Jump to content

Winterfell is Burning

Members
  • Posts

    6,379
  • Joined

Everything posted by Winterfell is Burning

  1. I'm not sure this is a good idea. Logan was already the perfect send-off, and that will make harder to a new Wolverine be accepted into the role.
  2. In the show, Daemon indicates they went to brothels together. But yeah, if he takes Alicent or some noblewoman as mistress, he can keep Rhaenyra as heir and legitimize one of the bastards if she dies before him. We probably just never heard about them. Doesn't mean they didn't exist
  3. Look how well that turned out. At the same time, he named Rhaenyra as heir before he had sons. (Again, it's marrying Alicent and having kids with her that really screws things up). It's not a slanderous claim, it's the obvious truth. And that was the point I was making regarding Alicent: even if she accepted Rhaenyra as heir, having 3 children who only an idiot knows that are bastards as heirs would be infringing Aegon's rights to be her heir (at least at that point). Perhaps you should watch this (or find similar content) Some of them might not know or care, but remember LF's propostal to Ned to keep Joffrey's real parentage in the back seat? The thing is that their status as bastards becomes a loaded gun that anyone can fire if they feel like it's in their best interests. It's a problem even if it's a lie, imagine in cases that are true.
  4. If Rhaenyra disinherits Aegon, his siblings, and she only has her bastard kids, then she has no heir. Also, would be a lot harder to make a case to disinherit a boy who at that point didn't do anything wrong than it is for Daemon, a grown ass man who alienated most of the realm. And I would hardly put much stock in 13 year old Aegon wanting or not to be king. Both in Westeros and real life, no ruler, not even an absolute one, rules alone (also, the Magna Carta has been around since the 13th century, the HRE was an elective monarchy even before that, etc). Even with dragons, the Targaryens can only govern if the society of Westeros allows them. Dorne shows that they can be beaten with the right tactics, and that was not even the strongest area in 7 Kingdoms. Moreover, the Grand Council wasn't just designed to get the lords on board, it was also to get the family and other claimants on board- this probably the most important point. Someone like the Velaryons, the richest family with dragons, can easily rally the troops for a bid to the throne. By giving them the chance to speak their case, try peacefully, and be soundly beaten (and other claimants try, and not even be taken seriously), shows their cause is hopeless and forces them to accept the result. If Viserys called for a Grand Council and Rhaenyra was an overwhelming winner, like Viserys himself was, then the Hightowers and anyone that wanted to support them would know it's a pointless affair to try to become rulers. By contrast, if Aegon wins, then Viserys is forced to accept him as the heir, and Rhaenyra has no case. There's a big difference between "the ruler doesn't like person A" and "person A has an excellent claim to the throne, possibly a better one than the ruler, that can be pressed at any time". It's the difference between some lord that Robert had a problem with before and Aerys' children and grandchildren
  5. Not that I like siding with D&D over GRRM, but in the show that makes zero sense, because the characters are all much older. Tywin is specifically mentioned to be 67 in season 4- assuming Aerys is the same age, that can't possibly fit. It's also worth keep in mind that, even if she accepted Rhaenyra's ascension to the throne without objection, Aegon would be the next in line after Rhaenyra, and by passing bastards as legitimate, she would stealing Aegon's legitimate inheritance (of course, she will have later Aegon III with Daemon, but at this point they don't know that)
  6. It's not an inherently bad decision to ask your consent to the people that you rule to make big decisions. It's essentially the basis of any functioning society. Jaehaerys was called wise, among other things, exactly because he knew that, and was not a tyrant. Your position of "if I don't like the decision the voters brought on, I won't let them vote anymore" is despotic.
  7. Considering that Rhaenys lost 20-1 just a few years later, I very much doubt it.
  8. Jaeherys wouldn't have done it if he didn't had doubts about a woman being accepted as Queen by Westerosi society in the first place.
  9. It's a better choice to just impose your female heir in a society that has disdain for women and hope for the best, which is what Viserys did. His method avoided a war of succession, Viserys' willful blindness didn't.
  10. When Jahaerys did that, there was a peaceful transition of power. When Viserys didn't, a civil war broke out and the Targaryens lost the dragons. Not too hard to see who was the smart guy. Heh...you might have missed that little event called Dance of the Dragons. Which only Viserys didn't know it could happen.
  11. Good question. I don't know, but it would be A LOT easier if he had no sons to dispute it, or lords that would prefer them instead.
  12. But is not less controversial, he's just an idiot. Aegon's claim is better than his (first born son of the king vs first born son of the 2nd son).
  13. Rhaenyra has no birthright to the throne. By birthright, the heir is the first born son, Aegon. That is the conflict, because Viserys chooses to do differently. By the system Viserys sets up- firstborn child inherits- then Rhaenys would the rightful queen in his place. That's why, again, Viserys could have Rhaenyra as heir, he could marry Alicent and have sons with her, but not both. Both in real life and Westeros started for much less (Daemon Blackfyre got half the realm to join him because of a SWORD. A freakin' sword!). It's also why posters insisting that Otto is "purely paranoid" for thinking Alicent's sons are in danger with Rhaenyra on the throne are talking non-sense. Even if Rhaenyra wanted nothing to do with it (and they didn't had much reasons to thrust her at that point), is easy to imagine someone on her side murdering them as a preventive measure or to gain favor, just like Tywin did with Rhaegar's kids without consulting Robert. People with that "Green=RIGHT!" mentality miss the point GRRM makes that war is an inevitability in a system where absolute power can be granted or removed just on the whims of one person or by who the parent(s) of said person is, or by, quite simply, murdering everyone else in your way. Both Greens and Blacks do horrible things not just because they're mostly horrible people (though they mostly are), but because they have a system that incentives them to do that to get or remain in power or to simply stay alive. To further illustrate the point, Rhaenyra has three sons who are obviously bastards, so even if by some miracle the Dance of the Dragons didn't happen when Viserys died, it would happen at some point when she dies. Also people seem to miss that Jaehaerys, called the Wise not by accident, knowing the potential for conflict, calls for a Great Council because he knows the potential for conflict, so the solution is to give as much people as possible a voice (of course, it's not a democracy, but it's an improvement). Yet Viserys, who won the Iron Throne with a worse claim than Aegon had, never even entertains the thought of doing the same, because he's an idiot.
  14. The people that oppose her would continue to oppose her- her not having children wouldn't be argument enough to bring a lot of new people to the other side, I think. Like I said, in the show, the age difference between her and Aegon would count in her favor, because it's big enough to be between parent and child. She could still claim the throne, but win at least some of his supporters by saying he would inherit after her anyway (in the books, the age difference it's much smaller, so it's another discussion.)
  15. That's not a cause for her to be disinherited. It would be perfectly understandable if he just bitter at the wedding, or begun to dislike her, but he went way, way beyond that.
  16. Her having 3 child who are clearly bastards also undermines her own ascension, because it opens a new avenue to be exploited against her (people can go to war claiming they don't bastards in the Iron Throne when she dies, or they don't want an adulteress as Queen- and of course, they would use much more offensive words than that ). If she couldn't have kids with Laenor, she'd better off not having kids at all. In fact, would make a war much less likely, since Aegon would be her heir anyway (and in the show, the age difference between them might as well be mother and child).
  17. It's because we're not only putting a face into the character, we also know the reasons he became so nasty and bitter towards Rhaenyra, and those just make him look even more like a creep (not that him disliking her wouldn't be understandable, but murderous rage that lasts for a decade is just pathetic). I did felt sorry when Rhaenyra turned him down, of course. But it's harder to after murdering someone because of it, plus being so spiteful for 10 years that even Alicent calls him on it.
  18. That is non-sense to me, for the reasons I pointed out many times before. If you think Dance of Dragons this is a story of good and evil, heroes and villains, then I respect your opinion, but I think you have been reading a very different series. Difference being when Aegon and Alysanne imposed their view, there was no one with the dragons to challenge them. And also that if they submitted, the kings of Westeros had no fear to being murdered, as none that chose surrender did. While even if Aegon and his family had peacefully accepted Rhaenyra's claim, they had no guarantee either Rhaenyra or someone from their side wouldn't kill him just to remove a potential threat (like Tywin did without consulting Robert). Not really. Just shows him as a dumb teenage boy. He'll become a real monster later, but that in itself is not a sign.
  19. One can easily argue that a king whose ONLY reason to become king was because he was a man has no right, or at least invites a war, when he chooses a daughter when he has male heirs available. Or that the king is no God and can't change thousands of years of tradition on a whim. Or like Otto pointed out in the previous episode, even if the heir by law, Aegon would be a threat to Rhaenyra just by being a man and would have to be killed. Even if she didn't want it, some supporter might do it for her (like Tywin later did with Rhaenys and Aegon). Or even if Rhaenyra had the right to ascend to the throne, the fact she is undeniably trying to pass 3 bastards as her heirs is itself something that will inevitably lead to war. Mind you, the real answer to me is that there's no right or wrong answer: both sides have a claim, and the entire fault is Viserys': he could have Rhaneyra be the heir, he could marry Alicent and have sons, but not both, and he made the war inevitable.
  20. It's pretty simple really: not only, as I pointed out multiple times, this idea that Alicent was an evil seductress scheming and seducing her way to the top for pure greed and evilness was clearly not what GRRM wrote (the narrators might seemingly portray this idea, but GRRM just repeating the type of ancient historians that would depict literally every woman with agency or ambition that way), it just makes bad TV for her to not only be a monster, but one that starts that way. So, people that bought into this idea of "Blacks=HEROES Greens=EVIL" are confused, while people who are not see it as it is: she was pushed by her father to a marriage to a man she didn't love, resulting in children that whose very existence can be a casus belli because of either having an excellent claim to the Iron Throne/having the best claim (depending on your POV), since Viserys insists Rhaenyra is the heir, despite the fact he only became king because the lords wouldn't tolerate a woman as monarch (whether Viseys is right to insist or not or whether Rhaenyra would be a good queen or not doesn't matter for this). To top that off, her father is dismissed as Hand, leaving her alone in court, and worse (the last part only in the show, but still) that happens in no small part because she sticks by Rhaenyra, who is then revealed to be manipulating her, despite Alicent for years trying to mend the relationship. Anyone would be at least a little bitter. I agree entirely about Rhaenyra. As for Larys, he's clearly a psychopath, and now he gets an inconvenience out of the way (his brother having 3 sons with the Princess, which could very well lead to him be caught in the crossfire if shit goes down) and he's now the Lord of Harrenhaal and one of the richest men in the realm.
  21. Will the people whining about "oh, Alicent is whitewashed" stop now? Probably not. Or maybe they'll move to "Aegon and Aemond are whitewashed" instead. Anyway, the series continues to get better, even with some flaws that make it not being top tier just yet.
  22. The problem is that the character doesn't work.
  23. Same here, unless Brazil wins. Then you suckers can kiss my ass, because we're the Champions of the World!
  24. Well, it's a national team, and they quit, not have been fired. But yeah, unheard of so many players walking out publicly. And considering how's a woman's team, apparently the FA president is a buddy of the coach, it's not hard to have suspicions...
×
×
  • Create New...