Hodor's Aunt

If I was Dany I would let some of Cersai's army run

51 posts in this topic

Those people have seen the power of her dragon. She can hardly have any better propaganda than first hand accounts from the battle in the camps of her enemy. I would let people slip away on all hirachy levels. Not Jamie or the Tarlys of course but enough other commoners & nobles to let everyone know what she is capable of doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh yeah so would I. I doubt more then a handful would take up arms against her again but essentially clear dany's path for her by doing the following

Confirming dany had a full grown dragon (they only saw one but since they saw it they won't have trouble believing their is three).

making anyone who was thinking of fighting against cersei likely back away.

Most of the people who hear about it are either gonna join dany so they can be on the winning side or stay out of it. Essentially the fear the survivors would spread would do have her work for her by making armies surrender,run,or just have mass amounts of desertion. Your right about this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The people of Westeros have only been freed of Targ rule for less than 2 decades though. Sure, dragons are scary, and fighting them would take heaps of balls (like Jamie and Bronn seemed to show) but surely you would, ultimately, try to oppose them so that your children and children's children aren't ruled by the whims of people that are lucky enough to have flying, fire breathing monsters?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ummester said:

The people of Westeros have only been freed of Targ rule for less than 2 decades though. Sure, dragons are scary, and fighting them would take heaps of balls (like Jamie and Bronn seemed to show) but surely you would, ultimately, try to oppose them so that your children and children's children aren't ruled by the whims of people that are lucky enough to have flying, fire breathing monsters?

This is a fantastic argument, but unfortunately since dragons died out so many generations before many people will probably get nostalgic for the Targaryen era.  At least the Targs never blew up their sept or did anything Cersei did.  I'd like to think I'd be on the side of big balls Bronn and Jaime, but I'm not so sure others will see it that way.

Share this post


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

The people of Westeros have only been freed of Targ rule for less than 2 decades though. Sure, dragons are scary, and fighting them would take heaps of balls (like Jamie and Bronn seemed to show) but surely you would, ultimately, try to oppose them so that your children and children's children aren't ruled by the whims of people that are lucky enough to have flying, fire breathing monsters?

dragons had died out a century ago in the game of thrones world

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Hodor's Aunt said:

Those people have seen the power of her dragon. She can hardly have any better propaganda than first hand accounts from the battle in the camps of her enemy. I would let people slip away on all hirachy levels. Not Jamie or the Tarlys of course but enough other commoners & nobles to let everyone know what she is capable of doing.

Definitely. I don't know if they have the time to show it on the show with so little screen time left, maybe they would mention it in a conversation. 

Share this post


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

This is a fantastic argument, but unfortunately since dragons died out so many generations before many people will probably get nostalgic for the Targaryen era.  At least the Targs never blew up their sept or did anything Cersei did.  I'd like to think I'd be on the side of big balls Bronn and Jaime, but I'm not so sure others will see it that way.

True, re Cersie also leaving a sour taste in the mouths of the common folk. I swear, the High Sparrow and Mance are the only leaders that seem like they would not cause a people's revolution - and they are both dead. Why the common people haven't either risen up against all the lords and ladies, or just left Westeros, is really beyond me at this stage.

4 hours ago, snow is the man said:

dragons had died out a century ago in the game of thrones world

Yes, that is true - but still, dragons are an unfair magical advantage specific to a certain ethnic group in this universe. It's like saying only German people have warplanes, or something. I just don't see how the rest of the world would willingly accept it in any age - the only way Valyrians/Targs could ever rule is by fear and suppression of choice in their subjects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, ummester said:

True, re Cersie also leaving a sour taste in the mouths of the common folk. I swear, the High Sparrow and Mance are the only leaders that seem like they would not cause a people's revolution - and they are both dead. Why the common people haven't either risen up against all the lords and ladies, or just left Westeros, is really beyond me at this stage.

Yes, that is true - but still, dragons are an unfair magical advantage specific to a certain ethnic group in this universe. It's like saying only German people have warplanes, or something. I just don't see how the rest of the world would willingly accept it in any age - the only way Valyrians/Targs could ever rule is by fear and suppression of choice in their subjects.

For the same reasons we rarely hear about slave or serf rebellions in histroy. They happened and guess who won even though they had alot more people. 

Also they always have a king or queen and before aery's the kings that were targs weren't that bad usually. Aery's was a special type of horrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Lucius Lovejoy said:

This is a fantastic argument, but unfortunately since dragons died out so many generations before many people will probably get nostalgic for the Targaryen era.  At least the Targs never blew up their sept or did anything Cersei did.  I'd like to think I'd be on the side of big balls Bronn and Jaime, but I'm not so sure others will see it that way.

Oh, they blew septas, too.
Actually, there were only few decent Targ kings  out of about 20 - Jahaerys I, Daeron II (despite the first Blackfyre rebellion- that was Aegon's IV doing, really), Viserys II, Aegon V (may be some one else, but I do not remember).

Share this post


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

Oh, they blew septas, too.
Actually, there were only few decent Targ kings  out of about 20 - Jahaerys I, Daeron II (despite the first Blackfyre rebellion- that was Aegon's IV doing, really), Viserys II, Aegon V (may be some one else, but I do not remember).

most were very forgetable kings or only ruled for a very short time. I don't think most were any worse then most other kings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, snow is the man said:

most were very forgetable kings or only ruled for a very short time. I don't think most were any worse then most other kings.

You mean in general?
Well, Maegor I, Aegon IV and Aerys - were definetely worse than the most. Baelor the Blessed wasn't that good either, for example. Or Daeron I the Young Dragon  definetely wasn't a good king - a boy with army and no sense of responsibility.

But, yes, I agree that most of the kings didn't rule long enough.

Edited by Gala

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, it is not like Baratheons have been above average rulers. In fact, Robert was the best of them and if or not Cersei has caught up with Joffrey depends on if you count her actions before her coronation especially the blowing up a few hundred people and The Sept.

Of course, only Robert really was a Baratheon, but the claim comes from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dragons 7th Eye said:

To be fair, it is not like Baratheons have been above average rulers. In fact, Robert was the best of them and if or not Cersei has caught up with Joffrey depends on if you count her actions before her coronation especially the blowing up a few hundred people and The Sept.

Of course, only Robert really was a Baratheon, but the claim comes from there.

well roberts reign set up the shi* storm that came after. He essentially put the realm in an insane amount of debt for no real reason,corruption under him was epic,and due to him not doing anything or even trying to rule he let feuds set up and let the lannisters run wild. He may not have been as cruel as aery's or some of the other kings but his actions helped set up the current state of the realm. (though again he wan't nearly as bad as aery's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Robert wasn't a good king, either. I always thought that Robert should have never become king and it seems he didn't want it too. He would rather fight and whore. 
But let's be fair, Lannisters, particularly, Cersei, Jaime and Tywin, played a huge part to set up the current state of the realm and events. As well as, Littlefinger and Varys. Jon Arryn, the only decent guy, didn't have any chance to make situation better.

Edited by Gala

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gala said:

Yes, Robert wasn't a good king, either. I always thought that Robert should have never become king and it seems he didn't want it too. He would rather fight and whore. 
But let's be fair, Lannisters, particularly, Cersei, Jaime and Tywin, played a huge part to set up the current state of the realm and events. As well as, Littlefinger and Varys. Jon Arryn, the only decent guy, didn't have any chance to make situation better.

true but alot of that was because robert did absolutely nothing and many times would go against what jon arryn said. It goes through this in the books more.

for example in the books

 

Spoiler

Stannis said that janos slynt was known to be corrupt and him and jon arryn went to robert and said janos was corrupt,stealing from his guards,and actually killing people who offered to speak against him to stannis. Robert essentially said better the thied we know. This behavior led to horrific corruption and that can be as bad as a cruel king.

If robert had done anything or listened to proper advice then their effect could be blunted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, snow is the man said:

well roberts reign set up the shi* storm that came after. He essentially put the realm in an insane amount of debt for no real reason,corruption under him was epic,and due to him not doing anything or even trying to rule he let feuds set up and let the lannisters run wild. He may not have been as cruel as aery's or some of the other kings but his actions helped set up the current state of the realm. (though again he wan't nearly as bad as aery's

Tbh, even the succession crisis and the issue of Lannister Spawn Joffrey sitting on the throne is partly King Bob's fault. He was a shitty, neglectful father to both his kids and the realm, and maybe if he spent more time with them than drinking and whoring, he'd have noticed that his kids are suspiciously blonde, his wife spends a lot of time with her brother, his eldest child is a sociopath, his brothers can't stand each other and he's surrounded by Lannisters all the time. He just didn't care, even if it put him and his friends and family in danger. Can't stand the guy, his only saving grace is being better than Aerys and Joffrey/Cersei, which isn't saying a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in a story with nothing but sub par rulers, I really don't see how it can all end with this good ruler arising. Surely the whole saga is a condemnation of rule, war, feudal society and the often stupid things that humans believe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, ummester said:

So in a story with nothing but sub par rulers, I really don't see how it can all end with this good ruler arising. Surely the whole saga is a condemnation of rule, war, feudal society and the often stupid things that humans believe?

I've wondered if they will save human kind from the WW but fail to keep the 7 kingdoms intact.  Kind of like Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, White_Winter_Raven said:

I've wondered if they will save human kind from the WW but fail to keep the 7 kingdoms intact.  Kind of like Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire.

I'm still convinced that the walkers have some kind of lesson to teach the humans of Westeros and we the readers/viewers. Jon and Dany might defeat them but, if they do, I think they will realise their victory was a mistake, or hollow, after the fact.

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