Who Am I?

[ravenous reader]

On 7/17/2017 at 8:52 PM, Aegon VII said:

3:

Many have suggested my exploits were inspired by Bael the Bard. I once either rescued or kidnapped a stark girl, depending on your perspective. Violence is not my first choice, but the text (asoiaf) has shown I will resort to it when necessary, specifically one v one combat. I grew to be one of the most powerful people in Westeros, as close to a king of Westeros as one can be without ever sitting the iron throne.

The predictable answer:  Rhaegar Targaryen

The answer I prefer:  Sandor Clegane!

[Makk]

On 7/18/2017 at 0:52 PM, Aegon VII said:

Many have suggested my exploits were inspired by Bael the Bard. I once either rescued or kidnapped a stark girl, depending on your perspective. Violence is not my first choice, but the text (asoiaf) has shown I will resort to it when necessary, specifically one v one combat. I grew to be one of the most powerful people in Westeros, as close to a king of Westeros as one can be without ever sitting the iron throne.

Mance (He thinks Jeyne is Arya)

[Makk]

5 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

1- I belong to one of the wealthiest Houses of Westeros, and I served as Hand of the King. While Hand, I schemed to make my daughter Queen, and eventually I succeeded.  Despite this, the claim of my grandson for the Iron Throne was disputed, and plunged the Seven Kingdoms into a devastating civil war when I crowned my grandson in defiance of the King’s last will and testament.  Though I died in the ensuing conflict, at least I lived long enough to see my daughter a queen and her son a king.  Who am I?

Tywin 

5 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

2 - My possible half-brother was a powerful lord and a great warrior and military prodigy.  Despite any jealousy or misgivings I might have had about not inheriting his seat, I was loyal to him throughout all my days, and eventually rose to a position of high authority myself.  Though I will never sit a throne, I have royal blood in my veins and royal blood on my hands, as I crushed a mighty host of a foreign king as part of my service, and my blood will one day sit a throne.  While I spent several months a captive, I eventually returned home to take up authority once more, and continued my loyal service despite my bitterness at my treatment.  Who am I?

Not sure, some of it sounds like Jon but some of it doesn't fit well. I can't think of who else it would fit though.

[Philokles]

On 18/07/2017 at 1:52 AM, Aegon VII said:

Many have suggested my exploits were inspired by Bael the Bard. I once either rescued or kidnapped a stark girl, depending on your perspective. Violence is not my first choice, but the text (asoiaf) has shown I will resort to it when necessary, specifically one v one combat. I grew to be one of the most powerful people in Westeros, as close to a king of Westeros as one can be without ever sitting the iron throne.

Sandor

 

6 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

1- I belong to one of the wealthiest Houses of Westeros, and I served as Hand of the King. While Hand, I schemed to make my daughter Queen, and eventually I succeeded.  Despite this, the claim of my grandson for the Iron Throne was disputed, and plunged the Seven Kingdoms into a devastating civil war when I crowned my grandson in defiance of the King’s last will and testament.  Though I died in the ensuing conflict, at least I lived long enough to see my daughter a queen and her son a king.  Who am I?

Otto Hightower

 

6 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

2 - My possible half-brother was a powerful lord and a great warrior and military prodigy.  Despite any jealousy or misgivings I might have had about not inheriting his seat, I was loyal to him throughout all my days, and eventually rose to a position of high authority myself.  Though I will never sit a throne, I have royal blood in my veins and royal blood on my hands, as I crushed a mighty host of a foreign king as part of my service, and my blood will one day sit a throne.  While I spent several months a captive, I eventually returned home to take up authority once more, and continued my loyal service despite my bitterness at my treatment.  Who am I?

Orys Baratheon

[X-Buster]

11 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

#1 is Daenerys but the clue is misleading because it contains factually incorrect information.

The Targaryens are emphatically NOT one of the "oldest, most prestigious" houses of Westeros.  They are one of the youngest, in fact, having only been around for ~500 years or so.  Compare that to the 8,000 year old Stark or Hightower lines, or the Lannisters and Arryns, who also trace their lineage back thousands of years.  It also can't be Bran, because his visions don't come "after a cup".  He eats a bowl of weirwood paste, but that's it.

And if #2 is Mance, it also is filled with bad assumptions and facts.  He was never prominent in the Night's Watch, and he isn't associated with the color white.

Fun game, bad questions.

The Targaryens are emphatically one of the oldest houses in that world.  And they definitely are the most prestigious family in the world.   I know that some people like the Starks.  But the Starks are not the equal of the Targaryens.  Are the Starks represented in the currency of the kingdoms?  No. The currency is a golden dragon.  The Westerosi calendar is dated from the time of who's conquest?  Not a Stark's but Aegon Targaryen's.  The most the Starks ever ruled is the north of Westeros and they were not in complete control of the north until Rogar Bolton submitted.  The Targaryens are one of the forty ruling families that owned the freehold of ancient Valyria.  There is no comparison in terms of prestige or greatness.  Sorry to burst your bubble.

[Makk]

I don't think we should quibble too much over detail in a game like this. As long as a reasonable explanation can be made by the riddler I think that is fine. Targaryens are an old house and they were in westeros. Good enough for me even though I can see how the detail could be argued in a legal argument (which this isn't). Same for Mance, I think it is fair to say he probably did rise to some sort of prominence in the watch although I personally wouldn't associate those colours with him..

[Aegon VII]

7 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

Again, wrong.  They move there 126 BC, not 326.  I was being generous to you and rounding up when I said 500 years.

If you're going to try to correct someone you should probably check your facts first. I claimed Dragonstone was founded in 326 BC. You say this is wrong. Look it up. (I'll give you a hint, they moved to Dragonstone in 126 BC, that's not when it was founded)

7 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

And you very specifically said "Houses in Westeros".  Whether the Targaryens as a House existed in Valria for 8 years or 8,000, they weren't in Westeros.  Lineage in Westeros is not the same as lineage in Essos, not when you specify that it's a Westerosi House.

Your entire argument comes down to you interpreting my statement one way and claiming that's the only correct way to interpret it. That is a very close minded perspective. Targaryens are one of the oldest families in asoiaf. They live in Westeros. Therefore, they are one of the oldest families in Westeros. A real world equivalent would be established families that moved from england to the US after north america was first discovered. For hundreds of years and to some extent even to today the "old" families were not the families that moved to the US first, they were the ones that had been established in England for hundreds of years as well. Having moved to a different area does not change ones lineage.

 

7 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

They were an extremely important family.  One of the Forty Families that effectively ruled the Freehold.  That they were a minor one of these still puts them in the very tippy top upper echelon of importance in the world.

 

Exaclty, which suggests they have been around for even longer. I was admitting they were one of the minor houses of the rulers

7 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

Wouldn't help, you'd still be wrong by an order of magnitude.

A whole order?

7 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

 Again, Westerosi houses go back thousands of years.  The Targaryen presence in Westeros goes back 500.  When Tyrion sets foot in Volantis, that doesn't make House Lannister one of the oldest Volantene families; his line may stretch back for millenia but his time in Volantis is only a couple days.

If Tyrion is in a room with 9 other people he is probably from one of the oldest houses in the room. If Tyrion walks into volantis he probably is from one of the oldest houses in volantis.

I'm not denying that your interpretation is more natural, or that it wouldn't be misleading or tyrion to say, "I am from one of the oldest houses in volantis". But misleading is not the same as false. It all comes down to how you interpret it, you are saying yours is the only correct interpretation and that is wrong.

 

7 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

This is absurd.  The common meaning of a cup is something you drink a beverage out of.  The common meaning for a bowl is something you eat food out of.  Before you were too specific, and now you're too vague.  Why not say a lake?  Haven't you ever had a sip of water from a lake or a pond?  What makes that any different than a cup or a bowl, if the only criteria is "is it physically possible to interpret this clue in a specific way"?

Once again you saying your interpretation is the only valid one when it is not. Really so far you've just quibbled over petty phrasing. My statement about soup was apt af. A paste is a thick viscous liquid much like a stew, chili, or grits. When people are served foods like this, it will usually be in a bowl. However, we (Americans) use the terms interchangeably when talking about foods like this. If you order a cup of chili, no one is going to try to serve it to you in a drinking cup, and no one is going to correct you and say "this is a bowl of chili not a cup". Bowl and cup are synonyms in this context, same as they are when referring to Bran eating the Weirwood paste.

7 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

Again, learn your words.

Well now that's rude.

7 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

 The "best" and "highest" are not the same.

I never talked about high or highest at all.. So you're telling me to learn my words, but it's your own words your correcting because they sure as hell aren't mine.

7 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

 You said, specifically, that he rose high.

I never said this. I said he rose to prominence in the NW. I'd say if the first ranger says that everyone knew Mance and he was the best of them, that qualifies him as being prominent.

7 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

 Which means a position of influence, not just a great set of skills.  Cotter Pyke is a bastard who has risen high.  Mance was a bastard who was good at his job.  There is a major difference.

Again, you're arguing against yourself here as I never claimed he rose high or had a position of influence. I claimed Mance rose to prominence in the NW and I stand by that statement.

7 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

Here are some better examples that are factually correct: 

1- I belong to one of the wealthiest Houses of Westeros, and I served as Hand of the King. While Hand, I schemed to make my daughter Queen, and eventually I succeeded.  Despite this, the claim of my grandson for the Iron Throne was disputed, and plunged the Seven Kingdoms into a devastating civil war when I crowned my grandson in defiance of the King’s last will and testament.  Though I died in the ensuing conflict, at least I lived long enough to see my daughter a queen and her son a king.  Who am I?

 

2 - My possible half-brother was a powerful lord and a great warrior and military prodigy.  Despite any jealousy or misgivings I might have had about not inheriting his seat, I was loyal to him throughout all my days, and eventually rose to a position of high authority myself.  Though I will never sit a throne, I have royal blood in my veins and royal blood on my hands, as I crushed a mighty host of a foreign king as part of my service, and my blood will one day sit a throne.  While I spent several months a captive, I eventually returned home to take up authority once more, and continued my loyal service despite my bitterness at my treatment.  Who am I?

Nice contribution!

37 minutes ago, E.S. Dinah said:

The Targaryens are emphatically one of the oldest houses in that world.  And they definitely are the most prestigious family in the world.   I know that some people like the Starks.  But the Starks are not the equal of the Targaryens.  Are the Starks represented in the currency of the kingdoms?  No. The currency is a golden dragon.  The Westerosi calendar is dated from the time of who's conquest?  Not a Stark's but Aegon Targaryen's.  The most the Starks ever ruled is the north of Westeros and they were not in complete control of the north until Rogar Bolton submitted.  The Targaryens are one of the forty ruling families that owned the freehold of ancient Valyria.  There is no comparison in terms of prestige or greatness.  Sorry to burst your bubble.

Thank you! I know the wording I used is more naturally interpreted as it being a house from westeros but I though it was still correct. They are from one of the oldest houses and they are in westeros -> They are one of the oldest houses in westeros. I truly hate it when people try to argue that a statement can only have one interpretation. If I was writing a story that was to be published it would be wrong for me to use language that is easily interpreted in a way other than what I meant, but this is a riddle and therefore it kind of comes with the territory.

16 minutes ago, Makk said:

I don't think we should quibble too much over detail in a game like this. As long as a reasonable explanation can be made by the riddler I think that is fine. Targaryens are an old house and they were in westeros. Good enough for me even though I can see how the detail could be argued in a legal argument (which this isn't).

Thank you! It seems everyone's a lawyer on this forum. It's funny though because usually the law leans to the loosest interpretation of a statement rather than the strictest..

16 minutes ago, Makk said:

Same for Mance, I think it is fair to say he probably did rise to some sort of prominence in the watch although I personally wouldn't associate those colours with him..

I can respect white being questionable. Red and Black I think is pretty solid between his cloak and his black iron fetters with the red ruby. I do believe the tent made of white furs is significant though. Also, his wife's sister gets decked out in all white, so we could assume the all white came from her family/culture and that Dalla would have dressed similarly. So between his heart(dalla) and his home(the tent) I think there's a better argument for white being Mance's tertiary color than any other color. I'm open for arguments supporting other colors though!

Also, this may just be my perspective and therefore not really valid, but the dude has spent like 17 years in a land that is nothing but white as far as the eye can see. It makes me associate white with him a little more than I should perhaps lol

[Makk]

24 minutes ago, Aegon VII said:

I can respect white being questionable. Red and Black I think is pretty solid between his cloak and his black iron fetters with the red ruby. I do believe the tent made of white furs is significant though. Also, his wife's sister gets decked out in all white, so we could assume the all white came from her family/culture and that Dalla would have dressed similarly. So between his heart(dalla) and his home(the tent) I think there's a better argument for white being Mance's tertiary color than any other color. I'm open for arguments supporting other colors though!

Also, this may just be my perspective and therefore not really valid, but the dude has spent like 17 years in a land that is nothing but white as far as the eye can see. It makes me associate white with him a little more than I should perhaps lol

I'm not really disputing it, it just didn't occur to me. Overall I thought your arguments were fine.

I do think for this sort of game you need to leave it open to several different possibilities or it will be too easy, and that can lead to something that needs a little bit of "creative thinking" to fit perfectly. I wouldn't want to take this too seriously.

 

[Philokles]

I was born into a prominent House with royal aspirations. When I was only a child, my elder brothers participated in a war to place our dynasty on the throne. I grew up into a handsome young man with a love of fineries. In my early twenties, I tried to become King myself with the support of my lover. However this brief reign ended abruptly at the hands of a relative. The pinnacle of this time was probably a tourney, which had an unexpected conclusion.

[cpg2016]

11 hours ago, Aegon VII said:

If you're going to try to correct someone you should probably check your facts first. I claimed Dragonstone was founded in 326 BC. You say this is wrong. Look it up. (I'll give you a hint, they moved to Dragonstone in 126 BC, that's not when it was founded)

But... you're still wrong?  Because it doesn't matter when Dragonstone was founded.  New York City was founded hundreds of years ago, but if I only moved there ten years ago, I don't get to claim I've been here for hundreds of years.  If you want to make the claim that House Targaryen has been around for 500+ years, you need to show that they've been there, not that something has.

 

11 hours ago, Aegon VII said:

Your entire argument comes down to you interpreting my statement one way and claiming that's the only correct way to interpret it. That is a very close minded perspective. Targaryens are one of the oldest families in asoiaf. They live in Westeros. Therefore, they are one of the oldest families in Westeros.

I mean, if this is how you want to weasel out of being wrong, I guess that's your business... but it doesn't make you right.  If I offer you a hundred dollars, and the give you 100 lire or something and claim those are "Turkish dollars", I may have found a stupid (and wrong) loophole, but it doesn't make it right.

 

11 hours ago, Aegon VII said:

A real world equivalent would be established families that moved from england to the US after north america was first discovered. For hundreds of years and to some extent even to today the "old" families were not the families that moved to the US first, they were the ones that had been established in England for hundreds of years as well. Having moved to a different area does not change ones lineage.

This is just... so dumb.  If the Windsors move to the United States tomorrow, they don't automatically become one of the oldest families in America.  

11 hours ago, Aegon VII said:

A whole order?

Well, yeah.... 500 vs 5,000 is an order of magnitude.

11 hours ago, Aegon VII said:

I never talked about high or highest at all.. So you're telling me to learn my words, but it's your own words your correcting because they sure as hell aren't mine.

Sorry, you said "prominence".  Which means either important, or famous.  Since everyone in the Watch effectively knows everyone else (there only being a 1,000 of them), the key word here is important.  And while Mance might have been the best, that doesn't make him important.

12 hours ago, Aegon VII said:

If Tyrion is in a room with 9 other people he is probably from one of the oldest houses in the room. If Tyrion walks into volantis he probably is from one of the oldest houses in volantis.

I'm not denying that your interpretation is more natural, or that it wouldn't be misleading or tyrion to say, "I am from one of the oldest houses in volantis". But misleading is not the same as false. It all comes down to how you interpret it, you are saying yours is the only correct interpretation and that is wrong.

Right, and I'm saying that if the way in which you read the question changes the answer, then it's a bad question.  I mean, I still think what you call a difference of interpretation, is grammatically incorrect, but put it aside from now.  Right now, the best answer to your question is Bran, because despite the ridiculous vagueness of your question, he is a more natural fit, even though some of the facts would be wrong (e.g. he doesn't "escape the realm" with his brother, who is still very much in the realm).

So yeah... under your "interpretation," the question is meaningless because it has no answer.  So it's a wrong interpretation or an awful question.  Your pick.

12 hours ago, Aegon VII said:

Thank you! It seems everyone's a lawyer on this forum. It's funny though because usually the law leans to the loosest interpretation of a statement rather than the strictest..

Right, but you're admitting that my interpretation is the natural one.  And there is enough vague BS in the rest of the question that if you are allowed to interpret anything any way you want, you get more than one possible answer, all of which are equally valid.

Look at my questions.  Each one, no matter how you "interpret" it, has one answer and one answer only.  Your third question (which is Littlefinger), is a much better effort.

[cpg2016]

14 hours ago, Horse of Kent said:

Otto Hightower

Orys Baratheon

These are right, obviously.  

[The_Red_Viper_of_Dorne]

On 7/19/2017 at 7:55 PM, Aegon VII said:

But Jon is supposedly a bastard, and very much identifies with the white and red of ghost and weirwoods, as well as the black of the NW, so I'm not sure it's DEFINITElY BR. And as others have pointed out, him being labelled a traitor isn't explicit in the books. But between BR deserting the NW, and killing other relatives (both in war and through the false promise of safe conduct), I have to think at least one brother felt betrayed!

 

 

 

 

Jon is too obvious though.