Renly was the true steel

why does everyone blame Renly for Stannis's mistake

225 posts in this topic

57 minutes ago, WSmith84 said:

No doubt Renly had this question in mind when he was debating his options.

Sometimes, I do wonder if the primary motivator behind Renly's actions was solely a desire to create a situation in which he and Renly could be together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Coolbeard the Exile said:

Renly owes Stannis his loyalty. Stannis is his older brother and rightful king. He could still probably marry Margery and gain the Reach for his brother so and the timeline would change slightly so that Stannis takes King's Landing before Tywin can come to the rescue. Stannis is stubborn but he isn't a fool. Im 100% sure he would pardon Robb Stark. 

Meanwhile Stannis can win the war if Renly was loyal.

 

Except the Tyrells were never going to follow Stannis. They remember him holding Storm's End for a year, Stannis is not a man to forget that and the players know that.

Yes Stannis has the "lawful" claim but has next to no support. He was never a winning proposition to anyone and thus no one supported him.

11 hours ago, Trigger Warning said:

 

Renly: "Ned, strike now so we can control the king and you can be regent."

Ned: "Nope"

Renly: "Well I don't want to die here so I guess I'll go" 

Ned: (Dies)

How is Renly urging Ned to strike so that Ned can take the regency only benefiting himself? The exact scenario you described is what might have happened if Ned listened to Renly. Ned being honourable in a moment when decisive action was needed is what got him killed, not Renly. 

Agreed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Trigger Warning said:


Are you implying that he wouldn't have been assassinated if he had nicely turned down Stannis' offer?

 

No.  I think the humiliation was too far gone by then and not exclusive to that conversation.  People tend to develop habitual patterns in their relationships rooted in their childhoods.  Stannis was probably always the dutiful, retiring, yet somehow resentful, teeth-grinding, middle brother; and Renly was probably always the insouciant,  attention-grabbing, disrespectful, upstart little brother making fun of him.

My point was to highlight that Renly was a lousy politician.  Politics is about negotiating human relationships effectively; and not only surviving them, but thriving in them without having to resort to mockery, stonewalling, and divorce, etc.  If you can't find consensus with your own brother, I'd say your political leadership is not all it's cracked up to be.  The situation was always going to be a tragedy -- unless Renly played by the rules.  I think rules, responsibility and accountability are important -- or it's just a descent into self-indulgent anarchy.

Quote

A Clash of Kings - Prologue

It was just the sort of notion that would appeal to Renly Baratheon; a splendid new order of knighthood, with gorgeous new raiment to proclaim it. Even as a boy, Renly had loved bright colors and rich fabrics, and he had loved his games as well. "Look at me!" he would shout as he ran laughing through the halls of Storm's End. "Look at me, I'm a dragon," or "Look at me, I'm a wizard," or "Look at me, look at me, I'm the rain god."

The bold little boy with wild black hair and laughing eyes was a man grown now, one-and-twenty, and still he played his games. Look at me, I'm a king, Cressen thought sadly. Oh, Renly, Renly, dear sweet child, do you know what you are doing? And would you care if you did?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

7 hours ago, ravenous reader said:

No.  I think the humiliation was too far gone by then and not exclusive to that conversation.  People tend to develop habitual patterns in their relationships rooted in their childhoods.  Stannis was probably always the dutiful, retiring, yet somehow resentful, teeth-grinding, middle brother; and Renly was probably always the insouciant,  attention-grabbing, disrespectful, upstart little brother making fun of him.

My point was to highlight that Renly was a lousy politician.  Politics is about negotiating human relationships effectively; and not only surviving them, but thriving in them without having to resort to mockery, stonewalling, and divorce, etc.  If you can't find consensus with your own brother, I'd say your political leadership is not all it's cracked up to be.  The situation was always going to be a tragedy -- unless Renly played by the rules.  I think rules, responsibility and accountability are important -- or it's just a descent into self-indulgent anarchy.

 


Renly is only there because Stannis has attacked his castle. He knows the negotiations aren't going to go anywhere so he doesn't care, Stannis is an incredibly weak position in relation to him, his only advantage being a magical assassin that no one expects. The only consensus that could be reached would be Renly relinquishing his crown and that was not going to happen so why even bother being tactful to a man that has just besieged your seat? 

"If you can't find consensus with your own brother, I'd say your political leadership is not all it's cracked up to be." 

So basically if Renly doesn't do exactly what Stannis says despite Stannis' apparent position being incredibly weak then he's a bad politician? I'd say that the alliances Renly cultivated in the Reach and the very fact of Renly pulling two regions into rebellion against the apparent rightful monarch at the drop of a hat shows his political acumen more than a chat with his brother that he knew would lead to nothing. 

This is just looking for anything to diminish Renly's capabilities. 

Renly's mistake was not knowing his brother has a magical assassin, other than that he was the most well placed contender to actually win the war, I really don't see why people project this image of a fool onto him. Brothers fighting brothers is about as typical as medieval warfare gets.  

Edited by Trigger Warning

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Around the parley there was still another option: Neither side giving up their claim, but the calling of a Great Council. That could have been the sensible decision avoiding war, whatever comes out of it. (Given his backing, Renly winning a Great Council is not even unlikely.) Some war would still happen between pro-council and anti-council (Lannister mainly) factions. Catelyn was plainly the only sensible person there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, black_hart said:

Around the parley there was still another option: Neither side giving up their claim, but the calling of a Great Council. That could have been the sensible decision avoiding war, whatever comes out of it. (Given his backing, Renly winning a Great Council is not even unlikely.) Some war would still happen between pro-council and anti-council (Lannister mainly) factions. Catelyn was plainly the only sensible person there.


Stannis would never agree to that, the throne is rightfully his and Renly would never agree to it because all the power is basically already in his pocket and he's already crowned. It was always going to end in violence as soon as Renly was crowned, Renly couldn't just put off his crown and Stannis won't yield. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Trigger Warning said:


Stannis would never agree to that, the throne is rightfully his and Renly would never agree to it because all the power is basically already in his pocket and he's already crowned. It was always going to end in violence as soon as Renly was crowned, Renly couldn't just put off his crown and Stannis won't yield.

I know. This is why I said Catelyn is the only sensible one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, WSmith84 said:

Let's assume that Renly was being 100% practical (which he wasn't) and weigh up his options. At the time, Stannis hadn't crowned himself (I actually find it rather amusing how angry Stannis is that no-one declares for him - of course they haven't, you haven't put a crown on your head, you numpty) and Renly didn't know if he would or not. It would have been very embarrassing to declare for King Stannis only to have him declare for Joffrey.

Anyway, Renly has the choice of declaring for Stannis or crowning himself. The fundamental question is: would the Tyrells side with Renly if he supports Stannis or would they declare for Joffrey? I can't give a definite answer either way: Joffrey could make Marg a queen and Stannis isn't exactly fond of the Tyrells (not to mention his Florent connection) but Loras is Renly's best friend (and lover, though I don't know if Mace knew that). No doubt Renly had this question in mind when he was debating his options.

I can answer that and it's no. The whole point of allying with Renly was to put Marg and by extension Tyrell grandchildren on the throne. Renly needed the protection the Reach army could give -- the throne resources far outstrip his as LP of the Stormlands and the Lannisters are trying to kill him -- and Mace had no dog in the fight. Either Joff or Renly provides him with a grandson as king, but Renly got their first, is a grown man, and happens to be his favorite son's best friend.

 

14 hours ago, Darkstream said:

Ok, I get your point. And sure, prior to Stannis declaring, the argument that Renly should have been dutyful or loyal to Stannis would be nonsensical. Once Stannis does declare, and they have their parlay, Renly's refusal to renounce his claim, whether practical or not, would still be remiss of him.  

No it's not remiss of him to renounce his claim. Stannis brings absolutely no proof of the twincest. In fact when asked by Renly, here's how the conversation goes: 

“Isn’t that a sweet story, my lady?” Renly asked. “I was camped at Horn Hill when Lord Tarly received his letter, and I must say, it took my breath away.” He smiled at his brother. “I had never suspected you were so clever, Stannis. Were it only true, you would indeed be Robert’s heir.”
“Were it true? Do you name me a liar?”
“Can you prove any word of this fable?”
Stannis ground his teeth.”

If Renly gives up his crown, his alliance dissolves. When presented with an option that should appeal to both his fairness and duty in the Great Council suggested by Catelyn, he poo poos the idea. His stance of "I'm the rightful king and don't need to prove it" doesn't hold any water to anyone but himself. I think SoS Stannis would have gone with that option once he learns not to put the cart before the horse, but aCoK Stannis definitely didn't. Renly's proposal to him is definitely the short shrift but it was the best offer he was going to get. Had Stannis communicated with his brother at any point between Robert leaving for the North and Renly crowning himself, the better part of a year mind you, this entire mess might have been avoided.

14 hours ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Because Stannis believes in duty above all else. The throne was his according to right and law. It was his obligation to unseat the bastard usurper on the throne and rule Westeros. The simple fact is that he WAS in the right. Not having support or wanting to be king does not change the facts.

Renly on the other hand thought it would be fun to be king, didn't know about the twincest, and didn't give a damn about the fact that he had absolutely no right to proclaim himself king. In effect he was jumping ahead of five people because he still thought Joff, Myrcella, and Tommen were Robert's. Renly was being a total jackass.

Renly in fact was in the wrong, and should have taken Stannis' offer to be his heir in place of Shireen. Margaery would still have gotten to be queen so the Tyrells wouldn't have had any reason to back out. And together they could have won the war.

I get that Renly is liked. He's very likable, even to me, but he had no right to the throne and trying to pretend that he did or had some kind of noble motivation is silly. And trying to pin some kind of blame on Stannis for not submitting to Renly is beyond silly.

Not having support and and not being able to prove you should be king (and we agree Stannis is the rightful king) mean everything in the book. If we're debating outside of the book, you're still asking Renly to set aside an alliance he created specifically to protect himself from the Lannisters. Renly was a jackass to Stannis while in a position of strength. I guess you could say he was being a jackass to the twincest group, but since their mom was trying to kill him I'd personally give him a pass.

If Renly takes Stannis' offer, the Tyrell marriage is dissolved. It was never consummated. Margaery would never have been queen so long as Renly was heir, not king, in any measure. His "noble" motivation was his own survival and he chose the most expedient way to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stannis is not greedy and ambitious in the traditional sense. I think he means it when he says he doesn't want to be king per say. But his pride, bitterness, wounded ego and feeling of being unappreciated by almost everyone are overwhelming forces that define his personality just as much as his adherence to duty. He would never back off and let Renly be king, specially after Renly got Storm's End instead of him. Neither he would accept Robb taking half his kingdom.

Renly was confident in his superior numbers and charm to win allies. His original enemies were the Lannisters but he wouldn't back off to Stannis either.

So there you go. Two intelligent, formidable forces that could crush the Lannisters squabbling with each other for understandable reasons (given their personalities) with tragic results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, King Brandon Ice Eyes said:

So there you go. Two intelligent, formidable forces that could crush the Lannisters squabbling with each other for understandable reasons (given their personalities) with tragic results.

But Stannis had a weaker position. That's the difference. Stannis knew that, he could become the hand of the new king. He could have storm's end after the war. But instead, he wanted everything. So he cowardly kill his own brother with black magic. He knew he never could beat him in a fair fight. He should've united forces with Renly and let his pride aside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

9 minutes ago, Ser Loras The Gay said:

But Stannis had a weaker position. That's the difference. Stannis knew that, he could become the hand of the new king. He could have storm's end after the war. But instead, he wanted everything. So he cowardly kill his own brother with black magic. He knew he never could beat him in a fair fight. He should've united forces with Renly and let his pride aside.

I am not disagreeing with you. I meant understandable more in the veins of explainable. It is perfectly cohesive with their personalities that they would do that. The fandom that loves Stannis tend to take his side because they believe an younger brother overstepping the line of succession would foment future dynastic problems. I don't necessarily agree because the circumstances prompted Renly to flee KL and search for allies to save his life. Meanwhile Stannis was in Dragonstone gathering his own army and listening to Melisandre. He had a weaker army but a supernatural force by his side. Like Dany has for example.The timing was terrible and it wasted a great opportunity to get rid of the usurpers Lannisters once and for all.

Edited by King Brandon Ice Eyes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

29 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

No it's not remiss of him to renounce his claim. Stannis brings absolutely no proof of the twincest. In fact when asked by Renly, here's how the conversation goes: 

Whether Stannis can prove his accusation or not, is not the issue here. In the society that they live in, it is the older sibling who is by rights the head of the house. And it is the younger siblings duty to defer to the eldest in all matters, whether that is a claim on the throne, or submitting to an arranged marriage, etc.

Yes, I agree at this point, it would not be practical for Renly to submit to Stannis' demands, however, that does not change the fact that Renly is shirking his obligations to Stannis.

Edited by Darkstream

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, King Brandon Ice Eyes said:

It is perfectly cohesive with their personalities that they would do that.

That is something that I agree with you. But we have to consider the dumb aspect. Even doing what his personality would suggest that he would do it, he should't. I think that is what this thread is trying to discuss. But you're right. He did what was expect from him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

5 minutes ago, Darkstream said:

Yes, I agree at this point, it would not be practical for Renly to submit to Stannis' demands, however, that does not change the fact that Renly is shirking his obligations to Stannis.

That's bullshit. Even in this society this norm just applies when the houses are in peace. Or at least they don't have chaos. Why should Renly who has more allies, more men, more gold, more power overall bend the knee to Stannis? Power is what determines this. Not his parentage. The power passes to the elder sibling, that's true. But if the power is passed to the youger one, why should he tranfer it to the eldest?

Edited by Ser Loras The Gay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Ser Loras The Gay said:

That's bullshit. Even in this society this norm just applies when the houses are in peace. Or at least they don't have chaos. Why should Renly who has more allies, more men, more gold, more power overall bend the knee to Stannis? Power is what determines this. Not his parentage. The power passes to the elder sibling, that's true. But if the power is passed to the youger one, why should he tranfer it to the eldest?

I didn't say that he should, and who cares if you think it is bullshit? If you read my post, you would see that I said, I agree that it was not practical for Renly to step down considering the situation. Again, none of that changes the fact that he was negligent in his obligations and duties owed by him to Stannis, according to the laws of Westeros.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Darkstream said:

Again, none of that changes the fact that he was negligent in his obligations and duties owed by him to Stannis, according to the laws of Westeros.

Tell me one person besides Stannis and his men who thought that Renly should be less negligent in his obligations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

3 minutes ago, Ser Loras The Gay said:

Tell me one person besides Stannis and his men who thought that Renly should be less negligent in his obligations.

You are completely missing the point, ignoring what I say, and attempting to build a strawman argument here. I could really give a flying fuck if anyone thinks he should have been less negligent. None of your arguments change the facts.

Edited by Darkstream

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Darkstream said:

You are completely missing the point, ignoring what I say, and attempting to build a strawman argument here. I could really give a flying fuck if anyone thinks he should have been less negligent. None of your arguments change the facts.

I just want to know how this "duty" is any pratical when the power dynamics change. Just that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Darkstream said:

Whether Stannis can prove his accusation or not, is not the issue here. In the society that they live in, it is the older sibling who is by rights the head of the house. And it is the younger siblings duty to defer to the eldest in all matters, whether that is a claim on the throne, or submitting to an arranged marriage, etc.

Yes, I agree at this point, it would not be practical for Renly to submit to Stannis' demands, however, that does not change the fact that Renly is shirking his obligations to Stannis.

Actually it is exactly the point. Unless Stannis is the rightful head of the house, which is not the case if Joffrey hasn't been proven illegitimate, then Renly owes him no fealty. In fact they are cadet branches of the royal branch, if anything. In a vacuum where only the reader exists, we know that Renly should owe fealty to Stannis as the rightful king. No one can or should dispute that. What we can and will dispute is whether Renly owed Stannis any type of fealty, which he doesn't until Stannis becomes head of the house. Had Stannis communicated these concerns to Renly before he was crowned or before Robert died, then this entire thing might have been avoided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ser Loras The Gay said:

I just want to know how this "duty" is any pratical when the power dynamics change. Just that.

I never said it was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.