Jump to content

Did Walder Frey even have a choice?


devilish

Recommended Posts

Quote
Quote

b- If the Lannisters cared about smallfolk then they wouldn't have ordered Loras to storm Dragonstone.

Cersei ordered Loras to storm Dragonstone.

Loras volunteers when Cersei refuses to allow Paxter Redwyne's ships to leave with Dragonstone and Storm's End still untaken.

Quote

"Storm's End is a hundred times more valuable than the Shields, and Dragonstone . . . so long as Dragonstone remains in the hands of Stannis Baratheon, it is a knife at my son's throat. We will release Lord Redwyne and his fleet when the castle falls." The queen pushed herself to her feet. "This audience is at an end. Grand Maester Pycelle, a word."

The old man started, as if her voice had woken him from some dream of youth, but before he could answer, Loras Tyrell strode forward, so swiftly that the queen drew back in alarm. She was about to shout for Ser Osmund to defend her when the Knight of Flowers sank to one knee. "Your Grace, let me take Dragonstone."

His sister's hand went to her mouth. "Loras, no."

Ser Loras ignored her plea. "It will take half a year or more to starve Dragonstone into submission, as Lord Paxter means to do. Give me the command, Your Grace. The castle will be yours within a fortnight if I have to tear it down with my bare hands." (AFFC Cersei VII)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nittanian said:

Loras volunteers when Cersei refuses to allow Paxter Redwyne's ships to leave with Dragonstone and Storm's End still untaken.

I stand corrected, thank you. Loras though, is using Lannister troops to storm Dragonstone, not Tyrell men. And Tywin would never have allowed the situation to reach this point in the first place. The only reason Loras did this was because of Cersei's unreasonableness in refusing to free the Redwyne fleet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really have a hard time comprehending the flip on Tywin in this conversation. 

When the fandom talks about

  • the Reynes and Tarbecks
  • the Sack of Kings Landing (in particular the fate of the Royal children)
  • his reaction to Tyrion's arrest

And then of course everyone seems to agree that Joffrey's punishment of Ned was also an overreaction

The common consensus is that both King and Hand are capable of overreacting in the punishing of their enemies. Why would this not be on the Frey's mind? Why would they not be worried about the consequences of their actions having pissed off Tywin?

After House Stark, they played the biggest role in the war of the five Kings in harming Lannister and Westerland interests.

 

Now obviously Robb's betrayal was the big reason why the Freys reacted like they did* but to ignore all other factors seems a little unfair. Which is something that goes in the fandom regarding the Freys, as they want them to be as 2 dimensional as possible. 

Valid reasons for the Red Wedding in size of importance

 

  1. Robb's betrayal and the cost that betrayal had to the Freys and their resources
  2. Roose Bolton needing Robb dead and no serious rivals in the North
  3. Appeasing Tywin Lannister, who does not need the Freys to win the Riverlands
  4. Robb is less likely to escape if he is killed in the Twins, attacking on the way to the Twins means Robb may call for support from the other Riverlords
  5. The incentives that the Crown was willing to offer for such a betrayal

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

I really have a hard time comprehending the flip on Tywin in this conversation. 

When the fandom talks about

  • the Reynes and Tarbecks
  • the Sack of Kings Landing (in particular the fate of the Royal children)
  • his reaction to Tyrion's arrest

And then of course everyone seems to agree that Joffrey's punishment of Ned was also an overreaction

The common consensus is that both King and Hand are capable of overreacting in the punishing of their enemies. Why would this not be on the Frey's mind? Why would they not be worried about the consequences of their actions having pissed off Tywin?

Considering that that has been explained in detail numerous times, the problem must be on your side.

But, apparently, since the quotes from the author himself stating directly that Walder was motivated by his wounded pride aren't enough, this is a lost cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

6 minutes ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

But, apparently, since the quotes from the author himself stating directly that Walder was motivated by his wounded pride aren't enough, this is a lost cause.

You mean motivated by the " the dishonor that was done him". If you are going to take that as the only reason, which is certainly your prerogative, then at least get the authors words right rather than try to frame it in a way that Robb was not responsible. 

 

And yeah, by all means accept it as a lost cause. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

You mean motivated by the " the dishonor that was done him". If you are going to take that as the only reason, which is certainly your prerogative, then at least get the authors words right rather than try to frame it in a way that Robb was not responsible.

And yeah, by all means accept it as a lost cause.

We're not saying Robb wasn't responsible; he was, and Walder had every right to be absolutely mad as hell about the betrayal. If the Freys had switched sides after Robb betrayed them, I wouldn't have blamed them. I think even in-universe, many would have supported or understood the Freys' decision. After all, a King is supposed to reward those who give loyal service (the Freys certainly gave that), not stab you in the back for it.

What we are saying is that Walder definitely had a choice. George's quote makes that clear: Walder would have gotten out of the alliance if Robb hadn't betrayed him and it would not have been a Red Wedding. Therefore, the motivation for the Red Wedding cannot have been fear, because that fear of Tywin's reprisals would still exist in this other scenario, yet would not cause a RW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

I really have a hard time comprehending the flip on Tywin in this conversation. 

<snip

The common consensus is that both King and Hand are capable of overreacting in the punishing of their enemies. Why would this not be on the Frey's mind? Why would they not be worried about the consequences of their actions having pissed off Tywin?

<snip

Because they ran the plan past Tywin first and he gave his word that the crown would not do a thing to House Frey either for the RW or for having been on Robb's side first. Walder never makes a move without calculating the possible outcomes first, which is why he didn't have Robb marry one if his girls before letting him cross. It gave him wiggle room to back out at any point.

Getting that approval before acting means there's no fear of reprisal.

Tywin has a history of being forgiving, lenient even to those who humble themselves and bend the knee. Walder could easily have written to Tywin asking if he could avoid punishment by capturing Robb & Co. and handing them over to the crown, and the answer likely would have been "Welcome back." 

This is not a flip on Tywin. It's an indictment on Walder, and proof that yes he did have a choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, WSmith84 said:

We're not saying Robb wasn't responsible; he was, and Walder had every right to be absolutely mad as hell about the betrayal. If the Freys had switched sides after Robb betrayed them, I wouldn't have blamed them. I think even in-universe, many would have supported or understood the Freys' decision. After all, a King is supposed to reward those who give loyal service (the Freys certainly gave that), not stab you in the back for it.

What we are saying is that Walder definitely had a choice. George's quote makes that clear: Walder would have gotten out of the alliance if Robb hadn't betrayed him and it would not have been a Red Wedding. Therefore, the motivation for the Red Wedding cannot have been fear, because that fear of Tywin's reprisals would still exist in this other scenario, yet would not cause a RW.

Well even though Walder could have betrayed Robb without pulling something as horrendous as the Red Wedding, I don't think that would have been enough to impress someone like Tywin Lannister of all people who's more of a ruthless mob boss than a chivalrous lord. The fact is I think Tywin wanted more than just beating Robb. The guy humiliated him time after time on the battlefield and took his son prisoner, he wanted him to die horrifically and then wash his hands afterwards and claim its not what he wanted. Walder would have known this and given he was already in bed with Robb he needed a way to not only betray Robb but do it in a way that would get him back into Tywin's good graces. If the Freys just took Robb prisoner, I doubt Tywin would have been as forthcoming with protection against any reprisals from Robb's loyalists, so to be on the safe side they not only had to crush Robb but to make it as brutal as possible.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kaibaman said:

Well even though Walder could have betrayed Robb without pulling something as horrendous as the Red Wedding, I don't think that would have been enough to impress someone like Tywin Lannister of all people who's more of a ruthless mob boss than a chivalrous lord. The fact is I think Tywin wanted more than just beating Robb. The guy humiliated him time after time on the battlefield and took his son prisoner, he wanted him to die horrifically and then wash his hands afterwards and claim its not what he wanted. Walder would have known this and given he was already in bed with Robb he needed a way to not only betray Robb but do it in a way that would get him back into Tywin's good graces. If the Freys just took Robb prisoner, I doubt Tywin would have been as forthcoming with protection against any reprisals from Robb's loyalists, so to be on the safe side they not only had to crush Robb but to make it as brutal as possible.  

Walder would have negotiated terms with Tywin first before turning his cloak. That's a given. And it is Tywin's interest to accept Walder's switch and offer complete amnesty or even a reward for several reasons. First, it gives him an extra 4000 men to use. Second, it shows the lords on Robb's side that if they switch sides and swear loyalty, they will not be punished and maybe rewarded. Third, it is a great PR move for Joffrey; swear yourself to King Robb, prove loyal in battle again and again and Robb betrays you, spits on your name and breaks a sacred oath. Swear yourself to Joffrey and, even if you fought against him, he'll reward your service and forgive your mistakes. Who looks better in this scenario?

Walder wouldn't even have to do anything as drastic as capture Robb. All he would have to do is declare for Joffrey, refuse Robb's crossing and withstand a siege if needed. The Northern army already know the Twins are untakeable; if they try, Tywin will take them in the rear and crush them.

Once again, for emphasis, GRRM said that without Robb's betrayal Walder wouldn't have committed a RW but would have switched sides. So, scenario 1: Robb betrays Walder, Walder changes sides, Red Wedding. Scenario 2: Robb doesn't betray Walder, Walder changes sides, no RW. These are George's own words. So, the RW is motivated by Robb's betrayal because that is the only difference in the two scenarios.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, WSmith84 said:

Walder would have negotiated terms with Tywin first before turning his cloak. That's a given. And it is Tywin's interest to accept Walder's switch and offer complete amnesty or even a reward for several reasons. First, it gives him an extra 4000 men to use. Second, it shows the lords on Robb's side that if they switch sides and swear loyalty, they will not be punished and maybe rewarded. Third, it is a great PR move for Joffrey; swear yourself to King Robb, prove loyal in battle again and again and Robb betrays you, spits on your name and breaks a sacred oath. Swear yourself to Joffrey and, even if you fought against him, he'll reward your service and forgive your mistakes. Who looks better in this scenario?

Walder wouldn't even have to do anything as drastic as capture Robb. All he would have to do is declare for Joffrey, refuse Robb's crossing and withstand a siege if needed. The Northern army already know the Twins are untakeable; if they try, Tywin will take them in the rear and crush them.

Once again, for emphasis, GRRM said that without Robb's betrayal Walder wouldn't have committed a RW but would have switched sides. So, scenario 1: Robb betrays Walder, Walder changes sides, Red Wedding. Scenario 2: Robb doesn't betray Walder, Walder changes sides, no RW. These are George's own words. So, the RW is motivated by Robb's betrayal because that is the only difference in the two scenarios.

Walder wasn't in a very good position after Blackwater. He could have continued to stay loyal to Robb which meant being dragged down with his former fiance in law and eventually have to face the wrath of Tywin Lannister. Or he could have taken his chances and openly revolted against Robb as you suggested but I doubt many of the Riverlords and Northerners would have been too happy about the Late Walder Frey turning his coat. If say Robb is defeated sooner thanks to Frey's defection, unless Robb's forces are beaten to the point of total annihilation, the Freys would always be blamed for turning on their comrades and held responsible for the defeat. And this time without the Red Wedding, their neighbors from both ends of the Twins will have most of their strength intact which means they are in a position to someday take their revenge on the Freys.

So you see the quandary here. The Freys could have either died at the hands of Tywin Lannister or by the hands of either Robb or his allies. The only real option they had was to ensure the faction they sided with is strong enough to protect them while the other side is weakened so severely that they aren't in a position to retaliate. Well the Red Wedding resolved this dilemma for the Freys beautifully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Kaibaman said:

Walder wasn't in a very good position after Blackwater. He could have continued to stay loyal to Robb which meant being dragged down with his former fiance in law and eventually have to face the wrath of Tywin Lannister. Or he could have taken his chances and openly revolted against Robb as you suggested but I doubt many of the Riverlords and Northerners would have been too happy about the Late Walder Frey turning his coat. If say Robb is defeated sooner thanks to Frey's defection, unless Robb's forces are beaten to the point of total annihilation, the Freys would always be blamed for turning on their comrades and held responsible for the defeat. And this time without the Red Wedding, their neighbors from both ends of the Twins will have most of their strength intact which means they are in a position to someday take their revenge on the Freys.

The Freys would have incited much less hatred if they had simply declared for Joffrey. We know from ASOIAF history that Kings that break their oaths to their vassals expect retribution. The Laughing Storm rebelled and declared independence due to a broken marriage contract, Aerys caused the Starks, Arryns and Baratheons to rebel, many lords angry at Daeron's lenience with the Dornish joined the Black Dragon etc. Walder had performed admirable service for Robb and Robb stabbed him in the back. Many would understand if the Freys switched sides (they'd hardly be the first, and they'd not be the first Riverlords to declare for Joffrey).

And actually, Robb's betrayal came at the perfect time (in a weird way). If Robb didn't betray them, then the Freys would look quite scummy switching teams. But the betrayal gives them a perfect reason to switch sides and appear justified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You always have a choice.  At the time it is likely that no other option seemed very good to Walder, but given hindsight we know he was wrong.  At this point it is pretty clear he made the wrong choice.

Were Walder to have stayed loyal to Robb, presumably Roose would have stayed nominally loyal as well, in that he would do whatever he could to advance his own position without going into outright rebellion.  Robb would have made it up the Neck, and I am a little unsure of the timeline involving Moat Cailin.  I'm not sure if Victarion had left with the bulk of the forces yet, but it seems likely.  Either way given the fact that he would hit it from both sides he probably would have taken the fortress, it's just a matter of how many losses he took.

With Moat Cailin gone and Robb back north I have to assume the other Ironborn would flee, and Rickon would try to come out of hiding.  Not only that but it would probably not be long before Ramsay got his.

Meanwhile the Tyrell Lannister alliance would fall apart on its own, just as it did.  Tywin still dies, Joffrey still dies, the Tyrells and Lannisters still invade the Riverlands again, but this time with no Frey support.  We saw at the siege of Riverrun that it was the Freys supplying in the food, this would make sieging Riverrun impossible.  Since the other Riverlords would likely have stayed loyal as well the Lannister force under Daven would not have been able to even enter the Riverlands unless Tarly marched his men north from Maidenpoole, which I do not think he would be able to do, I don't think they could send food supplies all the way from the Reach to the northern Riverlands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, aryagonnakill#2 said:

You always have a choice.  At the time it is likely that no other option seemed very good to Walder, but given hindsight we know he was wrong.  At this point it is pretty clear he made the wrong choice.

Were Walder to have stayed loyal to Robb, presumably Roose would have stayed nominally loyal as well, in that he would do whatever he could to advance his own position without going into outright rebellion.  Robb would have made it up the Neck, and I am a little unsure of the timeline involving Moat Cailin.  I'm not sure if Victarion had left with the bulk of the forces yet, but it seems likely.  Either way given the fact that he would hit it from both sides he probably would have taken the fortress, it's just a matter of how many losses he took.

With Moat Cailin gone and Robb back north I have to assume the other Ironborn would flee, and Rickon would try to come out of hiding.  Not only that but it would probably not be long before Ramsay got his.

Meanwhile the Tyrell Lannister alliance would fall apart on its own, just as it did.  Tywin still dies, Joffrey still dies, the Tyrells and Lannisters still invade the Riverlands again, but this time with no Frey support.  We saw at the siege of Riverrun that it was the Freys supplying in the food, this would make sieging Riverrun impossible.  Since the other Riverlords would likely have stayed loyal as well the Lannister force under Daven would not have been able to even enter the Riverlands unless Tarly marched his men north from Maidenpoole, which I do not think he would be able to do, I don't think they could send food supplies all the way from the Reach to the northern Riverlands.

He couldn't of known any of this would happen so what relevance is it? Things probably wouldn't of occurred in the way they did if Robb hadn't been killed anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Boarsbane said:

He couldn't of known any of this would happen so what relevance is it? Things probably wouldn't of occurred in the way they did if Robb hadn't been killed anyway.

So...are you arguing that Walder had no choice because the author forced him to do it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boarsbane said:

He couldn't of known any of this would happen so what relevance is it? Things probably wouldn't of occurred in the way they did if Robb hadn't been killed anyway.

The point is that he clearly had a choice, had he chose differently his daughter would still be married to Edmure, his grandchild would still inherit the Riverlands, and his family would not be universally hated across Westeros.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...