Who will tell Daenerys the Truth, and more importantly, what effect will it have?

[Hoffa]

17 hours ago, Yucef Menaerys said:

 

Nothing mad about it, I'd do the same if I were Dany. Treason and rebellion should never go unpunished and she would set a bad precedent if she let the people who deposed House Targaryen and murdered her family go free. House Baratheon should be stripped of all lands, titles and banished from Westeros for life for the crime of rebelling. House Lannister should be removed from power for the sack of Kings Landing and murder of King Aerys, Princes Elia, Rhaenys and Prince Aegon. Casterly Rock should be given to more loyal subjects of the throne or better yet just keep it within House Targaryen, Dany can give it to one of her children if she does have any.

I will be a little leaner on House Stark because I believe Rickard was killed unjustly but I have no qualms about the execution of hot-head Brandon who stormed into the Red Keep and threatened to murder the heir to the Iron Throne and Prince of Dragonstone with a bunch of his thugs. Jon Arryn is dead else he would've been executed too for treason. House Tyrell should be rewarded with Storms-end because they stayed loyal and true to the Iron Throne till the bitter end. After this is done Dany should make sure her dragons breed so that her future heirs can be secured and ready to bring the fury of the dragon on all who plot rebellion or treason. No one will think of rebelling for another century.

That's a sure way to cause another rebellion. I think (and hope) Dany is smarter than that.

[Varysblackfyre321]

On February 13, 2018 at 5:24 PM, Bernie Mac said:

Absolutely. Robb's prime motivation was justice for his father, had he sided with Renly he would have achieved that, the North would be in better shape, the Riverlands would be in better shape (and Renly was willing to let him rule both) the Wall would have more allies and Robb, and his new ally Renly, would be in a much stronger position to help. 

The series would be vastly different, but yeah, Robb should have knelt to Renly. 

I have a feeling Robb would have; he'd basiclly get the right to be called king(something he didn't even really want in the first place-Greatjon put him in a position to where Robb would be hard pressed to not declare), his vengeance and won't have to worry about quartly attempts by the south to retake the north. I mean yeah he'd have to awknowlege Renly as his superior but that's a small price to pay. 

[Angel Eyes]

17 hours ago, Yucef Menaerys said:

 

House Tyrell should be rewarded with Storms-end because they stayed loyal and true to the Iron Throne till the bitter end. After this is done Dany should make sure her dragons breed so that her future heirs can be secured and ready to bring the fury of the dragon on all who plot rebellion or treason. No one will think of rebelling for another century.

Tyrells are loyal to no one.

[Varysblackfyre321]

On February 12, 2018 at 5:35 PM, Pride of Driftmark said:

At the end of ASoS, Daenerys learns the truth about Aerys. The Mad King's reputation was not fabricated. This haunts her throughout ADWD, and she wonders what sort of legacy she's truly inherited (I love this, btw). However, Dany is still blissfully ignorant about the whole story of the War of the Usurper. She still considers Eddard Stark a cold man who rebelled from some sort of psychopathic vengeance. Will someone ever tell her the truth? Will she learn about Rickard and Brandon, about the wildfire plot (this one's unlikely, as only Jaime knows), about Rhaegar and Lyanna (at least the commonly accepted in-universe story), or about the call for Ned and Robert's head?

That's not the major problem, though. The major thing that I am curious about IS WILL SHE CARE? Does Daenerys have empathy enough to not wipe out every Stark, Baratheon, Arryn, Lannister, and Tully (not that there's many of any of them left) when she arrives in Westeros? Will learning the truth about the history of her house and its conflicts matter to her? Is she too focused on her ultimate goal of Fire and Blood to change?

She never posits she wants to wipe out any of the houses that rebelled-hell she even mushed how she's sad she couldn't just pay Joffery off to step aside and allow her back her family's throne.

[Pride of Driftmark]

1 hour ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

She never posits she wants to wipe out any of the houses that rebelled-hell she even mushed how she's sad she couldn't just pay Joffery off to step aside and allow her back her family's throne.

I like Daenerys quite a bit, and I don't mean to be contrarian just for the sake of it, but what else could bringing "fire and blood to the Usurper's Dogs" mean?

[bent branch]

1 hour ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

I have a feeling Robb would have; he'd basiclly get the right to be called king(something he didn't even really want in the first place-Greatjon put him in a position to where Robb would be hard pressed to not declare), his vengeance and won't have to worry about quartly attempts by the south to retake the north. I mean yeah he'd have to awknowlege Renly as his superior but that's a small price to pay. 

Actually, Robb thought Renly was in the wrong. If Robb was going to kneel to one of the Baratheon brothers it would have been Stannis. It seems many readers are unable to put themselves into the Westerosi mindset to realize how offensive many of the other lords thought Renly was being.

[Varysblackfyre321]

5 minutes ago, Pride of Driftmark said:

I like Daenerys quite a bit, and I don't mean to be contrarian just for the sake of it, but what else could bringing "fire and blood to the Usurper's Dogs" mean?

Taking out the primary lords who were responsible for upseating her family from their throne-not exterminate entire houses. She hates slavery and slave masters but she grew so fond of the wards from the former wise masters sent as hostages she could not bring herself to hurt them-even if it appears the former masters were rebelling.

[Varysblackfyre321]

22 minutes ago, bent branch said:

Actually, Robb thought Renly was in the wrong. If Robb was going to kneel to one of the Baratheon brothers it would have been Stannis. It seems many readers are unable to put themselves into the Westerosi mindset to realize how offensive many of the other lords thought Renly was being.

Robb was more...pragmatic than people like to give him credit for. He tried to broach the ironborn with an alliance even though Balon would have been breaking his oaths for no just cause-because he needed the old man. Renly merely is asking for Robb to recognize him as a superior; he can keep a hard stance in public if it'd sooth his ego but so long as he knows whose boss there should be no problem.And how offensive is Stannis being? He is also trying to usurp his nephews throne, and he will not allow any sort of peace to which Robb could keep his crown-at the same time offering nothing but demanding all for a frivolous claim of the queen having had with her brother and her children are the spawn of in chest-whilst he admits he cannot  substantiate this accusation. He looks like bitter and evil uncle that you'd find in a fairytale.

[bent branch]

9 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Robb was more...pragmatic than people like to give him credit for. He tried to broach the ironborn with an alliance even though Balon would have been breaking his oaths for no just cause-because he needed the old man. Renly merely is asking for Robb to recognize him as a superior; he can keep a hard stance in public if it'd sooth his ego but so long as he knows whose boss there should be no problem.And how offensive is Stannis being? He is also trying to usurp his nephews throne, and he will not allow any sort of peace to which Robb could keep his crown-at the same time offering nothing but demanding all for a frivolous claim he admits he cannot  substantiate.

You're totally ignoring all those older brothers' attitudes to younger brothers' place. The pragmatic older brother who was depending on social traditions to keep his younger brother loyal to him would not encourage Renly.

[Varysblackfyre321]

3 minutes ago, bent branch said:

You're totally ignoring all those older brothers' attitudes to younger brothers' place. The pragmatic older brother who was depending on social traditions to keep his younger brother loyal to him would not encourage Renly.

Does Robb want his children under the fear of Bran should he die? And again Stannis is offering nothing and demanding Robb concede everything all for a claim he can not substantiate and that sounds ridiculous-Renly is offering Robb wants and needs to win the war and his vegence and keep the pride of being King-out of the two Robb would likely go with the brother whose at least offering him something.

[Rosetta Stone]

1 hour ago, Pride of Driftmark said:

I like Daenerys quite a bit, and I don't mean to be contrarian just for the sake of it, but what else could bringing "fire and blood to the Usurper's Dogs" mean?

The Baratheons are not going to step aside to give Dany back her throne which is just like the Boltons are not going to step aside to give Winterfell back to the Starks.  We have established during these talks that Dany has as much right to her father's throne as the Stark have to Winterfell.  It will take force to remove the Baratheons from the throne. 

[bent branch]

36 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Does Robb want his children under the fear of Bran should he die? And again Stannis is offering nothing and demanding Robb concede everything all for a claim he can not substantiate and that sounds ridiculous-Renly is offering Robb wants and needs to win the war and his vegence and keep the pride of being King-out of the two Robb would likely go with the brother whose at least offering him something.

What, you mean how Joffrey, Tommen, Myrcella and Shireen have to fear uncle Renly? This hypocrisy of Renly supporters is what makes them so frustrating. Anyhow, if Renly had offered Robb what he wanted, then Robb might not have turned him down.

[Varysblackfyre321]

10 minutes ago, bent branch said:

What, you mean how Joffrey, Tommen, Myrcella and Shireen have to fear uncle Renly?

They fear their evil uncle Stannis the same way.

 

11 minutes ago, bent branch said:

his hypocrisy of Renly supporters is what makes them so frustrating. Anyhow, if Renly had offered Robb what he wanted, then Robb might not have turned him down.

Robb never even heard what Renly has proposed; Caitlyn was sent to him as an emissary to hash out whether or not there could be a potential alliance between the  kings; clearly was not so adverse with working with Renly to achieve his goals.

[bent branch]

43 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

They fear their evil uncle Stannis the same way.

 

Robb never even heard what Renly has proposed; Caitlyn was sent to him as an emissary to hash out whether or not there could be a potential alliance between the  kings; clearly was not so adverse with working with Renly to achieve his goals.

Difference between Stannis and Renly? Renly believes he is actually intending to kill his blood relatives. Stannis is only doing what he is doing because he doesn't believe them to be his blood relatives.

Robb wasn't going to accept Renly's proposal. Renly was demanding that Robb bend the knee and that wasn't on the table.

ETA: Argh, I just realized what thread we're in. I'm going to end my part here.

[Varysblackfyre321]

12 minutes ago, bent branch said:

Difference between Stannis and Renly? Renly believes he is actually intending to kill his blood relatives. Stannis is only doing what he is doing because he doesn't believe them to be his blood relatives.

Robb wasn't going to accept Renly's proposal. Renly was demanding that Robb bend the knee and that wasn't on the table.

ETA: Argh, I just realized what thread we're in. I'm going to end my part here.

Fair. This discussion could derail(not that taking diffrent objects of discussion is always bad in threads)  the thread and has very little relavance to the original topic. I do not blame you for ending it.

[Quoth the raven,]

The truth as you call it is not really important.  Dany will not treat the sons and daughters of the Usurper and his supporters any differently as long as they don't put up a fight.  Should they put up a fight then they will be treated like any other people who fought against Aegon the Conqueror.  Bend the knee like Torrhen Stark and they will be spared.  Resist their rightful ruler and they will get a fight.  Aegon had no claim to Westeros.  None whatsoever.  He still prevailed and ruled.  Dany does have rightful claim.  There is little reason to resist and oppose especially in light of the mess that the previous (Robert, Jon, Ned, Balon, Renly, Robb) and current (Joffrey, Tommen, Stannis) left the kingdom.  The people will welcome a change.

[Hoffa]

1 hour ago, Quoth the raven, said:

The truth as you call it is not really important.  Dany will not treat the sons and daughters of the Usurper and his supporters any differently as long as they don't put up a fight.  Should they put up a fight then they will be treated like any other people who fought against Aegon the Conqueror.  Bend the knee like Torrhen Stark and they will be spared.  Resist their rightful ruler and they will get a fight.  Aegon had no claim to Westeros.  None whatsoever.  He still prevailed and ruled.  Dany does have rightful claim.  There is little reason to resist and oppose especially in light of the mess that the previous (Robert, Jon, Ned, Balon, Renly, Robb) and current (Joffrey, Tommen, Stannis) left the kingdom.  The people will welcome a change.

Source please. And don't say Viserys. 

The mess they left behind? Because the targs never wared? How about the mess after the dance of the dragons? I guess that doesnt count as it doesnt fit your narrative. You are incredibly biased and thus impossible to discuss with. You should seriously consider talking exclusively to a mirror.  

[LiveFirstDieLater]

11 hours ago, Pride of Driftmark said:

I like Daenerys quite a bit, and I don't mean to be contrarian just for the sake of it, but what else could bringing "fire and blood to the Usurper's Dogs" mean?

I agree with you here, and there is actually a bigger issue...

Why does Dany want to invade Westeros?

She’s not intending on reestablishing the Targaryen dynasty... she doesn’t believe she can have children. Even if she succeeded she’d just be setting up a succession crisis after her death.

There’s no greater good she’s battling for, she knows her invasion will mean fire and blood. Her two biggest Westerosi allies are a man condemned to die for selling slaves and the Lord Commander of the Usurper’s Kingsguard.

So it’s really just about personal entitlement and revenge... not that she’s incapable of forgiveness, and as others have pointed out, Robert, Ned and Tywin are dead.

I do find it interesting that we never really heard the story she was told about Rhaegar, except that he died for the woman he loved... and I believe she is Lyanna’s daughter anyway, so take it all with a grain of tinfoil.

[zandru]

3 hours ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

She’s not intending on reestablishing the Targaryen dynasty... she doesn’t believe she can have children. Even if she succeeded she’d just be setting up a succession crisis after her death.

There’s no greater good she’s battling for, she knows her invasion will mean fire and blood. Her two biggest Westerosi allies are a man condemned to die for selling slaves and the Lord Commander of the Usurper’s Kingsguard.

So it’s really just about personal entitlement and revenge

I disagree with all of this. (1) Daenerys could "re-establish the Targaryen dynasty" by naming a successor; anyone, but likely she'd select someone who was a strong ally and of some Valyrian blood. The heir doesn't need to come out of her own body. So, no "succession crisis", either.

(2) No greater good? She's stated a number of times that her goal is to free Westeros from the misrule of the Baratheons. We, the readers, know that Robert bankrupted the treasury and drove the realm deeply into debt. As his "descendants" and Cersei take over, this increasing deficit spending is compounded by foolish decisions to empower the Church of the Seven, the War of the Five Illegitimate Kings, famine, and destruction of infrastructure. Dany thinks she can restore normalcy, at the very least. Her goal is to rule as a good Queen/Khaleesi, and she's stayed in Meereen with the (apparently doomed) hope of learning the skills of ruling well. That she's made the effort means a lot. Bobbie Baratheon figured all he needed to do was kick back and let other people do the work.

(2b&c) Jorah sold a few slaves and he's done with that. He's also been punished, and pardoned (let's not talk too much about that one). And you're also talking about a Kingsguard of Aerys II, Dany's father. Who also rescued her father from Duskendale, fought for him, and remained loyal to the end. What's the problem with Barristan again?

(3) Less "revenge" than restoration of the rightful dynasty, who she believes has a better record of ruling than the clowncar of Baratheons and Baratheon pretenders that followed. Hard to argue with that one.

[LiveFirstDieLater]

1 hour ago, zandru said:

I disagree with all of this. (1) Daenerys could "re-establish the Targaryen dynasty" by naming a successor; anyone, but likely she'd select someone who was a strong ally and of some Valyrian blood. The heir doesn't need to come out of her own body. So, no "succession crisis", either.

3 big problems with this... First, who would she name? Second, if the heir isn’t her blood, it’s not the Targaryen Dynasty. Third, this seems like a recipe for a succession crisis.

Quote

(2) No greater good? She's stated a number of times that her goal is to free Westeros from the misrule of the Baratheons. We, the readers, know that Robert bankrupted the treasury and drove the realm deeply into debt. As his "descendants" and Cersei take over, this increasing deficit spending is compounded by foolish decisions to empower the Church of the Seven, the War of the Five Illegitimate Kings, famine, and destruction of infrastructure. Dany thinks she can restore normalcy, at the very least. Her goal is to rule as a good Queen/Khaleesi, and she's stayed in Meereen with the (apparently doomed) hope of learning the skills of ruling well. That she's made the effort means a lot. Bobbie Baratheon figured all he needed to do was kick back and let other people do the work.

I think you’re missing the point here... Robert’s rational for taking the throne was revenge, justice, and end the horrible rule of a mad king. Doesn’t this sound exactly like what you’re describing? There is no evidence that Dany is capable of a more peaceful or successful rule. She lined the roads for miles with crucified “subjects”. The expression, “the road to Hell is paved with good intentions”, springs to mind. Even her calling card, “breaker of chains”, doesn’t apply to Westeros where slavery is already banned.

Enter Jorah... the fugitive...

Quote

(2b&c) Jorah sold a few slaves and he's done with that. He's also been punished, and pardoned (let's not talk too much about that one). And you're also talking about a Kingsguard of Aerys II, Dany's father. Who also rescued her father from Duskendale, fought for him, and remained loyal to the end. What's the problem with Barristan again?

Selling men into slavery isn’t exactly a misdemeanor where it’s all cool after a little bit. But ya, we can move on, the guy isn’t anyone’s idea of a hero.

Barristan wasn’t loyal to the end... I don’t hate Barry, he’s a badass old dude, but he doesn’t hold a candle to the rest of Aery’s Kingsguard in that regard, Kingslayer excluded for obvious reasons...

Quote

"Ser Willem Darry is fled to Dragonstone, with your queen and Prince Viserys. I thought you might have sailed with him."

"Ser Willem is a good man and true," said Ser Oswell. 

"But not of the Kingsguard," Ser Gerold pointed out. "The Kingsguard does not flee."

Barry might be good but he didn’t stay true...

Quote

(3) Less "revenge" than restoration of the rightful dynasty, who she believes has a better record of ruling than the clowncar of Baratheons and Baratheon pretenders that followed. Hard to argue with that one.

There is no such thing as a “rightful” dynasty... that’s some divine right bullshit. The Targaryens took power with fire and blood, it’s some unbelievably hypocritical shit to pretend otherwise.

And anyway, all evidence points toward Tywin (you know that other Usurper’s dog) being the one who ran the realm so well during Aerys’s reign.

There isn’t any reason to believe the Targaryens make better (or worse) monarchs than anyone else. They just have dragons (might makes right).