If dany becomes queen, what would she change?

[aventador577]

How would she change the seven Kingdoms and would she be successful?

I believe, she would try to centralize more power to insure that something like the rebellion does not happen again. But I'm not sure if she could be successful. It all depends on the dragons.

 

[The Gizzard of Oz]

3 hours ago, aventador577 said:

How would she change the seven Kingdoms and would she be successful?

I believe, she would try to centralize more power to insure that something like the rebellion does not happen again. But I'm not sure if she could be successful. It all depends on the dragons.

 

She will have to wait for the ice to thaw and spring to arrive but I believe she will bring about a new Age of Plenty and a Time of Prosperity.  She is the ruler that the seven kingdoms desperately need.  She will clean up the mess left behind by Robb Stark, Cersei Lannister, Euron Greyjoy, Jon Snow, and Roose Bolton to start a new glorious Reign of the Dragons.  I hope she finds more dragon eggs and marries Aegon to end the feud with the Blackfyres.

[snow is the man]

1 hour ago, The Gizzard of Oz said:

She will have to wait for the ice to thaw and spring to arrive but I believe she will bring about a new Age of Plenty and a Time of Prosperity.  She is the ruler that the seven kingdoms desperately need.  She will clean up the mess left behind by Robb Stark, Cersei Lannister, Euron Greyjoy, Jon Snow, and Roose Bolton to start a new glorious Reign of the Dragons.  I hope she finds more dragon eggs and marries Aegon to end the feud with the Blackfyres.

I agree she will be better because she can keep it unified because whenever someone thinks of rebelling they will remember the dragons. that said I don't see how jon snow can be blamed for westeros being a mess. He was in the nights watch and didn't contribute at all to the war except helping stannis in a small way and in truth he had no choice since pissing stannis off was out of the question. And since stannis saved the nights watch. I would say cersei,balon,joffrey,roose bolton,tywin lannister,and a few others were the ones to blame.

 

I think dany would likely do alot better helping the common people and getting the nobles in line. She has a good heart but can be ruthless as well. Also I think she would do better in westeros then in mereen and the free cities. There she is changing hundreds of years  or maybe thousands of tradition and is a complete outsider. Also she hasn't really used a dragon like she can if she rides one and actually controls it.

[shameeka]

At least she will be a better ruler than the most recent ones(Robert, Joffrey, Tommen)

[Falcon2909]

She'd immediately help the NW fight the white walkers

[Quwertzuiopp]

2 hours ago, shameeka said:

At least she will be a better ruler than the most recent ones(Robert, Joffrey, Tommen)

I beg to differ, Robert was in fact a pretty good ruler. If instead of wasting that much money that the throne got heavily indebted, he only wasted so much that he was permanently close to zero, he would have been near damn perfect a king. He was exactly the kind of king the country needed at that time. Just laissez-fair, stability, prosperity, creating commerce and diversion with tournaments, and of course immediately and skillfully crushing any kind of resistance instantly.

Was he a good person per se? Debatable, he was pretty grey and there are a lot of things he could have done better. But he was no bad king by any means, just not a great one.

[John Doe]

Many more people would die, she'd be a terrible queen. 

[Graydon Hicks]

1 hour ago, Quwertzuiopp said:

I beg to differ, Robert was in fact a pretty good ruler. If instead of wasting that much money that the throne got heavily indebted, he only wasted so much that he was permanently close to zero, he would have been near damn perfect a king. He was exactly the kind of king the country needed at that time. Just laissez-fair, stability, prosperity, creating commerce and diversion with tournaments, and of course immediately and skillfully crushing any kind of resistance instantly.

Was he a good person per se? Debatable, he was pretty grey and there are a lot of things he could have done better. But he was no bad king by any means, just not a great one.

i always thought of robert as the kind of guy who would make a great friend. the good friend who keeps you from doing stupid shit, but the "great" friend who not only encourages the stupid shit, but is right in the middle of it with you. he knew he wasnt a good king, a generally good person, but not a good king. he's too temperamental, too brash and impulsive; he makes for a better warlord. but he tried to balance out his faults as a king by employing a capable hand. ned would have been a good hand, if kings landing wasnt to piss pot of political corruption that it was. i feel that robert was someone who needs a goal, something to work or , in his case, fight for, to keep himself driven and focused on. during the rebellion, that was beating the targaryens. was he even interested in the throne for himself at the time, or was he just aiming for fall of house targaryen? but once he became king, i think he lost that drive. he had achieved his goal, so what to work for now? that lack of a goal or whatever, coupled with the deep emotional pain of losing lyanna, is what lead to his drastic weight gain and lack of interest in actually ruling the realm. his drinking, wenching, and spending all seem to be attempts to fill the whole in his heart, the void and lack of purpose in his life. so he wanted a Hand to run the kingdom in his stead. he even says in the first book, to ned. i also doubt the spending was as great on his part as we are lead to believe. how the crown used up all the money they had from aerys's reign, i have no idea, but i have a theory as to how they have stayed in debt.

[Moiraine Sedai]

Dany will do what Aegon V tried to do.  Give more rights to the small folk.  Egg risked it all at Summerhall to obtain the power to make reforms.  She will do what Egg could not.  But it will still be feudalism.  They're not ready for democracy yet.  

 

[Lion of the West]

21 hours ago, aventador577 said:

How would she change the seven Kingdoms and would she be successful?

I believe, she would try to centralize more power to insure that something like the rebellion does not happen again. But I'm not sure if she could be successful. It all depends on the dragons.

 

My view is that Danaerys will certainly change but the question is if it will be towards a more humane or harsh direction if she takes the throne. The idea that she will promoto some improvements for the smallfolk is not unlikely but given her experience with Slavers' Bay I think she's very unlikely to do something radical about it as radicalism has kind of blown up in her face before and she seems ready and willing to act more cautious with more limited reforms in mind.

But most of it will also depend how on she takes the throne and what kind of support she has when she rules. If she can just cling on by the skin of her teeth then most likely she won't do many great reforms. If she's got a solid foundation and lots of die-hard supporters, then she might well set for a more long reaching set of reforms.

[The Commentator]

Slaver's Bay is a great teacher and the perfect laboratory for trying out different ways of ruling.  In my opinion, Dany represents the same youthful idealism that George had when he was younger.  Now that idealism has been tempered with age and experience.  Specifically, I think we will see representation for the common people.  The free people of Mereen has access to the court and be heard by the highest authority in the land.  I expect there will be something similar in place for Westeros except it will be more formal.  The Hand will appoint a court where the commoners can air their concerns.  The key change is representation for the commons where they can have some input in how things will get done.  

What interests me most is how she will provide for succession.  Not something any 17 year old would think about but that will be determined by whether she has the ability to have children or not.  She may institute a voting system in which the representatives and the nobles will get to choose the ruler of the land.  In that case, she will be the last ruling monarch and the successor will be an elected person who will only rule for a finite term.  She may stick around to see the land through the long night and depart in Spring back to her adopted children to fulfill the role of Mhysa according to her last vision in the House of the Undying.  

[Helikzhan]

I'm not entirely sure, either. That's one of the reasons I think she's going to fail. 

14 hours ago, John Doe said:

Many more people would die, she'd be a terrible queen. 

No better no worse than the existing rulers. Which is to say by the time the Others show up most of humanity should be dead. 

[300 H&H Magnum]

Daenerys T. is the best possible ruler out of all the potentials in the books.  I would put her potential ahead of Stannis, Jon Snow, Cersei, Euron, and Aegon.  With that in mind, the Ice Age will tear down the existing system and drive people back to a hunting & gathering existence where there is little incentive for people to organize.  It's every person for himself as they fight for food.  Dany's greatest asset is the connections she will have with Essos which will presumable stay warm enough to provide food to feed Westeros.   It's convenient to have most of Essos and Westeros under one ruler and makes the allocation of resources where it is needed possible. 

[Graydon Hicks]

8 hours ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

Slaver's Bay is a great teacher and the perfect laboratory for trying out different ways of ruling.  In my opinion, Dany represents the same youthful idealism that George had when he was younger.  Now that idealism has been tempered with age and experience.  Specifically, I think we will see representation for the common people.  The free people of Mereen has access to the court and be heard by the highest authority in the land.  I expect there will be something similar in place for Westeros except it will be more formal.  The Hand will appoint a court where the commoners can air their concerns.  The key change is representation for the commons where they can have some input in how things will get done.  

What interests me most is how she will provide for succession.  Not something any 17 year old would think about but that will be determined by whether she has the ability to have children or not.  She may institute a voting system in which the representatives and the nobles will get to choose the ruler of the land.  In that case, she will be the last ruling monarch and the successor will be an elected person who will only rule for a finite term.  She may stick around to see the land through the long night and depart in Spring back to her adopted children to fulfill the role of Mhysa according to her last vision in the House of the Undying.  

i seriously doubt she would want o get rid of the power of the monarchy once it was firmly back in the hands of her house. but she may try to smash the power of the lords paramount to have total dominion of the provinces. that would eliminate the main political threat to her and her authority. 

[snow is the man]

On 5/22/2017 at 2:02 AM, Graydon Hicks said:

i always thought of robert as the kind of guy who would make a great friend. the good friend who keeps you from doing stupid shit, but the "great" friend who not only encourages the stupid shit, but is right in the middle of it with you. he knew he wasnt a good king, a generally good person, but not a good king. he's too temperamental, too brash and impulsive; he makes for a better warlord. but he tried to balance out his faults as a king by employing a capable hand. ned would have been a good hand, if kings landing wasnt to piss pot of political corruption that it was. i feel that robert was someone who needs a goal, something to work or , in his case, fight for, to keep himself driven and focused on. during the rebellion, that was beating the targaryens. was he even interested in the throne for himself at the time, or was he just aiming for fall of house targaryen? but once he became king, i think he lost that drive. he had achieved his goal, so what to work for now? that lack of a goal or whatever, coupled with the deep emotional pain of losing lyanna, is what lead to his drastic weight gain and lack of interest in actually ruling the realm. his drinking, wenching, and spending all seem to be attempts to fill the whole in his heart, the void and lack of purpose in his life. so he wanted a Hand to run the kingdom in his stead. he even says in the first book, to ned. i also doubt the spending was as great on his part as we are lead to believe. how the crown used up all the money they had from aerys's reign, i have no idea, but i have a theory as to how they have stayed in debt.

he did constant tourneys and allowed for massive corruption. Those things tend to be bead for the treasury as well as other stupid spending

[snow is the man]

6 hours ago, 300 H&H Magnum said:

Daenerys T. is the best possible ruler out of all the potentials in the books.  I would put her potential ahead of Stannis, Jon Snow, Cersei, Euron, and Aegon.  With that in mind, the Ice Age will tear down the existing system and drive people back to a hunting & gathering existence where there is little incentive for people to organize.  It's every person for himself as they fight for food.  Dany's greatest asset is the connections she will have with Essos which will presumable stay warm enough to provide food to feed Westeros.   It's convenient to have most of Essos and Westeros under one ruler and makes the allocation of resources where it is needed possible. 

I don't see this. Even for game of thrones it would be too depressing

[GyantSpyder]

She will appoint Darkstar as Hand of the Queen and will fail to understand what all the people in strange clothes and accents are complaining about when they suggest it makes no sense.

[The Gizzard of Oz]

On 5/22/2017 at 0:42 AM, John Doe said:

Many more people would die, she'd be a terrible queen. 

Many people will die regardless of who rules.  Stark lovers aren't going to like to this but Robb would have been terrible at ruling if you think many people dying is bad.  Robb could have shown humility and knelt to Joffrey to avoid thousands of casualties.  Catelyn could have brought the matter to Robert instead of arresting Tyrion.  Jon could have let Arya take care of herself instead of attacking the Boltons with his wildling agents.  Jon Arryn could have complied with the royal order and executed Robert and Ned instead of  rebelling and it would have saved thousands of lives. 

[Castellan]

Whether as Queen or not she'll help fight the Others. If she survives that as Queen, everything will be changed anyway by a long Winter, famine, war, greyscale, probably volcanic activity and floods, so she will be engaged just in basic reconstruction, I would think. I suppose there is a possibility of merging her conquests in Essos and Westeros under one rule which could change culture and trade.

[Ralphis Baratheon]

On 5/25/2017 at 7:22 PM, The Gizzard of Oz said:

Many people will die regardless of who rules.  Stark lovers aren't going to like to this but Robb would have been terrible at ruling if you think many people dying is bad.  Robb could have shown humility and knelt to Joffrey to avoid thousands of casualties.  Catelyn could have brought the matter to Robert instead of arresting Tyrion.  Jon could have let Arya take care of herself instead of attacking the Boltons with his wildling agents.  Jon Arryn could have complied with the royal order and executed Robert and Ned instead of  rebelling and it would have saved thousands of lives. 

Wouldn't that be a violation of Guest Right? Robert and Ned ate and drank at his table and slept in his Castle for years.