Renly was the true steel

why does everyone blame Renly for Stannis's mistake

259 posts in this topic

12 hours ago, khal drogon said:

To be loved by lords and people. Renly definitely knows allies makes kings. Simple differentiate his approach to Catelyn with Stannis's you would see the difference. Renly is more closer to early Robert which makes him more qualified than Stannis anyday.

Westerosi history have proved that a good ruler doesn't need to be popular, he needs to be able to think, think about his people and had been proved himself. Renly had nothing. 

Edited by The Doctor's Consort

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Darkstream said:

Yeah, and getting that right still lead the realm into financial disaster and a horrific, devastating war.

Sure, being able to make allies, or earn the love of the people would definitely be a beneficial asset when considering potential candidates to rule, but...

 
I don't think ruling in any capacity can be considered easy. And I certainly don't think welfare and peace would come automatically, or be sustainable just because a transition of power was achieved without a civil war - Not at all if the powers that be are not qualified to govern the day to day affairs of the kingdom.

So Renly is great at making allies, that is all fine and dandy to help you gain power. But what does he do when two of these allies have some sort of dispute, and are about to go to war over it? How is he going to maintain these alliances if he has to rule in favor of one of these parties over the other? Or how about managing the finances of the realm, or dealing with natural disasters or crisis such as famine and disease, or the threat of the Others. I don't think him being charismatic and personable is going to automatically solve any of those issue

Yes, it ran well for 14 years till Robert's death. I will always criticize Robert for financial disaster. Still there is nothing that suggests Renly would be a bad king as Robert.

Okay you are trying to make imaginary scenarios and assuming things to make Renly look bad. You assume Renly is all show and nothing more than that. To be fair to you Martin doesn't flesh out much of his character so anything could be assumed. We simply don't know how he could have handled all that. But we know more about Stannis and could make conclusions about his character and I think he would be a terrible ruler. His religious policy alone would have caused riots and unrest across the seven kingdoms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

Westerosi history have proved that a good ruler doesn't need to be popular, he needs to be able to think, think about his people and had been proved himself. Renly had nothing. 

Laughed at Stannis thinking about people. I thought half the time he thought about his rights and how everyone wronged him. He thinks about people but in a way that gives him the throne. Stannis is a good war commander but I can't think of him as a good ruler.

Share this post


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

Laughed at Stannis thinking about people. I thought half the time he thought about his rights and how everyone wronged him. He thinks about people but in a way that gives him the throne. Stannis is a good war commander but I can't think of him as a good ruler.

You can laugh all you want but he was the the King who still cared.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

You can laugh all you want but he was the the King who still cared.

Cared as a last resort to get his throne and because Melisandre stroked his messiah complex. I love Stannis as a character but his act of saving the wall isn't an act out of selflessness. 

Edited by khal drogon

Share this post


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

Cared as a last resort to get his throne and because Melisandre stroked his messiah complex. I love Stannis as a character but his act of saving the wall isn't an act out of selflessness. 

Same could be told about everyone who had done something good, Dany freed the Unsullied because she couldn't pay for them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Doctor's Consort said:

Same could be told about everyone who had done something good, Dany freed the Unsullied because she couldn't pay for them. 

You could interpret anything from the text but can't change the text. Good try.

Share this post


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

You could interpret anything from the text but can't change the text. Good try.

Of course everyone who doesn't agree with you cannot understand. Typical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, khal drogon said:

Yes, it ran well for 14 years till Robert's death. I will always criticize Robert for financial disaster. Still there is nothing that suggests Renly would be a bad king as Robert.

Sure, it ran well for forteen years - or so was the appearance on the surface. However, all of the turmoil that occurred after his death was a direct result of his negligence during those forteen years of his rule.

Quote

Okay you are trying to make imaginary scenarios and assuming things to make Renly look bad.

No, I'm not trying to make up imaginary scenarios to make Renly look bad. Are you suggesting that these scenarios are not the sorts of issues that a King has to deal with?

Quote

You assume Renly is all show and nothing more than that. To be fair to you Martin doesn't flesh out much of his character so anything could be assumed. We simply don't know how he could have handled all that.

I'm not assuming anything. Ok, yes I'm making an assumption -as is everyone weighing in on this subject - but I'm basing this on what we do know about Renly, from what we did see of him, as well as the opinions of others who knew him.

And I'm not trying to make a difinitive argument that he would have been a terrible king. I agree that he was not a very fleshed out character, and that given the opportunity, he may well have proved to be an excellent ruler. We will never know for sure.

My argument is more so in opposition to the prevailing argument on this thread that just because he was able to garner support, that means he would have been a good King.

Quote

But we know more about Stannis and could make conclusions about his character and I think he would be a terrible ruler. His religious policy alone would have caused riots and unrest across the seven kingdoms.

I agree.

Allthough I am a huge fan of Stannis - as I also am of Renly - I don't believe, based on what we know about them, that either would have been a competent ruler.

Edited by Darkstream

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

Of course everyone who doesn't agree with you cannot understand. Typical.

Heh. Kettle, pot, I'm sure you are familiar with the saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/19/2017 at 1:02 PM, The Doctor's Consort said:

What qualifications? What has Renly done to prove that he is better than Stannis and he would had been a better King?

Well he garnered allies. That helps. His bannermen actually followed him without threatening to revolt. That helps. He let his enemies beat each other up before he would mop them up. That helps. He knew to deal with a weak threat before it could be come strong (Stannis). That helps.

He also knew that brutal pragmatism and strength instead of weak propaganda -- though we know his letter was true -- is a better platform for ruling/conquering. That helps. Pretty much everything.

On 4/19/2017 at 9:19 AM, Angel Eyes said:

Because Stannis is rightful heir by law. It's as simple as that, Renly defied the laws of succession that governed Westeros. 

Stannis is the rightful heir by law, but he is not able to prove it. Kind of a big deal. Without proving it, most will just note him as another pretender to the throne.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/15/2017 at 2:44 PM, TheThreeEyedCow said:

If you haven't guessed already, it's about perspective. There is no one true king/queen. How could there be?

Any time I see an anti Dany/Stannis/Sansa/whoever thread I think to myself, 'how did you manage to miss the entire point of the series?' There are people you can relate to, for a multitude of reasons. And there are people you can't. How often do we tell ourselves that we're in the right and everyone else is mad? How often do we do selfish things and justify it accordingly? The answer is: all of the time. That's what human beings do. Humans are fickle creatures and the one's in asoiaf seem impervious to reason. Except a few. 

No. There is no definitive answer to the Op's question. Who is EVERYONE? The Kingdom is as split as the readership. Ask a man from Lannisport and he may say Stannis is no more than a cuckolded, stuffy old fool. Clayton Suggs would have a different answer entirely. Mel believes he's the Lord of Light. 

A better way to go about it is to ask, 'when is it ok to break the rules/oathes/vows?' It's a broader question, but it's applicable to most of our characters. The IB King's moot. Jon's loyalty to the watch. Dany's marriage to Hizdar. Jorah's banishment. The KG vows. Lyanna and Ned. Tyrion's kinslaying. The red wedding. 

I really like Stannis. That said, I believe Renly would of been a much smoother transition and the realm would of thrived with him. All in all, when I add it up in my head, my belief is that Renly would of bent the rules of succession to such a degree that it would of endangered and destabilized the monarchy especially for his heirs. We're supposed to come away from it understanding what a troublesome and unnecessary thing Monarchy's are. It's suppose to be a simple rule but in practice it's more of an obstacle. 

I suppose the only definitive answer I could give regarding the Baratheon brothers is that neither of them deserve to be king as they were willing to kill their own family to achieve it. 

I think this is a good answer.

3 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Well he garnered allies. That helps. His bannermen actually followed him without threatening to revolt. That helps. He let his enemies beat each other up before he would mop them up. That helps. He knew to deal with a weak threat before it could be come strong (Stannis). That helps.

He also knew that brutal pragmatism and strength instead of weak propaganda -- though we know his letter was true -- is a better platform for ruling/conquering. That helps. Pretty much everything.

Stannis is the rightful heir by law, but he is not able to prove it. Kind of a big deal. Without proving it, most will just note him as another pretender to the throne.

Renly was great at everything except being loyal to his brother.  That cost him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys how is this still open for debate? Renly was the Prince that was Promised. Rhaegar died for him. All the maidens tore their hair out in grief when he died. Even his vengeful and righteous ghost came back from the grave to beat his disgusting evil traitor brother one last time. This is why the Others are coming back, cause Renly has been stolen from us. Way to go, Stannis! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, ravenous reader said:

Renly was great at everything except being loyal to his brother.  That cost him.

Loyalty to the brother who abandoned him and Robert to the Lannisters? Loyalty to the brother who recused himself to DS for near on a year without saying or doing anything other than "amassing troops" or whatever Tywin said? Loyalty to someone who attacked *him* instead of sending an envoy under a peace banner?

I'm not even saying Renly was great at everything. I'm saying he had little and fewer options once Ned went dumb, Stannis went dark, and Robert died. Cersei was coming for him and she wasn't gonna stop until he is dead. Still have a mental self-bet on who lives longer between Stannis and Cersei.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Renly's Banana said:

Guys how is this still open for debate? Renly was the Prince that was Promised. Rhaegar died for him. All the maidens tore their hair out in grief when he died. Even his vengeful and righteous ghost came back from the grave to beat his disgusting evil traitor brother one last time. This is why the Others are coming back, cause Renly has been stolen from us. Way to go, Stannis! 

Rushed satire is bad satire. Don't rush. Leave that to Canadians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Universal Sword Donor said:

Rushed satire is bad satire. Don't rush. Leave that to Canadians.

You dare call my love and loyalty satire? You forget yourself, ser!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Loyalty to the brother who abandoned him and Robert to the Lannisters? Loyalty to the brother who recused himself to DS for near on a year without saying or doing anything other than "amassing troops" or whatever Tywin said?

And why shouldn't he abandon the brothers who have shunned him, and essentially abanded him from the time that they were young children?

Stannis fled to DS because he knew that he would have been ignored and ridiculed by Robert if he brought his concerns to him without proof.

Quote

Loyalty to someone who attacked *him* instead of sending an envoy under a peace banner?

 

He did attempt to parlay with Renly peacefully, and was mocked for it.

Edited by Darkstream

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Rushed satire is bad satire. Don't rush. Leave that to Canadians.

Heh, I thought this was a dig at first, and took this closer to the heart than I should have. I guess, being a Canadian working man, I'm a little slow. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

You can laugh all you want but he was the the King who still cared.

Yeah, Stannis being better than Joffrey and Euron.

 

How Renly, Robb, and Balon were all dead at that time.  While Aegon and Dany weren't contacted by anyone from the Wall.  Not to mention, he is the only with a witch talking about the importance up North.

 

3 hours ago, Darkstream said:

And why shouldn't he abandon the brothers who have shunned him, and essentially abanded him from the time that they were young children?

Yeah, Robert totally abandoned him in his generously giving Stannis both lands and titles he had no inherent right to besides from Robert's generosity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Minsc said:

Yeah, Stannis being better than Joffrey and Euron.

 

How Renly, Robb, and Balon were all dead at that time.  While Aegon and Dany weren't contacted by anyone from the Wall.  Not to mention, he is the only with a witch talking about the importance up North.

Well dying is a pretty shitty thing to do when you have the responsibility of running a kingdom, as well is going on vacation in some exotic foreign land.

I guess Stannis was the only one intelligent enough to surround himself with the sage council of a Red witch of Rahloo.

Quote

 

Yeah, Robert totally abandoned him in his generously giving Stannis both lands and titles he had no inherent right to besides from Robert's generosity.

Well shunning his older brother in favor of his younger brother by giving Renly the family seat in Storms End, and shipping Stannis out to a meager seat out in the middle of nowhere, off of the mainland goes against custom, and was a serious dick move.

It wasn't generous, it was an insult.

Edited by Darkstream

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.