Arthur Dayne VS Oberyn Martell VS Robert Baratheon

[BricksAndSparrows]

39 minutes ago, The Young_Lion said:

Dayne is miles ahead of the others: even Jaime, who Brienne says could destroy any knight alive, talks of him like a god. Robert is quite overrated - ok, he defeated Rhaegar, and he was very strong, but there is little evidence that he was a truly great warrior. Also, a war hammer is a rubbish weapon for single combat - no reach and very heavy and slow. Oberyn is clearly very good, but while he could kill the mountain, he would find it harder to defeat someone with dawn, which is very light and has great reach. I expect a Robert vs Oberyn would be similar to Tyrion's trial, and although Robert was probably quicker than Gregor, the poor reach of his war hammer would make him the underdog.

I'm of the belief that Robert would have lost to the other two as well, but I wouldn't crap on the war hammer too much. Not all of them are short and they can punch through armor.

Quote

And to those who say that HR beat Dayne, what happened is unclear, and it is quite probable that Howland simply persuaded Dayne that Ned was Jon's only chance of survival

That's a boat load of speculation. Unless there is some piece of info I'm missing. Why wouldn't Dayne take the kid himself? The rest of the Targaryen children had just been butchered... And Why would Howland Reed be so convincing?

 

[Laughing Storm Reborn]

55 minutes ago, The Young_Lion said:

Dayne is miles ahead of the others: even Jaime, who Brienne says could destroy any knight alive, talks of him like a god. Robert is quite overrated - ok, he defeated Rhaegar, and he was very strong, but there is little evidence that he was a truly great warrior. Also, a war hammer is a rubbish weapon for single combat - no reach and very heavy and slow. Oberyn is clearly very good, but while he could kill the mountain, he would find it harder to defeat someone with dawn, which is very light and has great reach. I expect a Robert vs Oberyn would be similar to Tyrion's trial, and although Robert was probably quicker than Gregor, the poor reach of his war hammer would make him the underdog.

And to those who say that HR beat Dayne, what happened is unclear, and it is quite probable that Howland simply persuaded Dayne that Ned was Jon's only chance of survival

.'. Dayne>Martell>Baratheon

 

Hi there Lion,

Per book combat feats; weapon skill; genetics; and author/character quotes...

there´s no way in hell Robert is behind Oberyn or Dayne, he´s equal or superior

reasons are already mentioned in previous comments

 

 

 

[The Young_Lion]

26 minutes ago, BricksAndSparrows said:

I'm of the belief that Robert would have lost to the other two as well, but I wouldn't crap on the war hammer too much. Not all of them are short and they can punch through armor.

That's a boat load of speculation. Unless there is some piece of info I'm missing. Why wouldn't Dayne take the kid himself? The rest of the Targaryen children had just been butchered... And Why would Howland Reed be so convincing?

 

I do not think that a war hammer is a useless weapon, just that it is not suited to one on one combat. In battle, where space is confined, it is great, but when in one on one combat, its limited mobility compared to a valyrian steel sword or a spear is a major hindrance.

 

As for Robert's prowess, none of the Knights he killed seem to have been considered top tier warriors, with the possible exception of Connington. Rhaegar was a vey good jouster, but I can't find any evidence that he was an exceptional swordsman. Connington does seem to have had a reputation, having defeated Hoster Tully, however this does not mean that he was the equal of some of Dayne's opponents, such as the smiling knight. 

Robert's reputation is probably also the most inflated of the three given that he was King for nearly a decade and a half, so he would have had good PR, and lords and knights would have praised him so as to ingratiate themselves. I am not suggesting that Robert is not a very accomplished warrior, only that he could not match Arthur Dayne.

Even Eddard Stark, Robert's closest friend, who saw both men fight, called Ser Arthur the finest knight he had ever seen, implying that he was better than Robert who did have a knighthood.

And on the tower of joy, I admit it was speculation and I should have marked it as such, but all I meant to say was that it is not completely clear that Arthur Dayne was in fact defeated, and that considerable uncertainty exists as to what happened.

 

[BricksAndSparrows]

5 minutes ago, The Young_Lion said:

Robert's reputation is probably also the most inflated of the three given that he was King for nearly a decade and a half, so he would have had good PR, and lords and knights would have praised him so as to ingratiate themselves.

This is a good point. It's one of the reasons why Robert ultimately doesn't bother fighting in the Melee at the Hand's Tourney.

Quote

I am not suggesting that Robert is not a very accomplished warrior, only that he could not match Arthur Dayne.

Get used to typing this. You'll need to include it in every post...

[One-eyed Misbehavin]

I think Dayne wins and it's bc what the OP said technical skill/awareness and I see that leading to the win. Plus he's not losing that much weapon speed to oberyn' spear bc Dawn is so light and has a major advantage against Robert.

Im going to go against the mold and give the red viper 2nd place. His speed seemed unmatched and we didn't even see him push his hardest. (He played with Gregor he could be any better)

 

[Laughing Storm Reborn]

1 hour ago, The Young_Lion said:

I do not think that a war hammer is a useless weapon, just that it is not suited to one on one combat. In battle, where space is confined, it is great, but when in one on one combat, its limited mobility compared to a valyrian steel sword or a spear is a major hindrance.

 

As for Robert's prowess, none of the Knights he killed seem to have been considered top tier warriors, with the possible exception of Connington. Rhaegar was a vey good jouster, but I can't find any evidence that he was an exceptional swordsman. Connington does seem to have had a reputation, having defeated Hoster Tully, however this does not mean that he was the equal of some of Dayne's opponents, such as the smiling knight. 

Robert's reputation is probably also the most inflated of the three given that he was King for nearly a decade and a half, so he would have had good PR, and lords and knights would have praised him so as to ingratiate themselves. I am not suggesting that Robert is not a very accomplished warrior, only that he could not match Arthur Dayne.

Even Eddard Stark, Robert's closest friend, who saw both men fight, called Ser Arthur the finest knight he had ever seen, implying that he was better than Robert who did have a knighthood.

 

 let's discuss this...

Dayne killed better warriors by who´s word? the smilling knight being half the mountain's size and twice as mad makes him better than Fell? Mooton? Grafton? Rhaegar on horseback? Jon Con? if a warrior is mentioned it's because he is worth mentioning, Robert killed dozens more in battle (those are the ones not mentioned) Jon Con killed denys arryn and wounded Hoster and almost got himself killed by a recovering Robert with a sword... by the books Jon Con more than seems better than the SK

Funny how killing more known knights than most is good PR compared to Dayne's one feat being legit badass

Robert's prowess with his warhammer is legendary (wich is better than legendary prowess with a sword in armoured combat), that´s grrm's site canon, i think the guy knows something...

Ned said Dayne was the best KNIGHT and said Robert was the best WARRIOR...

And where does this Robert would not be a match against Dayne comes from? the show? because it´s not from the books nor from grrm who the only thing he said about Dayne was that he equaled barristan with the same equipment (robert wasn´t even mentioned, and doesn´t even use the same equipment)

1v1 wins: Robert>Dayne

Weapon: Robert>Dayne (yes in 1v1 a warhammer is still deadlier than a sword, it isn't a lance)

Height/Reach: Robert>Dayne

H2H/Strenght: Robert>Dayne

Dawn isn´t a lightsaber, the smilling knight's sword hanged on quite a while against a sharper sword... plate armour is a lot more thicker than a sword... while dayne tries to find a gap he gets hammered, either geting his head crushed or his arms broken

What i would like to read are book facts that give dayne the advantage against a guy with the same skill with a better weapon and better genetics... again this is not a sword duel (THAT dayne would win)

 

 

 

[Boarsbane]

2 hours ago, Laughing Storm Reborn said:

 let's discuss this...

Dayne killed better warriors by who´s word? the smilling knight being half the mountain's size and twice as mad makes him better than Fell? Mooton? Grafton? Rhaegar on horseback? Jon Con? if a warrior is mentioned it's because he is worth mentioning, Robert killed dozens more in battle (those are the ones not mentioned) Jon Con killed denys arryn and wounded Hoster and almost got himself killed by a recovering Robert with a sword... by the books Jon Con more than seems better than the SK

Funny how killing more known knights than most is good PR compared to Dayne's one feat being legit badass

Robert's prowess with his warhammer is legendary (wich is better than legendary prowess with a sword in armoured combat), that´s grrm's site canon, i think the guy knows something...

Ned said Dayne was the best KNIGHT and said Robert was the best WARRIOR...

And where does this Robert would not be a match against Dayne comes from? the show? because it´s not from the books nor from grrm who the only thing he said about Dayne was that he equaled barristan with the same equipment (robert wasn´t even mentioned, and doesn´t even use the same equipment)

1v1 wins: Robert>Dayne

Weapon: Robert>Dayne (yes in 1v1 a warhammer is still deadlier than a sword, it isn't a lance)

Height/Reach: Robert>Dayne

H2H/Strenght: Robert>Dayne

Dawn isn´t a lightsaber, the smilling knight's sword hanged on quite a while against a sharper sword... plate armour is a lot more thicker than a sword... while dayne tries to find a gap he gets hammered, either geting his head crushed or his arms broken

What i would like to read are book facts that give dayne the advantage against a guy with the same skill with a better weapon and better genetics... again this is not a sword duel (THAT dayne would win)

 

 

 

We have no idea how tall or how strong Dayne was, nor do we know his reach. Robert was probably stronger but not so much stronger that it would be an advantage, he may have been taller or he may not of been, and he may have had longer arms, but he might not of. Dawn is also as good as VS so I'm not even convinced Robert has the edge with weapons here. You also leave out the areas where Dayne would have an advantage, or likely, such as speed, horsemanship, and temperment. 

[One-eyed Misbehavin]

19 minutes ago, Boarsbane said:

We have no idea how tall or how strong Dayne was, nor do we know his reach. Robert was probably stronger but not so much stronger that it would be an advantage, he may have been taller or he may not of been, and he may have had longer arms, but he might not of. Dawn is also as good as VS so I'm not even convinced Robert has the edge with weapons here. You also leave out the areas where Dayne would have an advantage, or likely, such as speed, horsemanship, and temperment. 

Just bc someone has a one hitter quitter doesn't mean they would beat that tough ass guy who throws body shots. 

I see Dayne as barristan Selmy but with Dawn always have. His instincts give him the win. He has a bigger gap b/w himself and the other 2.

I still have to go with 

1. Arthur 

2. Oberyn has been taking down larger boys/men his whole life we know this. (probably very strong himself considering his peak physical ability. IMHO he has more things going for him than Robert does) speed,agility,athleticism,intelligence,poison,I could literally go on and on and on.

3. Robert

 

[One-eyed Misbehavin]

But Robert is very very high up on the list id prolly say top 10 in the past 300 years. ( I went there) without looking at a list

I just can't help but say Robert is definitely Laughing storm 2.0 who lost to Duncan the tall

The OP just picked 2 guys I think could take him. A fight has so many things that could change (Jamie sticking his knife through Jory's eye instead of his sword) that it all comes down to match ups and variables (like a small slip or trip over a rock)

Id also say Jamie could have beaten Robert I'm sorry 

[Laughing Storm Reborn]

19 hours ago, Boarsbane said:

We have no idea how tall or how strong Dayne was, nor do we know his reach. Robert was probably stronger but not so much stronger that it would be an advantage, he may have been taller or he may not of been, and he may have had longer arms, but he might not of. Dawn is also as good as VS so I'm not even convinced Robert has the edge with weapons here. You also leave out the areas where Dayne would have an advantage, or likely, such as speed, horsemanship, and temperment. 

That´s the problem Boars,

If Dayne were particulary strong or tall grrm would tell us, Robert has freakish strenght by the author's mouth, Dayne is stronger than Jaime that´s all we know... we have no idea about a lot of dayne´s specialities aside from sword and jousting, yet somehow he's better than a guy with more proven feats in the books...

Dawn didn´t cut the SK sword in half, it's not going to cut plate like butter... VS is good but not a lighsaber and surely not as deadly as a spiked warhammer that will kill/cripple you in one hit by a guy with freakish strenght...

Sure i might (might because a stronger guy can move quicker in armour) give speed to Dayne, and surely horsemanship... but in 1v1 armoured combat power trumps speed (unless like oberyn did, you run away with a lance poking until it does damage, but that was against a gigantic target with much less speed than his foe and with poison taking effect), dayne has to close in on a bigger guy, bad news is the bigger guy doesn´t fight with a sword...

Temperment is subjective, in the books Robert was never called Hulk smash, a guy with his military IQ is not going to fight like Gregor

Point is, Dayne is a legendary swordsman and Robert a legendary warhammer user with genetic advantages... i'm yet to know how Dayne could have favouritism aside from a sword-only duel or horseback fighting...

 

[Laughing Storm Reborn]

7 hours ago, One-eyed Misbehavin said:

But Robert is very very high up on the list id prolly say top 10 in the past 300 years. ( I went there) without looking at a list

I just can't help but say Robert is definitely Laughing storm 2.0 who lost to Duncan the tall

The OP just picked 2 guys I think could take him. A fight has so many things that could change (Jamie sticking his knife through Jory's eye instead of his sword) that it all comes down to match ups and variables (like a small slip or trip over a rock)

Id also say Jamie could have beaten Robert I'm sorry 

Just one thing to consider One-eyed, when Dunk fought Lyonel the guy, math considered, was at least 40+... not prime Lyonel, who himself would not be better than prime Robert who uses a deadlier weapon

Ned fought Dayne, and considered Robert the best warrior and Arthur the best knight...

If Dayne is above Oberyn, Jaime or Barri, Robert isn´t behind by any means, book or author words considered

 

 

[Ser Biscuit]

Oberyn probably isn't top 50 in terms of fighters so this comparison doesn't make much sense.

Oberyn almost defeated Gregor because he poisoned him. I repeat, only because he poisoned Gregor did Oberyn ALMOST beat him. Even with the poison Gregor still won. And without that poison Gregor defeats him soundly. Oberyn is not some famed fighter, he's a cheater who uses a woman's weapon because he can't beat people in a straight up fair duel. And if he knows that, why don't readers?

I would go so far as to say that Brienne in a one-on-one duel sans poison waxes Oberyn. And Brienne isn't top 50 either.

[The Young_Lion]

11 hours ago, Laughing Storm Reborn said:

 let's discuss this...

Dayne killed better warriors by who´s word? the smilling knight being half the mountain's size and twice as mad makes him better than Fell? Mooton? Grafton? Rhaegar on horseback? Jon Con? if a warrior is mentioned it's because he is worth mentioning, Robert killed dozens more in battle (those are the ones not mentioned) Jon Con killed denys arryn and wounded Hoster and almost got himself killed by a recovering Robert with a sword... by the books Jon Con more than seems better than the SK

Funny how killing more known knights than most is good PR compared to Dayne's one feat being legit badass

Robert's prowess with his warhammer is legendary (wich is better than legendary prowess with a sword in armoured combat), that´s grrm's site canon, i think the guy knows something...

Ned said Dayne was the best KNIGHT and said Robert was the best WARRIOR...

And where does this Robert would not be a match against Dayne comes from? the show? because it´s not from the books nor from grrm who the only thing he said about Dayne was that he equaled barristan with the same equipment (robert wasn´t even mentioned, and doesn´t even use the same equipment)

1v1 wins: Robert>Dayne

Weapon: Robert>Dayne (yes in 1v1 a warhammer is still deadlier than a sword, it isn't a lance)

Height/Reach: Robert>Dayne

H2H/Strenght: Robert>Dayne

Dawn isn´t a lightsaber, the smilling knight's sword hanged on quite a while against a sharper sword... plate armour is a lot more thicker than a sword... while dayne tries to find a gap he gets hammered, either geting his head crushed or his arms broken

What i would like to read are book facts that give dayne the advantage against a guy with the same skill with a better weapon and better genetics... again this is not a sword duel (THAT dayne would win)

 

 

 

In terms of 1v1 wins, I agree that we know more about Robert's victories than Dayne's, but this is probably because he had great PR as King. Because of this, we know of every single one of Robert's feats at arms, no matter how minor, whereas it is likely that we are unaware of some of Dayne's less famous victories.

 

On the war hammer point, even if you think that a warhammer is as good as a sword, you cannot deny that Dawn is an exceptional weapon. Ok, it may not slice through plate with no resistance, but the point could probably penetrate it, and the edge could get through any weaker parts of the armor. As it is a greatsword, it is longer than any other weapon except a spear or pole arm, so Dayne has the reach advantage. It is also made of magic asteroid metal, so is much lighter meaning Dayne can strike faster and more often. In terms of strength, Robert probably does have an advantage, but as Dayne was on a list of the very strongest people Jaime had ever met, he cannot have been a weakling, so Robert's advantage is not likely to be as enormous as you are implying. 

 

Also, as already mentioned by Boarsbane, Dayne was probably much more skilful, faster, a better horseman and less prone to acting impulsively. 

Therefore he has a clear advantage.

[Laughing Storm Reborn]

11 hours ago, The Young_Lion said:

In terms of 1v1 wins, I agree that we know more about Robert's victories than Dayne's, but this is probably because he had great PR as King. Because of this, we know of every single one of Robert's feats at arms, no matter how minor, whereas it is likely that we are unaware of some of Dayne's less famous victories.

 

On the war hammer point, even if you think that a warhammer is as good as a sword, you cannot deny that Dawn is an exceptional weapon. Ok, it may not slice through plate with no resistance, but the point could probably penetrate it, and the edge could get through any weaker parts of the armor. As it is a greatsword, it is longer than any other weapon except a spear or pole arm, so Dayne has the reach advantage. It is also made of magic asteroid metal, so is much lighter meaning Dayne can strike faster and more often. In terms of strength, Robert probably does have an advantage, but as Dayne was on a list of the very strongest people Jaime had ever met, he cannot have been a weakling, so Robert's advantage is not likely to be as enormous as you are implying. 

 

Also, as already mentioned by Boarsbane, Dayne was probably much more skilful, faster, a better horseman and less prone to acting impulsively. 

Therefore he has a clear advantage.

Here´s the thing Lion, dayne is more skillfull with sword and much less with a hammer, if this were a sword duel a legendary swordsman would have the advantage...

Robert does not use a sword, he uses a spiked warhammer, much deadlier than a regular sword and even Dawn who could not slice the SK´s sword in 5 hits (they fought a while before the sk´s sword was damaged) much less plate armour...

Dayne is not more skilled in battle, he is with sword and horse, and he isn´t in h2h power and warhammer...

Can dayne kill Robert? sure, so does prime barri or jaime, but are they favourites? no, not considering the advantages in armoured 1v1 duels on foot

The time Dayne needs to find a gap is more than sufficient for a guy with legendary prowess to break his arm with one hit, or smash his head with another (robert does not need to find gaps, he injures dayne with every hit)... unless this is on horseback or Bob agrees to fight with sword, Dayne is at a disadvantage

what i do not understand is this belief that even with Ned's quote and Bob's feats, dayne somehow because of a comparison with barristan in sword skill is superior... it does not make sense book or reality wise, the fact tha dayne is equal to barri (with sword) does not mean he is superior to bob... 2 different beasts entirely

I want to clarify one thing, imo Robert is not superior to Dayne, Barristan or Jaime as a warrior, but he SURELY isn't inferior... equaly legendary warriors who tip the scale depending on the kind of duel and equipment allowed, genetics and personal weapon favour Bob on foot but on horseback or in sword skill the opposite aplies

[Blackfish Tully]

On 7/15/2016 at 0:27 PM, Jasta11 said:

I think people underestimate Robert. Unlike Gregor, he is said to be a highly skilled fighter, on top of his immense size, speed and strength. He's be an even more fearsome foe to duel.

 

I don't think anybody is underestimating Robert especially concerning Arthur Dayne . Arthur Dayne is considered one of the greatest fighters in the history of Westeroes so saying that he would beat Robert does not mean you are underestimating Robert . 

It is telling that when Jaimie thinks of fighters who are stronger then him he thinks of Robert , the White Bull and Arthur Dayne , of all the fighters he has known Arthur Dayne is in Jaimie's top 3 strength wise for fighters who are no longer living . That may mean that one of Robert's biggest advantages against most fighter (his immense strength) may not be such an advantage against Arthur Dayne . 

The realization chilled him. Robert had been stronger than him, to be sure. The White Bull Gerold Hightower as well, in his heyday, and Ser Arthur Dayne. Amongst the living, Greatjon Umber was stronger, Strongboar of Crakehall most likely, both Cleganes for a certainty.

 

[The Young_Lion]

Tbh, we are comparing two people who we have never seen at full strength on-page, so we do just have to work by reputation and guesswork, and will never be able to know conclusively who was better.

However due to Jaime's idolisation of Ser Arthur Dayne and comments by GRRM, I get the impression that with Dawn he was near unstoppable, and that he would probably beat Robert assuming dawn could do some damage through armor. This does seem likely, as plate armor is much thinner than a sword, which would normally be at least 5cm edge-to-edge, so a good strike would likely get through plate. Even if a cut could not get through, however, a thrust would almost certainly do so, as points lead to much higher pressure strikes and much deeper wounds than edges.

Ultimately, conditions on the day would have a huge impact on the fight, and it could have gone either way if one of them had slipped in some mud or been blinded by the sun, as they were both clearly very, very good.

[Trigger Warning]

A sword is an edge, plate is specifically designed to turn away blows on a curve. Comparing the width of a sword blade with the thickness of armour doesn't mean much. It's easier to damage a sword edge with a sword than to cut into plate. 

[The Young_Lion]

I agree that plate is adapted to defend against swords, but if swords are useless against it then why are they so dominant among Westerosi Knights? And dawn is far sharper than any ordinary blade, and Ser Arthur Dayne was clearly very strong. Therefore it seems likely that Dawn could do serious damage through plate.

[Trigger Warning]

They're not useless against it, they can still deliver heavy blows to inflict trauma, they can be used as a lever and can be used on the weak points of armour as thrusting weapons (Estoc for example). They're used because they're very versatile weapons that can be carried to compliment a more specialised weapon like a lance or pole weapon but when compared to the war hammer in a scenario where it's two men on foot in full plate the war hammer has the clear advantage, the issue is this particular circumstance isn't the norm in a battle, hence the use of a versatile weapon like a longsword. 

To be honest more than anything it's just romanticised fantasy, GRRM likes the idea of swords and plate armour so that's what they use even when more specialised weapons would be preferable, it's the rule of cool, the same way Dayne draws Dawn from his back, the issue is it's hard to draw in world consistency with this in comparison to reality because what GRRM wants to happen happens when he wants it to regardless, but we have to use reality to gauge the general effectiveness of weapons in scenarios that GRRM hasn't written. 

Unless Dawn can cut through plate clean (which we don't know or have any inkling of) then Bob has the advantage simply because from what we know of arms and armour and historical combat pretty much every aspect of the fight would be in his favour. 

 

[BricksAndSparrows]

12 hours ago, One-eyed Misbehavin said:

...Jamie sticking his knife through Jory's eye instead of his sword...

Jamie rides off and leaves his men to kill Jory. They never cross swords.

Anyway..

The hammer is a fine weapon for someone strong enough to wield it, but I wouldn't say it beat the sword. But it still has disadvantages. The position of your opponent doesn't always give you the space to make a full swing. It's certainly slower.

But I'm just trying to add a little balance here...