why does everyone blame Renly for Stannis's mistake

[Darkstream]

3 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Did I dictate the death vs life with respect to their claim? I do not believe I did.

No, your claiming Renly has a stronger claim, based on his actual strength. Stannis was stronger than Renly, which resulted in Renly's death. By your rules, Stannis had the stronger claim.

[Ser Loras The Gay]

4 minutes ago, Darkstream said:

No, your claiming Renly has a stronger claim, based on his actual strength. Stannis was stronger than Renly, which resulted in Renly's death. By your rules, Stannis had the stronger claim.

Kek

[Universal Sword Donor]

13 minutes ago, Darkstream said:

No, your claiming Renly has a stronger claim, based on his actual strength. Stannis was stronger than Renly, which resulted in Renly's death. By your rules, Stannis had the stronger claim.

I was referring to Westerosi support, not specifically "despised foreign priestesses who use magic to spawn assassin shadow babies to murder people." However I can understand the desperate confusion. 

However if we are discussing life as a factor in strength of claim -- let's exclude Robert for now -- Stannis is definitely above Joffrey and Renly. I mean who cares if Joffrey held the IT, beat Stannis in battle, and received oaths from most of the realm. 

STANNIS STANNIS STANNIS STANNIS

[Darkstream]

3 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

I was referring to Westerosi support,

So, nobody is denying that he had more support. Yes, he had more support than Stannis. That just means he had more treasonous criminals on his side. It doesn't make his claim any more valid than Stannis'.

3 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

 

not specifically "despised foreign priestesses who use magic to spawn assassin shadow babies to murder people."

Oh please, go cry to the referees officiating the war.

3 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

 

However I can understand the desperate confusion. 

Yup, as usual, when you lose an argument, or someone disagrees with your all mighty knowledge, it's just a matter of that person's inability to comprehend your nonsensical argument.

3 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

However if we are discussing life as a factor in strength of claim -- let's exclude Robert for now -- Stannis is definitely above Joffrey and Renly. I mean who cares if Joffrey held the IT, beat Stannis in battle, and received oaths from most of the realm. 

STANNIS STANNIS STANNIS STANNIS

Man, you're really grasping now, aren't you?

[Universal Sword Donor]

Just now, Darkstream said:

So, nobody is denying that he had more support. Yes, he had more support than Stannis. That just means he had more treasonous criminals on his side. It doesn't make his claim any more valid than Stannis'.

Oh please, go cry to the referees officiating the war.

Yup, as usual, when you lose an argument, or someone disagrees with your all mighty knowledge, it's just a matter of that person's inability to comprehend your nonsensical argument.

Man, you're really grasping now, aren't you?

Man you know what. Enjoy the shade of the evening

Nothing the text puts forth nor this thread can convince you of much of anything

[Darkstream]

26 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Nothing the text puts forth

Ok, here's three quotes from the text supporting my stronger claim than yours.

Courtesy of @John Doe

Thank you for pulling and posting these quotes.

Quote

"Ser Edmure told me. I am sorry, Mother … for Lord Hoster and for you. Yet first we must meet. We've had word from the south. Renly Baratheon has claimed his brother's crown."

"Renly?" she said, shocked. "I had thought, surely it would be Lord Stannis …"

 

Quote

 

That is what we shall win if we join with King Renly. What does Lord Stannis have against that, that we should cast it all aside?"

"The right," said Robb stubbornly. Catelyn thought he sounded eerily like his father as he said it.

 

 

Quote

"It's treason, I warned them, Robert has two sons, and Renly has an older brother, how can he possibly have any claim to that ugly iron chair?

 

Now it's your turn.

 

Quote

nor this thread can convince you of much of anything

No, your weak ass arguments, and ever moving goal posts, are certainly not going to convince me of anything.

[Darkstream]

3 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

 not to mention a man who let his brother die.

Really? When Stannis fled to Dragonstone, his brother was on a merry trip up to the North, to bring his best friend back to KL, and do some long overdue hunting at the same time.

Please explain to me how Stannis was suppose to not only be privy of Cercei's plot to murder Robert when he got back, but as well, be in the position to stop her.

I mean, have you ever read Spider Man comics? Would you say that Peter Parker just let his Uncle Ben be murdered as well.

[Bernie Mac]

5 minutes ago, Darkstream said:

Really? When Stannis fled to Dragonstone, his brother was on a merry trip up to the North, to bring his best friend back to KL, and do some long overdue hunting at the same time.

When does Stannis ever claim that he fled? 

Stannis, because he is so committed to running the realm, decided to abandon the Small Council when there was no King or Hand to run the realm leaving men like Renly and Barristan to govern. 

5 minutes ago, Darkstream said:

Please explain to me how Stannis was suppose to not only be privy of Cercei's plot to murder Robert when he got back,

Does Stannis think that the Lannisters played a part in Jon Arryn's death? If he does then he as decent reason to believe that they are a legitimate danger to the King. 

5 minutes ago, Darkstream said:

 

but as well, be in the position to stop her.

He did nothing. Did not lift a finger to help his King. He abandoned his duty. 

The very least he could have done was send a raven to Robert telling him what he suspected and how he reached that conclusion. He could have sent the same information to Renly and the new Hand, Ned. 

Instead he sulked and allowed the realm to continue to believe that Joffrey was the rightful heir. It is a bit too late too complain after Robert has died to do something about it. 

 

5 minutes ago, Darkstream said:

I mean, have you ever read Spider Man comics? Would you say that Peter Parker just let his Uncle Ben be murdered as well.

Was Ben killed by someone Spider man knew to be a specific danger to his uncle? If so then yes, if not then it is a terrible analogy. 

[Darkstream]

1 hour ago, Bernie Mac said:

When does Stannis ever claim that he fled? 

He hasn't. When did I claim that he claimed that?

It's what he did though. If you prefer, I can amend my comment to say "when he left"

Quote

Stannis, because he is so committed to running the realm, decided to abandon the Small Council when there was no King or Hand to run the realm leaving men like Renly and Barristan to govern. 

And? I don't dispute that these are the facts.

Strange, isn't the prevailing argument on this thread that Renly was the best candidate to be King, and govern the realm? Perhaps Stannis felt that such a man was capable of holding down the fort for a couple of weeks.

Quote

Does Stannis think that the Lannisters played a part in Jon Arryn's death? If he does then he as decent reason to believe that they are a legitimate danger to the King.

Not really. He believed that Aryn was murdered because he was digging around, and getting close to uncovering Cercei's secret.

He had no reason to believe that Cercei had plans to murder Robert as well. Robert was completely clueless to the situation, and Cercei had not attempted to off him anytime in the past fourteen years. Why would he suspect that she would now?

Quote

He did nothing. Did not lift a finger to help his King. He abandoned his duty. 

False, just because he didn't do what you deem to be necessary, doesn't mean he did nothing.

How do you know what his intentions were prior to Robert unexpectedly being murdered? Perhaps he was biding his time while he was building his strength, in order to support Robert, in what he thought was going to be an inevitable war between Robert and the Lannisters. Perhaps he was waiting until he could find some form of proof to support his allegations. Or yes, perhaps he was abandoning his brother to his fate. I'm not sure what any of this has to do with who had the better claim though.

Quote

The very least he could have done was send a raven to Robert telling him what he suspected and how he reached that conclusion. He could have sent the same information to Renly and the new Hand, Ned. 

I agree, he should have.

Quote

Instead he sulked

Well, I guess that's a fair assumption, however, neither you or I know what he was doing, or what his intentions were.

Quote

and allowed the realm to continue to believe that Joffrey was the rightful heir. It is a bit too late too complain after Robert has died to do something about it. 

Right you are.

Quote

Was Ben killed by someone Spider man knew to be a specific danger to his uncle? If so then yes, if not then it is a terrible analogy. 

Was Robert? As I stated above, I don't believe Stannis had any reason to suspect that Robert was in danger.

Besides, the circumstances may be slightly different, but the culpability of Stannis and Peter are the same. To blame Stannis, or claim that he could know what was going to happen is just ridiculous.

[Winter's Cold]

Stannis' claim died at Blackwater.

[Darkstream]

And Renly's claim died even before that, in his tent, not far from Storm's End.

[khal drogon]

5 hours ago, John Doe said:

This is not a claim. Robert was made king by the seven kingdoms kneeling to him and acknowledging him as such. Renly only had the Reach and the Stormlands and four other kings to beat before he could even dream of being crowned in such a fashion. 

Also, Robert did justify his claim by his relation to the old ruling dynasty, and the circumstances of his rebellion were drastically different. Everyone talking about Renly's claim said that he had no claim, not acknowledging this as a reader doesn't make his attempt at taking the throne justified.  

Robert initially had only 4 kingdoms. Only near the end of the war where he emerged as clear victor other kingdoms kneeler. Maybe that would have happened in Renly's case too.

What justification Robert had other than he won with swords? He used his Targ blood to make himself king while all Targaryens but two kids were killed and those two were made to run for their lifes. If Renly had won he could have simply justified that the Lannisters were evil and his brother is a crazy religious nut and that makes him the better king. Since he won through swords he can use the fancy word "right of conquest" and use that as a justification for his usurpation. No lord will object as they didn't object to Robert.

[Bernie Mac]

1 hour ago, Darkstream said:

He hasn't. When did I claim that he claimed that?

You wrote that he fled, he didnt. I was just letting you know what happened as you seem to have been under the wrong impression. 

1 hour ago, Darkstream said:

 

And? I don't dispute that these are the facts.

That is good. I was just explaining what happened as you seemed, given the words you used, to have been under the impression that he fled. He didn't. He abandoned his duties on the Small Council just like he abandoned his duties to his brother, the King. 

Now nine months later Stannis expects everyone to not only take his word but to also do their duty to him when he refused to the same for Robert unless there was the chance of reward. 

1 hour ago, Darkstream said:

Strange, isn't the prevailing argument on this thread that Renly was the best candidate to be King, and govern the realm?

One of the arguments made in the thread is that Renly had the more support than anyone else. Logic dictates that the more support you have the easier it should be to be King. Something that is true as we see from the current holders of the Throne. 

1 hour ago, Darkstream said:

 

Perhaps Stannis felt that such a man was capable of holding down the fort for a couple of weeks.

Or months. It is quite the journey to Winterfell and back. But yeah, we know what Stannis' opinions of Renly, Littlefinger and Varys is and yet he abandoned the governing of the realm to these men while he brooded back home. 

1 hour ago, Darkstream said:

Not really. He believed that Aryn was murdered because he was digging around, and getting close to uncovering Cercei's secret.

So he does think the Lannisters are dangerous and capable of murder. If he thinks they want the Crown then killing the King is a pretty logical step. 

Of course from Stannis perspective it may well be best that Robert never find out and create real heirs so he would be the 'true' heir. 

1 hour ago, Darkstream said:

He had no reason to believe that Cercei had plans to murder Robert as well. Robert was completely clueless to the situation, and Cercei had not attempted to off him anytime in the past fourteen years. Why would he suspect that she would now?

She had not killed Arryn in the last 14 years either but he suspected that the Lannisters killed Jon, the Hand of the King. Not only should he be revealing who he thought killed the Hand but he should have warned his brother. He failed in duty.

1 hour ago, Darkstream said:

False, just because he didn't do what you deem to be necessary, doesn't mean he did nothing.

lol he did nothing for Robert in the nine months between Jon's death and Robert's death. 

If you want to quote from the book what he did to help his brother I would love to hear it. 

1 hour ago, Darkstream said:

I agree, he should have.Well, I guess that's a fair assumption, however, neither you or I know what he was doing, or what his intentions were.

So as far as we know he did squat to help his King. 

1 hour ago, Darkstream said:

 

Was Robert? As I stated above, I don't believe Stannis had any reason to suspect that Robert was in danger.

Of course he was. If Stannis thought the Lannisters had killed Jon Arryn over their investigation then what did he think they would do to Robert's bastard son they visited? Or what they would do to Robert or Ned if the Lannisters got paranoid about them?

He thought they were murderers and he did absolutely nothing to protect his King. 

1 hour ago, Darkstream said:

Besides, the circumstances may be slightly different, but the culpability of Stannis and Peter are the same. To blame Stannis, or claim that he could know what was going to happen is just ridiculous.

lol now Stannis fans are equating him to Spiderman. 

[Universal Sword Donor]

3 hours ago, Darkstream said:

Ok, here's three quotes from the text supporting my stronger claim than yours.

Courtesy of @John Doe

Thank you for pulling and posting these quotes.

Now it's your turn.

No, your weak ass arguments, and ever moving goal posts, are certainly not going to convince me of anything.

Sorry I can't post any more. I'm king tommen's man based on his claim. I apologize for wasting anyone's time explaining why Renly's "mistake" is awful and Stannis is a paragon of virtue who never betrayed his rightful king and made sure Robert knew *exactly* what he thought and suspected.

All Hail King Tommen!

[Universal Sword Donor]

23 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

*snip*

Look Bernie, we are King Tommen's men now. He has the strongest claim. We can't fight any longer.

[Darkstream]

2 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

You wrote that he fled, he didnt. I was just letting you know what happened as you seem to have been under the wrong impression. 

That is good. I was just explaining what happened as you seemed, given the words you used, to have been under the impression that he fled. He didn't. He abandoned his duties on the Small Council just like he abandoned his duties to his brother, the King. 

Well now we are just arguing semantics. I would still maintain that he fled KL.

flee

flē/

verb

1. run away from a place or situation of danger.

    

   Is that not what he did? I don't think that fleeing, and abandoning his duties need be mutually exclusive. By fleeing, he abandoned his duties.

Quote

Now nine months later Stannis expects everyone to not only take his word but to also do their duty to him when he refused to the same for Robert unless there was the chance of reward. 

Yes, it's an unreal expectation, and quite hypocritical.

Quote

One of the arguments made in the thread is that Renly had the more support than anyone else. Logic dictates that the more support you have the easier it should be to be King. Something that is true as we see from the current holders of the Throne. 

I agree, but this does not equate to having a stronger claim - as is being argued by some.

Quote

So he does think the Lannisters are dangerous and capable of murder. If he thinks they want the Crown then killing the King is a pretty logical step. 

But that is not what he suspects was Cercei's motive. What he thinks are her motives was the fear of the legitimacy of her children being exposed.

Quote

Of course from Stannis perspective it may well be best that Robert never find out and create real heirs so he would be the 'true' heir. 

Possible, but I don't think that fits with Stannis' character at all.

Quote

She had not killed Arryn in the last 14 years either but he suspected that the Lannisters killed Jon, the Hand of the King.

Because Aryn wasn't on the cusp of revealing her secret until recently. With Aryn dead, Stannis had no reason to believe Robert would find out, or that Cercei still had a motive to commit another murder.

Quote

Not only should he be revealing who he thought killed the Hand but he should have warned his brother. He failed in duty.

Again, I agree.

Quote

lol he did nothing for Robert in the nine months between Jon's death and Robert's death. 

If you want to quote from the book what he did to help his brother I would love to hear it. 

So as far as we know he did squat to help his King. 

Yes, as far as we know. Like I've said, we don't know what his intentions were up untill Robert died. You cannot produce a quote as to this, any more than I can.

Quote

Of course he was. If Stannis thought the Lannisters had killed Jon Arryn over their investigation then what did he think they would do to Robert's bastard son they visited? Or what they would do to Robert or Ned if the Lannisters got paranoid about them?

He thought they were murderers and he did absolutely nothing to protect his King. 

Again, he had no reason to think Robert was in danger. You're falsely attributing Cercei's motives for murdering Robert to the situation that occurred with Aryn. I would posit that what finally drove Cercei to murdering Robert was her growing paranoia that had been spured on by the incident with Bran, as well as the escalating tensions between her and the Starks. And I do believe that she may have had intentions prior to this, but this is nothing Stannis would have been privy to.

As far as he knows, Cercei eliminated the threat of her infidelity being exposed when Jon was murdered. He has no insight into her desires to dispose of Robert, and rule through her children.

Quote

lol now Stannis fans are equating him to Spiderman. 

Not at all. All that I'm equating is the level of culpability that the two share as a result of their inactions in preventing something that they had no way of foreseeing.

And for the record, I don't favor either Stannis or Renly over the other. I am a fan of both of the characters, but feel that they both have some serious flaws, and that neither would have made a competent King. My arguments are being made on the basis of what I believe are the facts, not a bias hatred towards one or the other - something I don't believe is true of others on this thread.

 

[Lord Varys]

7 hours ago, Darkstream said:

Alright, let's put it this way. For argument's sake, I'll accept the used meaning of 'claim' on this thread.

Stannis is alive and contending for the throne. Renly is dead. Despite Renly's support and huge ass army, Stannis still was more powerful and defeated Renly. 

So on both counts, legal, and by strength, Stannis had the stronger claim.

That is nonsense. Stannis claim only got stronger after he killed his brother using black magic. Sure, afterwards he got a decent portion of his brother's army (but not the people who actually count) and then he lost on the Blackwater. Since then Stannis is basically little more than an outlaw law. He may call himself king but only his own men accept that claim. And those are, Northmen included, just a few thousand.

6 hours ago, Darkstream said:

Really? When Stannis fled to Dragonstone, his brother was on a merry trip up to the North, to bring his best friend back to KL, and do some long overdue hunting at the same time.

You claimed Stannis fled to Dragonstone - which is actually a dereliction of duty (His Grace the king had not dismissed Stannis as Master of Ships or given him leave to permanently return to Dragonstone with the lion's share of the royal fleet - do you know what any king who cared about his government would call such a behavior? Treason.) - to save his life because he feared he would be poisoned just as Jon Arryn was.

The idea that Stannis would then not also fear or expect that Cersei would try to kill Robert, too, to prevent him from learning 'the truth' as Stannis saw it isn't far-fetched at all.

Stannis is repeatedly contacted by Eddard Stark via letter while he hangs out on Dragonstone, and asked to retake his seat on the council. The man does not even reply. If Stannis cared about the lives of Robert and Ned, and if he had wanted to his suspicions to get out why didn't he answer any of those letters? Why didn't he come back? Even if he was afraid that Robert wouldn't believe him why didn't he try to reach out to Ned, a man who was also friends with Jon Arryn?

And why does Stannis conclude that Cersei killed his royal brother after Robert's death? Robert died in a hunting accident, and it is pretty obvious that Cersei was not directly involved in any of that.

6 hours ago, Darkstream said:

Please explain to me how Stannis was suppose to not only be privy of Cercei's plot to murder Robert when he got back, but as well, be in the position to stop her.

See above. The man thinks his brother was murdered without any evidence. He correctly deduced what Cersei would most likely do (or despises her so much that she thinks she is behind his brother's death without having a shred of evidence). Do you really think he only concluded that after the fact?

2 hours ago, Darkstream said:

I agree, but this does not equate to having a stronger claim - as is being argued by some.

It does, if you assume that 'claim' does not only mean 'blood claim'. The Targaryens had no blood claim to any of the Seven Kingdoms yet they conquered them anyway.

Renly had a weaker blood claim than Stannis but much more popular support and the best chance to win the day against both Stannis and Joffrey if he hadn't been defeated by black magic.

Whether he would have been able to establish a dynasty or remain on the throne for a long time is another matter. He most likely would have met a violent end, too, just as Stannis would have. Renly would have to become a kinslayer to win the throne (Cersei's children, and perhaps Stannis, too) and Stannis would effectively continue to conduct a religious crusade against the Faith and the other religions in Westeros. This would likely lead to a widespread uprising eventually, resulting in him being cast down pretty quickly.

[Darkstream]

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

That is nonsense. Stannis claim only got stronger after he killed his brother using black magic. Sure, afterwards he got a decent portion of his brother's army (but not the people who actually count) and then he lost on the Blackwater. Since then Stannis is basically little more than an outlaw law. He may call himself king but only his own men accept that claim. And those are, Northmen included, just a few thousand.

Of course it's nonsense; That is my point. But, when in Rome Westeros.org ....

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

You claimed Stannis fled to Dragonstone - which is actually a dereliction of duty (His Grace the king had not dismissed Stannis as Master of Ships or given him leave to permanently return to Dragonstone with the lion's share of the royal fleet - do you know what any king who cared about his government would call such a behavior? Treason.) - to save his life because he feared he would be poisoned just as Jon Arryn was.

Yup, I don't dispute any of this.

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The idea that Stannis would then not also fear or expect that Cersei would try to kill Robert, too, to prevent him from learning 'the truth' as Stannis saw it isn't far-fetched at all.

Well, I've addressed this in my last post, if you'd like to dispute what I've said there, please quote those arguments so I don't have to keep repeating myself.

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Stannis is repeatedly contacted by Eddard Stark via letter while he hangs out on Dragonstone, and asked to retake his seat on the council. The man does not even reply. If Stannis cared about the lives of Robert and Ned, and if he had wanted to his suspicions to get out why didn't he answer any of those letters? Why didn't he come back? Even if he was afraid that Robert wouldn't believe him why didn't he try to reach out to Ned, a man who was also friends with Jon Arryn?

I don't know why. As I've stated, I agree that he should have done so, and think that was an extremely unwise and dire decision on his part.

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

And why does Stannis conclude that Cersei killed his royal brother after Robert's death? Robert died in a hunting accident, and it is pretty obvious that Cersei was not directly involved in any of that.

I don't know, does he come to this conclusion without any sound reasoning? I don't recall the text on this matter, and would have to check into this before giving an informed response.

But, I would think that it's a reasonable asumption in hind sight, considering the situation.

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

See above. The man thinks his brother was murdered without any evidence. He correctly deduced what Cersei would most likely do (or despises her so much that she thinks she is behind his brother's death without having a shred of evidence). Do you really think he only concluded that after the fact?

See above.

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

It does, if you assume that 'claim' does not only mean 'blood claim'. The Targaryens had no blood claim to any of the Seven Kingdoms yet they conquered them anyway.

Well no, Aegon wasn't anointed the Kingship due to a claim; As you kindly pointed out, he conquered the ruling Kings.

By this logic, as someone else pointed out up thread, the Masters of Slavers bay would have as strong of a claim on the Iron throne as anyone else in the Seven Kingdoms.

I'm not sure why many here want to keep conflating a claim to the throne, with an illegal treasonous usurping, or a military coup. These are not the same things.

One is a legally established method of determining the succession, the other is a criminal means of overthrowing your government. Must I really argue which one is which?

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Renly had a weaker blood claim than Stannis but much more popular support and the best chance to win the day against both Stannis and Joffrey if he hadn't been defeated by black magic.

Yup.

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Whether he would have been able to establish a dynasty or remain on the throne for a long time is another matter. He most likely would have met a violent end, too, just as Stannis would have. Renly would have to become a kinslayer to win the throne (Cersei's children, and perhaps Stannis, too) and Stannis would effectively continue to conduct a religious crusade against the Faith and the other religions in Westeros. This would likely lead to a widespread uprising eventually, resulting in him being cast down pretty quickly.

Sure, possibly.

Although, your assertion that Stannis has, or "would continue to conduct a religious crusade against the Faith and the other religions in Westeros" is quite an inaccurate assessment of Stannis' stance in regards to religion, and frankly, a load of

[Darkstream]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

 Stannis is basically little more than an outlaw law. He may call himself king but only his own men accept that claim. 

Well, scratch out the "basically little more than" part, and this is also a description of Renly.

The difference is that it would be a true description of Renly; With Stannis, it's the false perception that most Westerosi have of him.

[Darkstream]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

That is nonsense. Stannis claim only got stronger after he killed his brother using black magic. 

That's nonsense. Stannis' claim didn't get stronger after Renly was executed. He may have garnered more support for his claim as a result. However, his claim, as it always was, was still that of the rightful heir to the IT, and first in the line of succession, according to the laws of Westeros.