Jump to content

what if Robert met Barristan instead of Rhaegar at the trident?


Marcus corvinus

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Valens said:

A better question would be: what if Robert met Arthur Dayne instead? A man Jaime Lannister described as stronger than him and bear in mind, not many people in Westeros are stronger than Jaime Lannister. And not to talk about his fighting skills. Sure, as the OP said, the mace is hard to beat with a sword but this guy was just incredible.

GeorgeRRM has said outright that Barristan and Arthur were equal swordsmen but because Arthur had Dawn it was no contest.  Not disagreeing with you, just adding some context straight from the source.  Maybe for the posters betting on Robert this would be a better debate.  

But I think anyone saying Robert without his war hammer, is like saying Arthur without Dawn.  Robert won melees and I'm sure was knocking over knights and horses on his way to rhaegar with that big thing on the Trident.  

I could definitely see Barristan winning, but just as a side bit I could see Barristan not killing Robert but rather disarming him and making him yield.  I think at that point the rebellion is over but it would have been interesting to see how that was treated.  AKA Aerys calling for Stannis and Renly's head.  Who knows.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Rob Storm said:

GeorgeRRM has said outright that Barristan and Arthur were equal swordsmen but because Arthur had Dawn it was no contest.  Not disagreeing with you, just adding some context straight from the source.  Maybe for the posters betting on Robert this would be a better debate.  

But I think anyone saying Robert without his war hammer, is like saying Arthur without Dawn.  Robert won melees and I'm sure was knocking over knights and horses on his way to rhaegar with that big thing on the Trident.  

I could definitely see Barristan winning, but just as a side bit I could see Barristan not killing Robert but rather disarming him and making him yield.  I think at that point the rebellion is over but it would have been interesting to see how that was treated.  AKA Aerys calling for Stannis and Renly's head.  Who knows.  

If Barristan won then he would have killed him without any hesitation. He's not the saint he duped everyone to believe. He's an experienced fighter, stuck in the middle of the war zone and whose role is to protect his prince. Robert was the catalyst of this rebellion and his prince was in danger because of it. If Robert's head meant sending the rebellion into retreat then he would have killed him with no hesitation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Valens said:

A better question would be: what if Robert met Arthur Dayne instead? A man Jaime Lannister described as stronger than him and bear in mind, not many people in Westeros are stronger than Jaime Lannister. And not to talk about his fighting skills. Sure, as the OP said, the mace is hard to beat with a sword but this guy was just incredible.

Dayne's only advantage over Selmy is Dawn and being younger to him. However Arthur comes from the 'clean death' nobility mantra which puts him in a disadvantage. Selmy is more adaptive and a better assassin then Arthur as shown in Duskendale. I think Robert is worse off fighting Selmy then Dayne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 06/09/2016 at 4:10 AM, Beautiful Bloody Sword said:

Wow, lots of love for Robert and confidence in his prowess. I think he was probably a force to he reckoned with, and a bit if a knucklehead, but also a bit of a softy. Ned is his biggest fan and verbal supporter of his prowess, but he's a tad biased. I don't think Robert was elitely skilled, but he was big and strong and pissed off. Selmy, Dayne, and even Rhaegar, were more skilled, and none of them are gigantic. They're skilled due to dilligent training, which I can't see Bob doing as faithfully, he had other interests.

The moment you said rhaegar was more skilled i lost faith bro, even dayne and selmy are better swords and jousters but not better fighters by feats or author words, those 3 are equals and rhaegar is some steps below aside horseback combat (he was quite the jouster wich helps some)... You might be confusing robert with gregor, and even gregor was skilled but not on Bob's level wich is described to us by his creator

 

On 06/09/2016 at 9:29 PM, BricksAndSparrows said:

My vote goes to Barristan. His battle record over shadows Robert's.

Duskendale. The Kingswood brotherhood. Ninepenny Kings. Escape from kingslanding (an oldman with no sword.)

C'mon guys...

Things can go funny in a battle and I'm all for the small margin rule, but on history alone, Selmy takes it easily.

 

Easily? No way, Robert has feats a as impressive, duskendale was stealth\assassination kills not achilles rampage... we saw a 40 something year old selmy in the trident trying that and he got as close to death as someone can be... he's a perfect soldier but still human after all

The rhaegar wound says little, it was not a fresh duel nor on foot, on horseback selmy could kill anyone imo

Can he beat bob when he was young? Yes, he's he the favourite in 1v1 on foot? No, imo robert is too good and too big to be inferior on a 1v1 duel and those are based on words of god, selmy's prowess with his weapon is not higher than bob's...

Duskandale assault kills is as impressive as killing renown knights wounded with a secondary weapon or winning 3 battles in a day while on the vanguard being the target (means a lot of kills)... Those 2 are the most feat-wise babies of grrm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 06/09/2016 at 4:43 PM, devilish said:

In medieval warfare, the main weapon would have been a halberd or a pollaxe. Swords were still used but mostly as a sidearm. They were longer, thinner and used pretty much as a spear (half swording). Having said that in GOT the sword seems to be the queen of weapons which is kind of stupid considering that its not very effective against full plate armour. Now either we presume that people like Sir Arthur Dayne, Sir Jamie Lannister and Sir Barristan Selmy were stupid (ie its like sending the SAS or the Navy seals in missions armed with just handguns) or else we can conclude that weapons and armour works differently in GOT then it works in real life. The armour is weaker or/and the sword is far more effective against armour than it really is. This will change the fight radically.


So let us discuss things from a GOT perspective. The main benefit of using the Warhammer (ie its armour piercing ability) is toned down. There are still other advantages though. The Warhammer requires less skill than a sword and the stick to what it is attached to can be longer. That may compensate to the sword’s reach. There again it will certainly not compensate to the sword’s superb flexibility. The sword has a long blade which means it’s got a longer reach of where it can cause damage. The Warhammer is basically a hammer linked to a stick/pole. It can only inflict damage to a restricted part of it.  It also can slash or pierce which gives its fighter plenty of flexibility. If the Warhammer is the size of a halberd then close quarter combat will be a problem for it. If it’s the size of a mace then an expert swordsmen will keep the distance and cut/slash the enemy. 


Robert’s biggest advantages were his age and his strength (size does help too but as said its toned down to Selmy’s use of a sword). One hit and the person is dead/maimed. The man wielding a mace like Warhammer will try to go as close as possible to the fighter to crush him into bits. An expert swordsman will dance around him, using its reach and the sword’s flexibility to slash and pierce his enemy maiming/injuring him to slow him down.  Someone as experienced as Selmy (who fought wars, duels and in an infiltration/rescue mission) will be able to remain focused along the way and unlike Oberyn who was emotionally compromised, he will go for a quick kill if given the opportunity. Selmy might even fake an opening that will give the illusion to Robert that he might bypass the knight and reach Rhaegar directly, only to hit him from behind. A battle hardened killer can and will easily do that.

As said before, Robert's biggest weaknesses in this fight wouldn't be his lack of skill when compared to Selmy (warhammers do not need alot of skill to wield) but rather his inexperience in fighting someone like Selmy + the fact that he's emotionally compromised. Selmy is possibly the worse fighter to fight against in those circumstances. We're talking about a person who can see innocent people burn into a crisp without suffering any sort of guilt whatsoever. Someone who was able to dupe everybody in thinking he's some honourable man. That sort of devious nature will feck an emotionally driven Robert. 

About the swords it's normaI in fantasy and i understand they are more effective in asoiaf like vs or dawn but we have george himself callinf warhammers extremely deadly, he knows that, that's why i put it above any sword in tgis fantasy aswell... I agree that emotions matter, but Robert is capable of fighting calm, no rage bounded guy is going to kill mooton + 5 guys and almost killing jon con with a sword recovering from a wound, that's selmy level stuff... 1v1 on foot selmy cannot escape robert like he would sandor or gregor, grrm made him too good for his size, selmy could strike but he would get hit, problem is one hit from bob and it's over, cripple or death...

Dayne and Jaime are not more skilled than bob, with a sword yes but that's it, not with a warhammer or the rest of crucial phisical battle atributes, on those bob had the advantages, a perfect model...

Selmy is solid snake, he would kill bob fast without his knowledge, but a duel he's fighting a faster, deadlier well more skilled maelys... On those terms i cannot see selmy survive, even if he could eventually cut a gap, he would get hit because he's facing a guy as good...

But there's the margin of selmy, and imo him, bob, dayne and jaime are the top of the ladder and i cannot deny any bet on one vs the other so...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If emotion didn't matter, then troop morale would not be such a big deal

in the art of war, by sun tzu, it's said that sun tzu army defeated a bigger army, to accomplish this, sun tzu placed his army between the enemy at their front, and a river behind, so they had no choice then fight for their lives with every drop of their blood

On the trident, Robert fought with such anger and fury, that cannot be denied, he killed rhaegar with a blow into his chest, not his head, not his neck, his fully protected best full plate that money can buy armor, a blow so hard that made the rubies fly, and crushed rhaegars internal body parts, 

this level of strength fueled by emotion cannot be ignored.

Selmy was fighting for honor, for his prince, for hist duty
Robert was fighting for his life.

we know that even jaime is reluctant of fighting sandor, because of his savagery and skill and speed, and sandor is not nearly as skilled as robert was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BlueNightzx said:



On the trident, Robert fought with such anger and fury, that cannot be denied, he killed rhaegar with a blow into his chest, not his head, not his neck, his fully protected best full plate that money can buy armor, a blow so hard that made the rubies fly, and crushed rhaegars internal body parts, 
 

 

The best weapon against plate armor is a mace or a hammer or an axe.  Something that crushes and transmits damaging force.  A sword is really only useful against plate if you manage to find a opening, like a joint, covered by mail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Laughing Storm Reborn said:

About the swords it's normaI in fantasy and i understand they are more effective in asoiaf like vs or dawn but we have george himself callinf warhammers extremely deadly, he knows that, that's why i put it above any sword in tgis fantasy aswell... I agree that emotions matter, but Robert is capable of fighting calm, no rage bounded guy is going to kill mooton + 5 guys and almost killing jon con with a sword recovering from a wound, that's selmy level stuff... 1v1 on foot selmy cannot escape robert like he would sandor or gregor, grrm made him too good for his size, selmy could strike but he would get hit, problem is one hit from bob and it's over, cripple or death...

Dayne and Jaime are not more skilled than bob, with a sword yes but that's it, not with a warhammer or the rest of crucial phisical battle atributes, on those bob had the advantages, a perfect model...

Selmy is solid snake, he would kill bob fast without his knowledge, but a duel he's fighting a faster, deadlier well more skilled maelys... On those terms i cannot see selmy survive, even if he could eventually cut a gap, he would get hit because he's facing a guy as good...

But there's the margin of selmy, and imo him, bob, dayne and jaime are the top of the ladder and i cannot deny any bet on one vs the other so...

The longsword is a magnificent weapon. It provides a certain length which allows it to be used like a short spear. Its relatively light which provides the warrior to dance around its opponent more easily than a heavy weapon. It can pierce, slash and parry which allows numerous styles and technique. Being so light it also allow the use of either a second weapon or better still, a shield. Shields not only protect the swordsmen but it changes the dynamism of the fight. Thanks to the shield he’s better protected from arrows. He can take more punishment and he can use the shield as an offensive weapon, to unbalance the enemy.


Warhammers can only be used to smash the opponent. This restricts the user’s unpredictability. It’s said that Robert’s Warhammer was so heavy that Eddard Stark couldn’t wield it. Which means that it was a two handed weapon (Robert is strong, but not as strong as being able to wield with one hand something Eddard couldn’t wield with two). That means that Robert would have to time his hit very carefully not to end up off balance. For every hit he gives, he will need a bit of recovery time to regain composure. Robert is strong so the recovery time will be relatively short. However Selmy is an expert which means he can use the little time provided to maximum advantage. 


Therefore if we presume that in GOT, swords are superior against armour than in real life. Then by consequence, warhammers become an inferior weapon especially in a fight between two lords who were both given top military training. In matter of fact, prior to top quality armour, blunt weapons were considered as weapons used by low quality soldiers. The reason being that they needed less time to master and they would deliver a huge hit on shields (rendering them ineffective after 2-3 hits) and therefore levelling the playing field between an inferior (but bigger) army and a superior (but smaller) army. 


Regarding Robert, I am the first one to agree with you that he’s not some brute (ie Gregor beta version) with loads of strength, little skill and no brains. Case in point is his brilliance in leading the rebellion. This brilliance was shown later on in not allowing Jamie to leave the KG (which means that the Lannister’s wealth will probably be inherited by Tommen ie his son) and in forcing Eddard’s hand to have Sansa marrying Joffrey (ie he managed to include his son in the Northern alliance mafia) Having said that, there’s little denying that Robert was ruled by instincts and basic emotions. This guy soiled his brother’s wedding bed, he couldn’t help humiliating the Lannisters despite, literally, being surrounded with them and fell into a deep depression when there was nothing thrilling going on. Robert was dominated by his emotions. His fury was legendary and feared by everybody. Rhaegar’s squire (Mooton) or fanboy (Jon) in front of him would fuel that fury. Selmy (a Stormlander & a Westerosi legend) is a hell of a different cup of tea. Robert wouldn’t want to be remembered as the man who slayed this hero and Selmy will use that to his advantage.


As said, I rate Bob as the 3rd best warrior in GOT (from Robert’s rebellion till now). However Selmy is the worst enemy he can be pitted against. Selmy, is skilled, he’s devious, he’s a child soldier (he had no other option) and he’s experienced in all sort of fighting situations (war, jousting, infiltration etc). Seriously I fancy Robert’s chances against Dayne more than against him.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/7/2016 at 5:31 PM, Laughing Storm Reborn said:

Easily? No way, Robert has feats a as impressive, duskendale was stealth\assassination kills not achilles rampage...

Selmy’s fighting in Duskendale wasn’t just stealth and assassination. He had to sneak in, yes.  But he had to fight his way out. And he slew anyone that tried to stop him.

If you stop and consider the challenges Barristan faced (combat-wise) it is extraordinary. He had to defend Aerys while he was escaping. That means fights he normally could have avoided (if he was alone,) he would have had to engage. And all the while, while fighting for his life, he would have needed to be watching/defending Aerys

It is documented that Tywin had his archers picking off people on the walls to try and help. This should indicate the state of alarm in the city. They were being chased on horse back through the city.

Quote

 

we saw a 40 something year old selmy in the trident trying that and he got as close to death as someone can be... he's a perfect soldier but still human after all

 

The rhaegar wound says little, it was not a fresh duel nor on foot, on horseback selmy could kill anyone imo

 

 

 

There is this double standard here. You offer us Selmy’s wound as an indication of his inferiority to Robert, but when Robert takes a wound in the exact same battle, you say it “means little.”

Much of your argument is built on this false pretense: There is equivalence between jousting and battle on horseback. Obviously there are similarities, but those two things are more different than they are alike.

I would say the difference between jousting and battle on horseback, is like the difference between jumping hurdles and running parkour.

You take the statement that Robert had been an indifferent jouster and interpret that to mean that Robert’s specialty was combat on foot. And so you hollow out this niche for Robert and spend much of your argument redefining examples of combat prowess, so they cannot be compared to Robert’s niche..

“Barristan Selmy cut a red path through the Golden Company to get to Maelys the Monsterous and slay him” … Yeah but that was mounted combat. That’s not on foot…

“Okay what about Duskendale. I mean Barristan fought his way out of the city slaying anyone in his path?” …No, no.. that's assassination/stealth stuff, not one on one, on foot...

There is so much wrong with this line of thinking.

Melees are not just battles fought on foot. In fact, most of the examples in the books show melees where the combatants are on horseback. The only description of Robert in a melee is one where the combatants are mounted.

Quote

 

Robert's berserk valor in the melee, the way he laughed as he unhorsed men left and right”

-That's from a Ned POV in Book 1

 

 

 From all this talk of Robert’s off-horse prowess, you would think there would be all these examples of him fighting on foot. But there are not.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On September 7, 2016 at 5:46 PM, Laughing Storm Reborn said:

About the swords it's normaI in fantasy and i understand they are more effective in asoiaf like vs or dawn but we have george himself callinf warhammers extremely deadly, he knows that, that's why i put it above any sword in tgis fantasy aswell... I agree that emotions matter, but Robert is capable of fighting calm, no rage bounded guy is going to kill mooton + 5 guys and almost killing jon con with a sword recovering from a wound, that's selmy level stuff... 1v1 on foot selmy cannot escape robert like he would sandor or gregor, grrm made him too good for his size, selmy could strike but he would get hit, problem is one hit from bob and it's over, cripple or death...

Dayne and Jaime are not more skilled than bob, with a sword yes but that's it, not with a warhammer or the rest of crucial phisical battle atributes, on those bob had the advantages, a perfect model...

Selmy is solid snake, he would kill bob fast without his knowledge, but a duel he's fighting a faster, deadlier well more skilled maelys... On those terms i cannot see selmy survive, even if he could eventually cut a gap, he would get hit because he's facing a guy as good...

But there's the margin of selmy, and imo him, bob, dayne and jaime are the top of the ladder and i cannot deny any bet on one vs the other so...

How do you know maelys' skill level? And maelys picked a man up by the head and ripped it off..... Robert isn't even close to that strong. And your Robert was faster arguement is also completely unsupported 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, devilish said:
1 hour ago, BricksAndSparrows said:

Selmy’s fighting in Duskendale wasn’t just stealth and assassination. He had to sneak in, yes.  But he had to fight his way out. And he slew anyone that tried to stop him.

If you stop and consider the challenges Barristan faced (combat-wise) it is extraordinary. He had to defend Aerys while he was escaping. That means fights he normally could have avoided (if he was alone,) he would have had to engage. And all the while, while fighting for his life, he would have needed to be watching/defending Aerys

It is documented that Tywin had his archers picking off people on the walls to try and help. This should indicate the state of alarm in the city. They were being chased on horse back through the city.

 

 

There is this double standard here. You offer us Selmy’s wound as an indication of his inferiority to Robert, but when Robert takes a wound in the exact same battle, you say it “means little.”

Much of your argument is built on this false pretense: There is equivalence between jousting and battle on horseback. Obviously there are similarities, but those two things are more different than they are alike.

I would say the difference between jousting and battle on horseback, is like the difference between jumping hurdles and running parkour.

You take the statement that Robert had been an indifferent jouster and interpret that to mean that Robert’s specialty was combat on foot. And so you hollow out this niche for Robert and spend much of your argument redefining examples of combat prowess, so they cannot be compared to Robert’s niche..

“Barristan Selmy cut a red path through the Golden Company to get to Maelys the Monsterous and slay him” … Yeah but that was mounted combat. That’s not on foot…

“Okay what about Duskendale. I mean Barristan fought his way out of the city slaying anyone in his path?” …No, no.. that's assassination/stealth stuff, not one on one, on foot...

There is so much wrong with this line of thinking.

Melees are not just battles fought on foot. In fact, most of the examples in the books show melees where the combatants are on horseback. The only description of Robert in a melee is one where the combatants are mounted.

 

 From all this talk of Robert’s off-horse prowess, you would think there would be all these examples of him fighting on foot. But there are not.

 

Bricks, i didn't say selmy killed everyone on horseback in the npk war, just maelys

They are equal, to me those 4 are the top skillful warriors ever, yes including the older generations

Duskendale was a stealth mission , yes he killed lots but not lots at the same time, no one can and on the trident there were lots on every side hence almost killef by soldier 345, yes he massacred lots so did robert in summerhall, gulltown, bells, trident, ashford, pyke, he was on the vanguard always, but duskendale or summerhall say little about those two dueling, selmy is facing an equally skilled guy (that's proven by the author's esteem of him, you cannot have more than legendary prowess in someone's view) with a better weapon and genetics for 1v1 on foot...

If you reread robert's kill list, there's as much known knights killed on foot as selmy (on bells alone he couldn't be on a horse, and a guy who always leads the vanguard is not going to have his horse for long) but looking to them both i go with the bigger guy with equal skill... The on foot parade i made is precisely to say it's the way i see robert as the favourite, opposite to horseback or sword duel wich i give to prime selmy...

Here in europe i always read jousting helped A LOT on point and strike with sword and lance on horse in battlefields, since the crusades to the 100 years war...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Devilish, i think bob used the warhammer one-handed there would not be need for george to glorify is "freakish" strenght if he wielded it two-handed, sandor, jaime, or ned could i believe, badly but could... Only gregor seems stronger so i would believe it was one-handed since his power is a bit fantasy leveled...

Regarding the duel i can only place my bet on personal belief and picturing both fighting at their mental and physical maximum, but when bob selmy dayne and jaime duel eachother i cannot find reasons to dispute any bet imo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do understand you're seeing big ass Robert every muscle bulging as he swung at Rhaegar.....

But imho the #1 quality Barry possesses is his ability to analyze the opponent in front of him and consider that person's strengths and weaknesses. And he does this in 1 split second (and scanning crowds he's on his toes and this goes along with what I said)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, One-eyed Misbehavin said:

How do you know maelys' skill level? And maelys picked a man up by the head and ripped it off..... Robert isn't even close to that strong. And your Robert was faster arguement is also completely unsupported 

- i don't, i know bob's and if maelys had legendary prowess grrm would say it

- maelys strenght is not much bigger than bob's not everyone likes ripping heads off ("his own freakish strenght" sounds like few had more and if thet had it was not much more like, and his skill (mentioned by the author) or feats are hardly on robert's level

- bob isnt gregor, he's tall and muscled, usain bolt is tall and muscled, it helps on speed, especially wearing plate armour

-for agilty just read ned's acount on robert's way of killing the thousands of wild boars (animals we kill with fire arms today) he faced

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Laughing Storm Reborn said:

- i don't, i know bob's and if maelys had legendary prowess grrm would say it

- maelys strenght is not much bigger than bob's not everyone likes ripping heads off ("his own freakish strenght" sounds like few had more and if thet had it was not much more like, and his skill (mentioned by the author) or feats are hardly on robert's level

- bob isnt gregor, he's tall and muscled, usain bolt is tall and muscled, it helps on speed, especially wearing plate armour

-for agilty just read ned's acount on robert's way of killing the thousands of wild boars (animals we kill with fire arms today) he faced

Maelys just seemed like a freak to me when I read the world book so maybe im biased. Robert is always near the top of my fighters list. But either way Barry would see every millimeter of that tall frame he is the best in the series at analyzing an opponent for strengths and weaknesses and I'm just of the opinion Barry could move and parry (I know parrying Robert's warhammer sounds ridiculous but Barry would) and i think Barry would come out injured but the victor 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...