Rethinking Stannis

[Grumpygoat]

Stannis would make a much better ruler than Daenarys and her constant "the Usurper's Dog's will pay" bollocks.

Err, but Stannis tends to show some of the same vitriol towards the likes of Joffrey, Renly, Robb and others who've stepped up for the crown.

And Dany's all of...15 or so. And still in the process of unlearning a lot of the garbage Viserys taught her; Barristan's possibly one of the only people who's ever given her an honest view of Robert Baratheon.

And for her age and position, she's thus far did an admirable job at leading. All things considered.

[Arakano]

From an objective point of view, Stannis position looks bleak. He has only few men, and while his position an the wall has some protective qualities, it is surrounded by foes. He has: Nearly the entire southern nobility, the powergaining faith, the Ironmen and Dany against him.

Still, I hope. Because I seriously LIKE Stannis. I do not like the influence of Mel, but aside of that, he is great in his way.

But who knows, things might develop his way. If the Starks take a friendly view towards him, he might gain the North. Then, if he allies himself with one of the warring ironborn-factions and ends on the winning side, his position is inconquerable, except against the Others or Dany and her dragons. Which would Stannis end between Fire and Ice... well...

[ajah]

The main problem I see with Stannis is that he is guilty of fratricide, an unforgivable crime, as well as helping in the butchery and overthow of the Targaryens. There seems to be a kharmic thing going on, where the sins of each character become revisited many times over, starting with the overthrow of the Targaryens, the killing of their children, etc. I'm not sure I'm describing my thoughts clearly, but it's as if the characters literally reap what they sow. One example--Ned pays the price for fighting in the war to overthrow the Targaryens, and then washing his hands of it and going home to a peaceful life for a decade and a half. So he gets sucked into the downfall of Robert, because what he SHOULD have done was become involved, either by seeing that Robert was not suited to be king, or by sticking around to help prevent trouble. If Robert had had more friends/true supporters around him, he could have helped to control the relationship with Cersei, and the Lannisters, for example.

As for going to the wall, I think Melisande's actual goal is to fight her faith's ancient enemy---the cold power behind the Others---not to put Stannis on the throne. Therefor, now that she had manipulated Stannis to the Wall, she's likely to keep him there, not to follow through with trying to gain him the iron throne.

My last thought about Stannis is that he is not truly the rightful king because it is a throne stolen from the Targaryens. I don't agree with those that say that when the throne was taken by force, that the Baratheons became the rightful owners. The Targaryens founded the nation of Westeros--before that the land was split into many kingdoms. It was only the strength of the magic/bond with their dragon sigil that provided the strength to do that. The dragon is clearly the top of the food chain, both as a predator animal and also as magical creature---it is not surprising that the Stag, or the Lion, would not have the strength to hold the kingdom together. So the kingdom fragments.

[BastardSword]

I find myself thinking, for some reason, of the game RISK.

I spent way too much time playing it in college, which is why I'm not a doctor. OK, beer was involved in that too, but moving right along, while I was never all that good a player myself, I played with some good players, and I noticed that some of those who won consistently had a very conservative, 'come from behind' style. They'd hold one continent, consistently get the extra men, while the flashier players went head to head and eliminated each other. I once tried that style myself in a game with 9 players; I bided my time--I think I held something pathetic like Australia--till it was down to four, things started moving my way and I wiped two guys off the board in short order, then battled it out at the last with a guy who was the best player I ever saw. He didn't take too long to finish me off, but I felt better than if I'd won against a less skilled player. [Edit to say, in the interest of full disclosure, he and I had never played before and I probably only lasted as long as I did because he underestimated me because I was a grrrl. When I showed up at the weekly game they thought I'd fetch beer and chips and look purty, when I said I wanted to play it was like "Aw isn't that cute, she wants to play!" This was 30 years ago.]

Anyway, seems to me Stannis is holding something that nobody else wants (the Wall and the Gift), which can turn into an advantage if other contenders sufficiently bloody each other and if he's consolidated that small power base. If the Northmen and the Ironborn exhaust each other north of the neck, the Tyrells and Lannisters go at it over the Marge/Cersei fracas, the Blackfish rallies the Riverlands (and maybe even the Vale) to take Riverrun back from Ser Emmon who has a big "L" for "Loser" written on his forehead, or at least isolate him...and Dorne's a powderkeg...if Stannis just settles his wildlings, strengthens the Wall, and scoops up the Northmen who have had a bellyfull of Boltons...

As a favorite saying, also from my college days, goes...

"There is nothing less important than the score at half-time."

out!

[ajah]

...if Stannis just settles his wildlings, strengthens the Wall, and scoops up the Northmen who have had a bellyfull of Boltons...

As a favorite saying, also from my college days, goes...

"There is nothing less important than the score at half-time."

out!

This would be true if we were only speaking of a political novel, but there are supernatural forces at play whose nature is not yet truly known. There is quite a lot of foreshadowing that those forces are actually the cause of the conflict, and that the struggle for political power are just a symptom of deeper troubles.

[ItIsKnown]

Since Stannis killed his brother with the help of Mel for pure political gain, I don't think he'll make it to the end of the book. He may end up getting killed off up north. After all, as they say in the books, "kinslayers are cursed in the eyes of gods and men" etc. etc. And I think it would be too easy to make Dany queen. I think we may see someone totally unexpected end up king or queen.

Tyrion is a good candidate, even though he is supposedly cursed for killing Tywin. After all, Varys more or less gave him the opportunity, and Tyrion has had a lot of reason over the years to knock off Tywin. All hail Tyrion, the Imp of Westeros!

[BastardSword]

It's true the popular wisdom is that kinslayers are cursed, but what if your kin is a nasty shit (pun intended) like Tywin Lannister? Tyrion should get a medal for sending him howling down to hell, not a curse.

[Kelli Fury]

I agree with those who say Stannis has the better claim and would make the better king 100% I don't think the books will work out that way for him, but I think he's shown himself a much more effective ruler than Dany.

[ajah]

It's true the popular wisdom is that kinslayers are cursed, but what if your kin is a nasty shit (pun intended) like Tywin Lannister? Tyrion should get a medal for sending him howling down to hell, not a curse.

Too bad there's no hint that Tyrion is actually a bastard, and not Tywin's son.

[BastardSword]

Ajah, ya'll must be new around here

There are those who believe that Tyrion was the product of Joanna Lannister being raped by Aerys Targaryen.

This is not a BS joke, this is a real theory!

[R'holler]

Bastard Sword going back to your original message, I think that Stannis will be eliminated at some point because of Robert's bastards. GRRM has spent too much time on them and I think it is because they have some bigger role to play which they can't as long as the 'trueborn' Barathons live. I don't think that there was so much concentration on them just because they look like Robert and can prove that Cersei's brood are the product of incest. So at some point I am expecting Gendry and the other boy (Edric? forgot his name) to try to claim the throne as well.

However, I do think that Stannis will be around for the next book because I don't think he has still played out whatever Mel has in store for him.

[Grant Dempsey]

...if Stannis just settles his wildlings, strengthens the Wall, and scoops up the Northmen who have had a bellyfull of Boltons...

That would depend on just how much the northmen hate the Boltons now. Don't forget that Stannis Baratheon has allowed Melisandre to burn godswoods (the symbols of the First Men's nameless gods) to the ground and that most northmen are still going to be prejudiced against wildlings (even he himself recognized that by making a marriage to Dalla one of his conditions in exchange for declaring Jon Snow Lord of Winterfell). Even with the northmen's anger still burning from the Red Wedding, I don't think Stannis Baratheon will be perceived as much of a saint either. Plus, a lot of the Houses in the North have their lords and lords' heirs held captive in Lannister/Frey/Bolton hands. If they were to switch over and support Stannis Baratheon, they would be accepting the deaths of those hostages.

[cybroleach]

The main problem I see with Stannis is that he is guilty of fratricide, an unforgivable crime, as well as helping in the butchery and overthow of the Targaryens.

How can you reason that?

First Mel killed Renly. While Stannis suported his killing he was in no way involed as we find out from his convo with Davos later. Second, how does he help butcher the Trags? All he does is hold Storm's End.

My last thought about Stannis is that he is not truly the rightful king because it is a throne stolen from the Targaryens. I don't agree with those that say that when the throne was taken by force, that the Baratheons became the rightful owners. The Targaryens founded the nation of Westeros--before that the land was split into many kingdoms.

First his clame is throw his Targ blood, Thus he is the rightful king barring Dany's reinsertion. Also how is Robert's conquest any less valid that Aegon's. Furthermore, Agon's conquest was about asserting his power to become a Tyranical force, while Robert was liberating the opressed people from the mad tyranical rein of the King.

Also Aegon didn't found th Kingdom of westeros he conquered six and waged war on a seventh.

It was only the strength of the magic/bond with their dragon sigil that provided the strength to do that. The dragon is clearly the top of the food chain, both as a predator animal and also as magical creature---it is not surprising that the Stag, or the Lion, would not have the strength to hold the kingdom together. So the kingdom fragments.

Obvously the Dragon was to weak to rule as well as it lost the kingdom to the wimpy lil Stag.

lol, i guess you're supporter of incest to then as Dragon's don't mate with lesser creatures. And lion's only mate lions, and flowers can only polinate flowers.

The Targ kingdom never fragmented? look at thier history they had counless wars where the kingdom was fragmented.

[Carpe]

Personally, I cannot understand people who run with the "Targaryens are the true rulers of Westeros" opinions. I fail to see how just because one conquest was a few hndered years ago, that a more recent conquest is invalidated and wrong.

With that out of the way, I always see Stannis as wanting the throne solely for duty's sake. Were he to see Dany's claim as being superior, which personally, I disagree with, I think he would actually step aside. However, as long as he believes his is the better claim, I suspect he will contine to fight... no matter how hopeless his position.

[Grant Dempsey]

The Targ kingdom never fragmented? look at thier history they had counless wars where the kingdom was fragmented.

Still, as far as I'm aware, the lesser Houses mostly knew their place and kept to it. Those wars were, for the most part, between one Targaryen and another. The question was always which Targaryen a House would support, not whether or not a House would rise up in its own right. You didn't have Lannisters controlling and manipulating the Iron Throne, Starks declaring their own independence, Greyjoys leading conquests of their own, and, hell, Baratheons not only making their own claim as well, but becoming divided amongst themselves over it. The War of the Five Kings has been more chaotic -- more devastating to the order and stability of the realm -- than the wars which occured throughout the Targaryen dynasty (even if perhaps less bloody so far)

[Mutethunder]

Still, as far as I'm aware, the lesser Houses mostly knew their place and kept to it. Those wars were, for the most part, between one Targaryen and another. The question was always which Targaryen a House would support, not whether or not a House would rise up in its own right. You didn't have Lannisters controlling and manipulating the Iron Throne, Starks declaring their own independence, Greyjoys leading conquests of their own, and, hell, Baratheons not only making their own claim as well, but becoming divided amongst themselves over it.

The taergaryens had dragons then ofcourse, I would be fairly afraid of arguing with those who have dragons. And if a single house would try to conquer the throne, a dozen others would attack that house for more lands and favor from the king, who had dragons. Besides the greater houses still had control over their previous kingdoms, and would be content with the targ rule. Tullys got the riverlands because of the targs, Tyrells got the reach, the baraethon still had stormlands after, Lannisters had the westerlands and starks still got the North.

And at the end of the targ dynasty it was mostly Tywin who ruled the kingdom.

Stannis is not a kinslayer as it was Mels magic which killed Renly. And if Stannis still lives when Dany arrives with the dragons, he wouldn't be stupid enough to try attacking her. I think he would resign to be LC of the Nightwatch or something

[Steve Moss]

This is not a BS joke, this is a real theory!

A real theory? Is that like 100% genuine imitation leather?

Bastard Sword going back to your original message, I think that Stannis will be eliminated at some point because of Robert's bastards. GRRM has spent too much time on them and I think it is because they have some bigger role to play which they can't as long as the 'trueborn' Barathons live. I don't think that there was so much concentration on them just because they look like Robert and can prove that Cersei's brood are the product of incest. So at some point I am expecting Gendry and the other boy (Edric? forgot his name) to try to claim the throne as well.

GRRM's spending a lot of time and concentration on a character doesn't mean much when it comes to predicting that character's longevity. Ned and Robb, anyone?

If they were to switch over and support Stannis Baratheon, they would be accepting the deaths of those hostages.

Only until the first succesful battle. Once the Northerners acquired thier own hostages and prisoners, it would be counter productive to kill the Northern prisoners.

Keep in mind, historically medieval PoW were kept for ransom purposes, not as hostages. Those Riverland, Northern, etc. lords probably have extended family who would be unhappy to see them executed. The possibility for tit for tat, now or at a later date, is too high.

[Arakano]

Since Stannis killed his brother with the help of Mel for pure political gain, I don't think he'll make it to the end of the book. He may end up getting killed off up north. After all, as they say in the books, "kinslayers are cursed in the eyes of gods and men" etc. etc. And I think it would be too easy to make Dany queen. I think we may see someone totally unexpected end up king or queen.

Tyrion is a good candidate, even though he is supposedly cursed for killing Tywin. After all, Varys more or less gave him the opportunity, and Tyrion has had a lot of reason over the years to knock off Tywin. All hail Tyrion, the Imp of Westeros!

Yes, Tyrion will be king... Because he is:

1) A Lannister, which is at the moment the most hated family in Westeros (although readers hate the Freys more).

2) An ugly dwarf. Charisma, anyone? Most people rising to a throne were strong and good-looking. Their heirs might be ugly, but not the first generation.

3) The killer of his own father, which makes him accursed, as was said.

4) In NO WAY a relative of the Targaryen or Baratheon dynasty

5) Without any power of his own.

Fanboyism aside, there are IMO better chances of Moon Boy ascending the throne than Tyrion. The best he can hope for is Casterly Rock.

And as to the kinslaying curse, we have two options:

1) It is not actually a curse, but rather a popular opinion supported by the faith. In this case, Stannis has no problem, as it is unknown that he, through Mel, killed Renly. Tyrion, however, killed - as far as the smallfolk knows - both his father and his nephew. Cursed.

2) It IS real, and brings about a gruesome fate. In this case, both Tyrion and Stannis are doomed, which would be a pity IMO.

[Grant Dempsey]

Only until the first succesful battle. Once the Northerners acquired thier own hostages and prisoners, it would be counter productive to kill the Northern prisoners.

Assuming the northmen would even be able to get into their first battle before news of their turning over to Stannis Baratheon reached the Lannisters or the Freys.

Keep in mind, historically medieval PoW were kept for ransom purposes, not as hostages. Those Riverland, Northern, etc. lords probably have extended family who would be unhappy to see them executed. The possibility for tit for tat, now or at a later date, is too high.

It's already been stated numerous times that the taking of hostages can also serve to ensure that their families (or their lords -- if they aren't actually related) do not rise up again. The threat is that prisoners would be executed if the House(s) they belong to defy their captors. I don't think the forces of Last Hearth, for instance, would be very enthusiastic about joining Stannis Baratheon, with the Greatjon held hostage at the Twins.

Besides, as I said, the northmen have reason to hate Stannis Baratheon. I don't think he could be an outright positive choice for alliance, from their perspective. If anything, he would merely represent "the lesser of two evils". Even then, would the Lannisters' execution of Eddard Stark and the Red Wedding really outweigh the burning of godswoods (and forced worship of R'hllor) and the acceptance of wildlings into the realm?

[BastardSword]

Good point about Stan being challenged by Gendry and Edric (presumably Edric being safely gotten away by Davos means he's got more to do in the story, and we already have lots of set up for Gendry).

I have a BIG QUESTION, I realize I may have interpreted something all wrong, and I can't find the chapter I want (curse you GRRM for making it impossible to find a given chapter by not numbering them somehow or providing a TOC by POV):

I have been under the impression that Stannis believes that Mel FORESAW Renly's death rather than causing it. However upon reflection I realize that's totally incompatible with his sending Davos rowing Mel to Storm's End so she could birth her shadow baby.

???