't become a problem later on.   

[One-eyed Misbehavin]

Only if the child of fat Walda and Roose is fostered at WF by Jon Targ. Every other Bolton hopefully doesn't make it.

[Raksha 2014]

On 3/30/2016 at 9:37 AM, Scorpion92 said:

The baby's father is a Bolton, and the mother is a Frey. I don't think fostering this baby and changing his sigil will be good ideas because this is a medieval society, and Starks will not hold respect of other northern houses if they do not extinguish the family that dared to rise and usurp their place as rulers of the North. Different time, different rules, you need to imagine how northerners will view it. Especially with winter approaching, there will be harsh and ruthless choices - the reason Starks were called Kings of Winter in the first place.

And frankly I do not believe Fat Walda, Roose, Ramsay or this child survives the series. They might get chopped off in the very next book.

 

I would not be okay with either Roose (rapist and traitor and murderer) or Ramsay surviving the books.  I think it very likely that poor Walda isn't long for this world.  If, by some miracle, she does survive, and produces a live, healthy baby; one would hope the child is a girl.  A baby Bolton girl could be married off to a Stark or a Stark relative and House Bolton could become a cadet branch of the Starks.  A Bolton boy could be sent to the Wall when he is old enough, and House Bolton parceled off to House Stark and its faithful allies.  

[BalerionTheCat]

No. No more than the Freys.

Roose and Ramsey must die. If Walda has a surviving child, how unlikely, he or she could become a ward of some family, Stark or other. But the Bolton name and practices must disappear. Meaning probably more than just Roose and Ramsey.

[norwaywolf123]

Bolton or Stark what is the difference?

Lannister or Targaryen what is the difference?

Robb Stark or Tywin Lannister what is the diffrence? Robb and Tywin both see the enemy lords smallfolk as foes and trys to make life impossible for them. burning the field, stealing food, burning food.

people supporting Starks for being Stark or Lannisters for that sake are just elitists happy to obey as long as someone has the right history and name and looks............... (War, War Never Changes)

[The Dragons Hand]

I desire some form of ungodly revenge on Ramsay.

Roose can get offed with a single sudden strike and a Bond/Chuck Greene one-liner

[Scorpion92]

1 hour ago, Raksha 2014 said:

 

I would not be okay with either Roose (rapist and traitor and murderer) or Ramsay surviving the books.  I think it very likely that poor Walda isn't long for this world.  If, by some miracle, she does survive, and produces a live, healthy baby; one would hope the child is a girl.  A baby Bolton girl could be married off to a Stark or a Stark relative and House Bolton could become a cadet branch of the Starks.  A Bolton boy could be sent to the Wall when he is old enough, and House Bolton parceled off to House Stark and its faithful allies.  

To be honest, I believe most northern houses will become extinct by the time Jon becomes Lord of Winterfell and brings everyone's attention in the North to real threat from Beyond the Wall. He will give the lands and titles of extinct families to his main supporters: wildlings. Currently the number of female heirs to northern lands is vast and will grow with upcoming war between Boltons and Stannis, and then Stannis taking northern fleet and army south to take Iron Throne (where he will lose and burn in dragon flame). Lady Dustin (and potentially Ryswell), Lady Cerwyn, Lady Tallhart, Lady Glover (if her husband and brother-in-law do not return home), Lady Mormont, even some theories state spearwife Rowan is a long lost daughter of Mors Umber who under right circumstances might inherit Last Hearth - all candidates to be betrothed to wildling chiefs and main supporters of Jon once he takes Winterfell and becomes Robb's heir King Jon Stark. Hell, given Larence Snow's background might give Jon a reason to legitimize him into Hornwood and grant its lands and titles.

If stabbing at Castle Black taught Jon anything is that you cannot send away your allies and surround yourself with enemies. You need people you trust around you. Wildlings will become Jon's main source of political power, and he needs to reward and integrate them into the North. All these northern female heirs are there for a reason. Marriage is the fastest way to solidify alliances and end the wars in medieval society. It will be a perfect way to integrate wildlings into the North, otherwise they will be outcasts forever. It will also be a right political move on Jon's part - rewarding his most loyal supporters with lands and titles. 

I also think Davos will become Jon's Hand eventually. Stannis will leave the North with northern army and Manderly fleet to take back first Dragonstone, and then Iron Throne. He will die at the island thanks to arrived Dany. Plus, Golden Company invaded Cape Wraith and Davos' seat and family are in big danger. His situation might be dire, so he will need a new master and lord to serve story wise. Given Davos' travels to White Harbor and interaction with Manderlys, there are some theories that Jon might award Wolf's Den and White Harbor to Onion Knight - another southerner and follower of Seven just like Manderlys (of course, this is assuming that House Manderly eventually loses its lands and titles). Not to mention that Davos has big experience in naval operations and tactics, and giving the biggest northern port to his Hand might be another wise move on Jon's part.

And House Bolton is bound to go extinct: Ramsay and Roose will bite it for sure next book, and I am pretty sure pregnant Fat Walda will be killed by Ramsay himself as her children are threat to him. I think Jon either burns down Dreadfort to the ground to mirror Ramsay's burning of Winterfell or gives the castle and its lands and titles to a wildling chief.

Well, again, this is all crackpot, but I do believe that entire northern political outlook will change once Jon becomes Lord of Winterfell. FInally the North will be under one leadership - some will accept Jon because of Robb's will and his Stark blood right, some because they chose him as their leader the Free Folk way. One thing for sure - he will be the only capable figure of uniting and leading the North into upcoming battle against the Others when the Wall finally falls at the end of Winds of Winter.

That is my big crackpot on general outline of what is going to happen in the North in next book.

[No Gods, No Masters]

5 hours ago, The Wolves said:

I still don't get why the Starks should continue to let the Boltons exist . Somebody remind me where did continuing to let them exist get the Starks if we go back to ASOS, AFFC, and ADWD we'll find out. 

The Starks have just been fucked over so much throughout the books for such petty reasons like smal grudges, that ugly chair and power that I'm okay if they exterminate their enemies even the innocent ones. 

Also when have being sympathetic, humane, or even fair ever got the Starks anywhere but dead and betrayed in this story? 

You're right that honor has backfired for Ned and Robb. But I should clarify-- I have no problem with one of them executing Roose and/or Ramsay (though I still find it more likely that they'll die another way). Roose and Ramsey have earned it-- they've committed horrific crimes, not only against the Starks (so it's not only a personal grudge), but against many Northerners, Ironborn, Riverlanders, and others. Roose was involved in the Red Wedding, so while it wasn't his own guest-right that was betrayed, he is an accomplice to that abomination, as well as partaking in many other crimes. And if getting rid of those two ends up wiping out house Bolton, so be it. That would just tie up a loose end by way of justice.

However, if, for instance, Walda Frey gets pregnant with a Bolton, or if there are other Boltons who I don't know of, who have not committed crimes themselves, executing (read: effectively murdering) other innocent Boltons  in order to extinguish their house would be purely vengeful, unjust, and, as I said, would be an example of wrongly blaming the father's sins on the son, something that GRRM has made a point of painting as wrong. I mean, how would we feel about Tyrion being killed for being a Lannister? Yeah, Tywin deserved it, Cersei will deserve it, and Jamie... Well, Jamie is a complicated case. But the point is, Tyrion shouldn't be punished for his family's deeds, when he had no power to influence those deeds, and isn't like them.

Protection of children, in particular, has been emphasized throughout the books, alongside this theme, and for anyone (a Stark, a Baratheon, a Targaryan, or anyone else) to murder a baby Bolton, simply because it's name is "Bolton" would not be justice. Throughout the books, we have complicated families. Even the worst parents sometimes have wonderful children, from Tyrion (vs Tywin) to Rhaegar (vs the Mad King).

And as an example to illustrate that Martin is against this kind of vengeance, we need look no further than Lady Stoneheart. She embodies her motive-- pure, indiscriminate revenge. She will kill Frey (or anyone associated with the Frey-Bolton-Lannister alliance), even if they have nothing to do with the Red Wedding-- even if they are by all accounts good, honorable, innocent people (there is one example of this, I believe, but I can't remember the name, if anyone can help me out). I think it's quite clear that Stoneheart is meant to represent a total loss of humanity-- a woman consumed by hatred and the desire for revenge. How would killing an innocent baby/child Bolton be any better? Extinguishing a name doesn't matter-- getting justice against the individuals who committed crimes does. There are evil people in generally-good families and vice versa.

[dreem24]

Protection of children, in particular, has been emphasized throughout the books, alongside this theme, and for anyone (a Stark, a Baratheon, a Targaryan, or anyone else) to murder a baby Bolton, simply because it's name is "Bolton" would not be justice. Throughout the books, we have complicated families. Even the worst parents sometimes have wonderful children, from Tyrion (vs Tywin) to Rhaegar (vs the Mad King)

Love the examples a spoiled rich kid and a troubled man with 1000 insecurities.  Anyways who cares about right and wrong it's not you getting killed...  Just dont make it stupid(sorry english) Dont make it cuz of bad luck or some random shit have it make sense.

 

I respect more lady stoneheart cuz she wants such a revange i mean it's only natural someone kill your loved ones once done crying you wait wait and kill em all. 

Just dont make it stupid. 

 

Guys dont you have fun with the ages of the characyers i mean the grown men club at 16 hahaha.  Sometimes it's hard just....

[Vivienne Vee]

On 3/30/2016 at 0:51 PM, Stannis is the man....nis said:

I would have a problem with Ramsay not dying as it would feel contradicting for George and his style to let someone as dumb, loud, and violent as Ramsay come out of this ok

I agree whole-heartedly with this. I'm actually gonna be pretty angry if nothing terrible happens to Ramsay soon. Could be Stannis or Jon in battle, could be Mance or Theon by some trickery/assassination, could be Roose himself (I'm one of the people who thinks there's an outside chance that Roose is some sort of immortal skinchanger grooming his son to steal his identity), could be the undead making their big arrival south of the Wall by overrunning the Boltons. 

But whatever happens, Ramsay's got it coming. Justice isn't absolute in ASOIAF but characters who behave like Ramsay - both the pathologically sadistic and the audacious who act without thinking - tend to meet short ends. If we take the pink letter at face value, he's thus far gotten everything he's wanted save for Theon and Jeyne escaping - and in return he got Mance as a prisoner and successfully provoked Jon into getting himself (at least temporarily) killed.

As far as I'm concerned either Ramsay's being set up for the most gratifying comeuppance in the series, or he's a lame character who reflects the worst of the authorial impulses Martin is sometimes accused of (needless cruelty, things going unexpectedly solely for shock value, etc).

[Daeron Velar]

Aren't the only Boltons just Ramsey, Roose and the child in the belly of Obese Fat Walda? I have no doubt that Ramsey will eventually meet his demise including Roose iffy on Fat Walda but her future doesn't look bright with Ramsey still running around and a trueborn son doesn't mode well for him so shouldn't the question be. Would you think the Boltons will survive the series?

[My_Half_Groat]

Execute Roose for the Red Wedding

Execute Ramsay for being Ramsay

Fat Walda lives out her days in the Dreadfort a widow or marries another lord and loses both the Bolton in her name and her claim to their lands.

Fat Walda's child: if male, he goes to the Wall. sorry kid, tough luck but at least you weren't born poor, you'll have nice gloves. If it's a girl, she is married off to some small southern lord's family. Far away from power and far away from any claim to the north. 

The Dreadfort is then given to a Stark wedded to a Manderly to lock down power in the North.

[Ninerings]

The only problem in the North is not Roose. he did what he had to to keep war from the North. His son is an idiot that even HE can't stand. There are worse up there like the Karstarks. We may be led to love the Starks, but they lost, so you can't hate on who is taking over.

[khal drogon]

13 hours ago, Winter's Cold said:

The Starks are not the only ones who suffered from the Bolto n betrayal. All the other houses who had family members at the Red Wedding also suffered. If they learn the extent of the Bolton involvement in the Red Wedding, what reason would they have to accept the continued existence of House Bolton in the North. What does Lord Manderly say when an innocent Frey child dies? Though mayhaps this was a blessing. Had he lived he would have grown up to be a Frey. House Bolton is not just a Stark enemy, they are an enemy of the North and they will pay the price for their actions. If that means that innocents of House Bolton will be exterminated as vengeance for the deaths of the innocents of the other Northern houses, then that's a disaster of their own making.

Would you apply the same logic on Robb and say his death was his own making? I won't blame the other poor lords who died in the Red Wedding.

[Equilibrium]

It is a great way to make a point, so I think we have high chances to have at least one Bolton, that is Roose or Ramsey not newborn baby or Richard Bolton their estranged cousin who sells codfish in White Harbor

Ramsey can get on redemption path, in the way of either stop his cruel and unusual entertainments or doing something heroic. Or one of them can get imprisoned or exiled or otherwise Aesop'd without being killed. 

Or they can remain in power as a clear message that not everyone gets what they deserve.

And lets not forget the pure shock and surprise if Ramsey survives to do what he likes best in say Disputed Lands as a merc. 

That said, if Ramsey doesn't get some more character depth or some other personal dimension, I will miss him as much as I miss Vargo Hoat, that is not at all, but I will miss Roose a little, and I will certainly be disappointed if he is just killed off in the "good always wins in the end" way. Way for a Roose to be killed is to have him make some unreasonable move or decision.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Rusty Winchester]

On ‎3‎/‎30‎/‎2016 at 10:57 AM, Nimble as Dick said:

Lol I am surprised at the support for Roose around here. True he is a very interesting and intriguing man BUT he is very treacherous as well. The story of him raping Ramsey's mother under the dead body of her husband is enough for him to be a favorite to get killed off by it's self. Definitely Ramsey has to go and even though Fat Walda seems pretty cool, her baby is a Bolton AND a Frey spawn so they need to go as well! The realm would be better off without Boltons and Freys in it IMO. The question isn't if the Boltons should be killed off, but how satisfyingly will they get dealt with to make up for all of their treachery.

See this Roose story is one I have a bit of trouble with.  My memory might be failing me here, but is the source for this story not in fact Roose himself?  We know he is capable of great cruelty, and in fact openly states that he believes in using fear as a weapon to keep people in check.  Is it possible that he invented this story for that purpose, or just to keep Ramsay in check, remind him of what he is? The only reason I suspect this, is that while we have plenty of examples of Roose doing incredibly cruel things, they otherwise always seem to serve a purpose.  I can't think of any examples of him engaging in cruelty just for the sheer joy of it, which is certainly what the story of Ramsay's conception would seem to be.  Please feel free to correct me on this point, I can't deny I might be whitewashing the actions of an undeniably bad dude just because I find him interesting.