aadam13 Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 Say if Daeron ii was truly a bastard and somehow had the evidence to prove it and were in a position to send it to everyone. Also Daemon Blackfyre What would you do? Would you: Send it to as many lords as you can and spark the Blackfyre Rebellion leading to a bloody rebellion to overthrow a good ruler (since half the lords would call it false evidence) which might not work (although more lords might join Daemon this time) Or keep to it yourself and allow a bastard and his line to remain on the throne P.S. Daemon Blackfyre or his sons will not rebel unless you send your evidence.By the way I'm not saying Daemon would be a bad ruler since I believe he would be a good ruler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion of the West Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 If I lived in a white room with with no friendships and various relations to take into account, as well as ignoring my oaths of fealty to my liege, then I would support Blackfyre as the legitimate heir. For those arguing that the "best man" should rule, see the clusterfuck called the Barracks Emperors for how it will go when there are no clear line of succession and legitimacy don't matter. That's the kind of chaos abandoning the concept of legitimate ruler and a, somewhat, clear line of succession will throw Westeros into. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Equilibrium Posted September 17, 2016 Share Posted September 17, 2016 I would argue whether Daeron II was a good ruler. He might seem good ruler to us with modern sensibilities, cognitive distance and benefit of knowing what happens during his reign and after. Westerosi noble wouldn't really look at it that way, he was obviously under Dornish influence, and all who didn't hate the Dornish didn't really care for them and getting Dorne didn't matter. Large amount of lords were bitter about privileges Dornish got. He also strengthened rule of law in KL, which is another thing nobles care little about. Optics matter, Daemon is all Daeron isn't, perfect knight and perfect king, Aegon Conqueror reborn, that is the reason bunch of the lords supported him in open rebellion against Daeron who was legitimate reigning monarch and by then proven as competent and just. And further more, your question implies we are talking about beginning of Daerons rule. In such case for me answer is clear, send the letter. In alternative case, say I am myself as sitting in front of laptop now, not lord, well probably would sent it as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orphalesion Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 What do I care if Daeron II is a bastard or not? I'm not supporting a rebellion that will leave thousands dead and the continent in bleeding tatters. Very, very few things are worth waging war and "some random laws some dude make up about how to choose who gets to sit on an uncomfortable, tacky chair" is not among them. Besides, I have enough to do without the royal family throwing a hissy fit over nothing; as a feudal lord I have to make sure the harvests come in before the next 3-4 year winter, make good matches for my offspring, have the east tower of my keep rebuilt and send my men to root out the highwaymen that prey on the east road. A rebellion would just disrupt all of that and waste the lives of many of my men for essentially no gain at all. "Legacy" won't buy me anything, a good ruler and a peaceful land are worth thrice their own weight in gold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion of the West Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 On 2016-09-19 at 9:32 PM, Orphalesion said: What do I care if Daeron II is a bastard or not? I'm not supporting a rebellion that will leave thousands dead and the continent in bleeding tatters. Very, very few things are worth waging war and "some random laws some dude make up about how to choose who gets to sit on an uncomfortable, tacky chair" is not among them. Besides, I have enough to do without the royal family throwing a hissy fit over nothing; as a feudal lord I have to make sure the harvests come in before the next 3-4 year winter, make good matches for my offspring, have the east tower of my keep rebuilt and send my men to root out the highwaymen that prey on the east road. A rebellion would just disrupt all of that and waste the lives of many of my men for essentially no gain at all. "Legacy" won't buy me anything, a good ruler and a peaceful land are worth thrice their own weight in gold. Problem is that the way I see it, if the concept of legitimacy is toppled, or undermined enough, then what you'll get is pretty much a major civil war at every death of the ruler because everyone who can may seek to claim the throne. If you want order and peace, you've got to be ready to fight for the principles that provides the order and peace. Thus if there are no rules about who gets to be king, Westeros will, in my opinion, fall into the pit of the Roman Barracks Emperors style of government within a few generations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Grey Wolf Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 2 hours ago, LionoftheWest said: Problem is that the way I see it, if the concept of legitimacy is toppled, or undermined enough, then what you'll get is pretty much a major civil war at every death of the ruler because everyone who can may seek to claim the throne. If you want order and peace, you've got to be ready to fight for the principles that provides the order and peace. Thus if there are no rules about who gets to be king, Westeros will, in my opinion, fall into the pit of the Roman Barracks Emperors style of government within a few generations. On 9/17/2016 at 4:58 AM, Equilibrium said: I would argue whether Daeron II was a good ruler. He might seem good ruler to us with modern sensibilities, cognitive distance and benefit of knowing what happens during his reign and after. I wouldn't say Daeron II was a bad ruler but if you read some of my posts on the thread about Daeron I you'll see I point out he doesn't entirely deserve the reputation he has and the Blackfyres had some legitimate reasons for rebelling against him. As for the letter, I'm with LionoftheWest, I would send it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Lepus Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 The problem with rejecting legitimacy to support a "good ruler" is that 1.-you would have at least a civil war every generation, and 2.-you would have no guarantee that the guy who will get the crown will be a good ruler at all, just a guy who is good at convincing other people to fight for him... People supported Robert Baratheon, and he wasn't a good king (he didn't rule at all, he left the job to Jon Arryn). People supported Euron, and he's guiding the Ironborn to disaster... Now, in a real democracy you can vote the guy out of office, but if the way people put a supposed "good ruler" on the throne is through violence, there is a good chance that he will entrench himself in his new position and it will take a new revolution twice as bloody to oust him... And even if all the guys who climb to power through a rebellion were competent rulers, I doubt a country that suffers a bloody civil war every 10-20 years wil do better, even with good rulers, than a peaceful country with mediocre or barely competent rulers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Summer Islander Prince Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 16 minutes ago, Ser Lepus said: The problem with rejecting legitimacy to support a "good ruler" is that 1.-you would have at least a civil war every generation, and 2.-you would have no guarantee that the guy who will get the crown will be a good ruler at all, just a guy who is good at convincing other people to fight for him... People supported Robert Baratheon, and he wasn't a good king (he didn't rule at all, he left the job to Jon Arryn). People supported Euron, and he's guiding the Ironborn to disaster... Now, in a real democracy you can vote the guy out of office, but if the way people put a supposed "good ruler" on the throne is through violence, there is a good chance that he will entrench himself in his new position and it will time a new revolution twice as bloody to oust him... And even if all the guys who climb to power through a rebellion were competent rulers, I doubt a country that suffers a bloody civil war every 10-20 years wil do better, even with good rulers, than a peaceful country with mediocre or barely competent rulers. In defense of Euron, he's doing a better job than Balon did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Grey Wolf Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 8 hours ago, Summer Islander Prince said: In defense of Euron, he's doing a better job than Balon did. That isn't an accomplishment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Lia Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 I would destroy the evidence, for the reasons given by Orphalesion. If I'm the only person who knows for a fact that Daeron isn't the legitimate heir, then everyone else will honestly be following the established succession and the concept of legitimacy won't be undermined anywhere except in my mind. Where it was obviously pretty weak to start with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.