Jump to content

Is Meryn Trant less skilled than Preston Greenfield and Osmund Kettleblack?


mystickristoff

Recommended Posts

I´d say Preston Greenfield. He´s the only one of the three that no one ever talks negatively about. We know Trant is not exceptional in any way, and the Kettelblacks are really more spies than warriors.

I don´t know for sure but Greenfield is generally respected and propably one of ther better fighters in Robert´s KG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tbh - I think Meryn Trant gets an unnecessary bad rap. He was able to kill Syrio after all. And he is completely correct in the discussion with Jaime (which I think gives him the disfavor of this forum).

Considering that he is still alive from the riot where Preston is also a sign in his favor. Yes, he went back but stupidity certainly makes you less skilled as a kingsguard, especially if you protect someone you aren´t supposed to protect in the first place.

I would pick him before Preston, but I admit I only have weak arguments for said choice. The kettleblacks I won´t even bother to judge - they are clearly currying favor with the powers that be (until now that is) and have done nothing to prove their value. In addition, Osmunds kingsguard experience is lacking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Protagoras said:

Tbh - I think Meryn Trant gets an unnecessary bad rap. He was able to kill Syrio after all. And he is completely correct in the discussion with Jaime (which I think gives him the disfavor of this forum).

Considering that he is still alive from the riot where Preston is also a sign in his favor. Yes, he went back but stupidity certainly makes you less skilled as a kingsguard, especially if you protect someone you aren´t supposed to protect in the first place.

I would pick him before Preston, but I admit I only have weak arguments for said choice. The kettleblacks I won´t even bother to judge - they are clearly currying favor with the powers that be (until now that is) and have done nothing to prove their value. In addition, Osmunds kingsguard experience is lacking.

??? Meryn Trant didn't really have a discussion with Jaime. He asked a question regarding obedience to the king, Jaime gave a reason why he should be obeyed before the king, and Meryn accepts. It was Borros Blount that argued against Jaime when he was demoted to a food tester.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Dorian Martell said:

No he wasn't. He took out several lesser men at arms with a wooden training sword before being killed. He was Badass, which means that Trant is also a badass 

He managed to do that by hitting unarmoured areas of the body, which yes, makes him brilliant, but it doesn't follow that a fully armoured person armed with a sword, murdering a bloke unarmoured armed with a stick is a display of skill. By your logic, if you manage to karate half-a-dozen people to the floor, and I walk up to you and hit you with a cricket bat, I'm a black belt.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

He managed to do that by hitting unarmoured areas of the body, which yes, makes him brilliant, but it doesn't follow that a fully armoured person armed with a sword, murdering a bloke unarmoured armed with a stick is a display of skill. By your logic, if you manage to karate half-a-dozen people to the floor, and I walk up to you and hit you with a cricket bat, I'm a black belt.  

A man with a wooden sword and epic fighting skills takes down a number of men armed and armored in steel. This makes him a badass.
Another man manages to beat hte far more skilled fighter. That makes him a badass too, and indicates he posesses great fighting skills 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dorian Martell said:

A man with a wooden sword and epic fighting skills takes down a number of men armed and armored in steel. This makes him a badass.
Another man manages to beat hte far more skilled fighter. That makes him a badass too, and indicates he posesses great fighting skills 
 

It only makes him better than the other individuals taken out, it does not mean his skills are superior or equal to Forel´s.  There is too much of a unfair advantage given to Trant to be able to judge his skill, or lack or it, from this fight.  A little early to be calling a fully armed knight with a sword taking out a guy with a stick, 'a badass' for all the amazing skill that stick wielding guy just proved he had.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dorian Martell said:

A man with a wooden sword and epic fighting skills takes down a number of men armed and armored in steel. This makes him a badass.
Another man manages to beat hte far more skilled fighter. That makes him a badass too, and indicates he posesses great fighting skills 
 

Trant could only win because the plot demanded it and the series would had been different if he had lost. It is all thanks to GRRM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dorian Martell said:

A man with a wooden sword and epic fighting skills takes down a number of men armed and armored in steel. This makes him a badass.
Another man manages to beat hte far more skilled fighter. That makes him a badass too, and indicates he posesses great fighting skills 

I refer you again to my cricket bat analogy. What you're basically saying is "Forel is a great swordsman because he managed to defeat a bunch of others armed only with a stick, and therefore Trant is a great swordsman because he managed to defeat Forel when Forel was armed only with a stick...". Do you not see the breakdown in logic there, or should I just give up on this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I fee like Forel had to pick up one of the Lannister guards' longsword by the time Arya ran out. It wouldn't be the weapon he's used to as it would be heavier than the "Needle-like" Braavosi sword he's used to but at least it's an actual sword than a wooden hilt. It would be silly for him to continue fighting with a wooden hilt when those Lannister guards that were knocked down had swords he could have taken from them. Unfortunately, he's still outnumbered 4 to 1? Or was it 5 to 1? The guards may have far lesser skill than he has but Trant is at least average. Plus Forel had no armor on. Not even light armor. We see how important armor is in Jorah VS Bloodrider.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

I refer you again to my cricket bat analogy. What you're basically saying is "Forel is a great swordsman because he managed to defeat a bunch of others armed only with a stick, and therefore Trant is a great swordsman because he managed to defeat Forel when Forel was armed only with a stick...". Do you not see the breakdown in logic there, or should I just give up on this?

You speak of logic but you don't seem to follow it. Syrio defeated a host of better armed and armored fighters, making him a certified badass. Trant, armed and armored like the rest of the defeated, was able to beat said certified badass. Defeating a man with a wooden sword is not something to look down on as that man with the wooden sword had just defeated a number of people in the moments before thier conflict. Defeating Syrio is an accompliushment in itself and should not be lessened 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On July 23, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Dorian Martell said:

Defeating a man with a wooden sword is not something to look down on 

Yes, yes it is. Basically other fighters were pathetic and lost to an amazing and talented fighter. Meryn Teant defeating Syrio, meaning he was not pathetic, however the definition of "badass" is not "not pathetic". If that was the case, then when I beat my 6 year old student in basketball, I would be a talented basketball player. Obviously, this is not the case, and defeating an unarmored, wooden sword wielding person just means you are ... bot pathetic...maybe average, but honestly....it says nothing about his skills....if syrio had defeated jamie lannister or brienne of tarth or aomeone, it might say something, but he deafeated a bunch of guardsmen who were probably born poor and very little training, if any, with an actual master-at-arms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lord of Raventree Hall said:

Yes, yes it is. Basically other fighters were pathetic and lost to an amazing and talented fighter. Meryn Teant defeating Syrio, meaning he was not pathetic, however the definition of "badass" is not "not pathetic". If that was the case, then when I beat my 6 year old student in basketball, I would be a talented basketball player. Obviously, this is not the case, and defeating an unarmored, wooden sword wielding person just means you are ... bot pathetic...maybe average, but honestly....it says nothing about his skills....if syrio had defeated jamie lannister or brienne of tarth or aomeone, it might say something, but he deafeated a bunch of guardsmen who were probably born poor and very little training, if any, with an actual master-at-arms.

I feel I must counter this with that if they are actual guardsmen they would be as well trained as any other guardsmen. Not as good as lordlings and well-off knights of course, but these are no drunk brawlers in a tavern either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...