Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Hugorfonics

  1. NW fights armageddon, Gareds knowledge would be invaluable But the wall is not an independent realm, they're subjects of the king like everyone else (I meant hormones as in the countless crows that are excused for going to moles town for the night) That's not clear to me. The Old Bear knew Jon would desert and sent men to stop him on the way, I don't think execution was ever in Mormonts mind as Jon is too valuable for the undermanned NW. Which hurts the NW. And Gared wasn't near the first. Mormonts neutrality allows the world to continue to spin without pissing off Ned or whomever, but this isn't good for the watch. It's in fact really bad, allowing the others to grow strong. It's all absurd. The shield that guards the realms of men is subject to seven kingdoms worth of swords.
  2. Directly contradicting the aims of the NW Certainly not, just that Westerosi do I think so too. But the final word would probably not be execution. It's one thing to desert like Daeron another like a moment of insanity like Gared. When Jon had his moment of weakness Mormont related it to moments of hormones, ones excused. The Westerosi lords disagree, the ones with fire and steel
  3. . The Lord Commander took no notice of the irritating bird. "Gared was near as old as I am and longer on the Wall," he went on, "yet it would seem he forswore himself and fled. I should never have believed it, not of him, but Lord Eddard sent me his head from Winterfell. . The lords of Westeros have some final says over the NW. This is obviously detrimental almost anyway you look at it. But without neutrality means your a player. And when playing the game against 7 kingdoms there is no winning, only death. Although this is probably a good thing because there's plenty wrong with the NW, not specifically it's suicidal relationship with it's outer world
  4. That's a pretty good start date but it's acting like Pipen wasn't a medieval king which is confusing. Also not bad, my issue with that (similar to date the fall of (real) Rome) is Constantinople was nothing resembling what it was for two hundred years since it was sacked in the crusades. But I like the general line of thinking, so I'll push my end a bit from Bastille to Austerlitz and the final end of the final Roman Empire (Bastille is more romantic, but it's also easier to revolve everything around Rome)
  5. That's one way of looking at it. I always thought they the fact that nobleman didn't have to technically fight and the fact that they murdered a bunch of cuman nobleman thusly losing their entire auxiliary were the main causes of defeat. But facts, mongols didn't take castles and Bela saw that as the answer, by selling out his throne to the cumans and the kingdom to the empire. I don't know much about 1285 other then it happened, it was fought by solely Hungarian nobles not Germans? Facts. Who the fuck knows what really happened. Its hard to tell in the dark ages, that they called the golden age. But to my understanding the story pushed by Batu was believed by the contemporary Europeans,
  6. (ironborn loath it too, at least Vic does) For sure and this would definitely be a breaking point with the populace, but they dont have a say. However even the lords who turn a blind eye to polygamy and incest might balk at full on slavery. Thing is, slavery wont make sense. The Dothraki live like they do because of Slavers Bay, thats where they get their horses, steel and everything else they need in life. There is no Slavers Bay in Westeros however, and while the Dothraki probably like raiding more then farming, it just wont be sustainable to sell their subjects. Hes a brilliant tactician strategist and an on field general, why dont you find him a good judge? He says they can out shoot Westerosi Dothaki do too. And Mohi was like 20 years after Genghis. Its true thats the closest they got (with thanks to Bela who build mad defenses to deter the future Mongol advance, but not the Germans or Turks) but Id chalk that up to having a population, of like, idk, 500k? Ruling, like, 2 billion? Its mind boggling to think of their might. Plus Christendom just kept paying them tribute for like hundreds of years (although it was mostly to convince them to attack the Muslims) Depends on your definition. Most people say my definition of medieval europe is ridiculously off (they got a point), Id put the time frame from Milvian Bridge to the Bastille, so 19th century isnt really GRRM like lol. But im guessing you mean like War of Roses time, so 15th century? It was largely a numbers game and far from home problem, but for sure. They were viewed as the invader, the Dothraki however would have Targaryen in their back pocket I dont wanna judge until I see them in action. (Lord Umber was not chosen to lead becasue hes thought rash) Nothing is certain in warfare Id say it depends on the disunification, and with Lannister on the throne the pieces fall into play. I cant imagine anything more brutal then Tywin, he spreads fear and terror to scare his enemies (hear me roar), Dothraki do it because thats the only way they know how to get paid Yea I guess, Mongols did it lol. But they were an impressive lot. Anyway, unless theyre needed for defense I dont see why theyd be in Dorne. The Prince and especially his brother would love to fight alongside the Targaryens, even if its next to Dothraki or seemingly the Others Its extremely difficult to imagine Dany let alone her brother pardoning her jailor. But from the other side, I think Stannis betraying his king always bothered him and with his purity of the law at heart I think he could be talked into bending the knee (like I suspect he'll do with Jon) No, not command. But perhaps they could still respect/fear her Something everyone always does. Renlys camp wanted to take Brienne before the battle Oh. All he has to do is awkwardly slide off his saddle and half the army will mutiny. Theres definitely many chances of things to go wrong when you travel the distance of the globe to conquer unknown land. I just think they gotta decent shot. I mean, theyre warm blooded too. And I think it gets cold there, or at least cool. Dany is always draped in that white lion that Drogo killed for her. Seems kinda heavy, nothing to wear in the heat. If you look at a map the sea looks parallel to like Riverlands, so not northern weather but not dornish either
  7. I think the opposite. Quentyn already brokered an alliance with Dany and the Windblown, and while Doran will keep his sons promise I acknowledge others will be mad, like the perpetually mad sandsnakes or Yronwood. Aegon I see falling quickly with no other support, Dany may have Ironborn support depending on how that goes down but aside from that shell just make use of Aegons levies. Also if Tyrion becomes her hand and takes the West then its likely he gives his support to her. This will complicate matters with his wife who looks to soon be in possession of like half of Westeros, so like almost everything in asoiaf, it all comes down to Sansa
  8. The Dothraki never flay or burn people alive. Bolton and Stannis are eyebrow raisers (doesnt stop them from gaining allies and more soldiers), sure, but Tywins not. When Robb sacked the west its seen as conventional warfare. War itself is brutal by default. Yea but Dany was leading a sortie of vagabonds not a royal army thats equipped with a supply train You dont think it snows on the sea? I always thought of the sea as like Americas Great Plains, and according to my sister in law the blizzards there are so bad snow literally rises past the front door leaving you a prisoner in your own house. Now the seas probably not that bad, because scary winter is a northern thing, but I think they get snow sometimes, why not. And again, theyd just adapt. Maybe not like Liddle with ski shoes but outside of scary north heavy snows not a thing. I see no reason for either of those things to be true. Close combat sure, but Dothraki fight with bows and lances If theyre willing to follow him across the Narrow theyll listen to his battle plans, like they always have Shes not exactly a weak person either, true her dragons gives her that glow of Mother of Dragons, but shes still that shrewd clever manipulative Stormborn. Viserys would be awful, agreed. Totally would fail under his leadership. Jorah says they do Thats a strange thing to say when the Mongols conquered half the world, even hundreds of years later long after the invention of gunpowder the Comanche were able to defeat standing armies of Spain and Mexico, and countless bands of Confederate and American militias. Being the greatest rider and the greatest shot is a deadly combination. (Also definitely with the Comanche but I think even with the Mongols too, the Dothraki far outnumber their real life counterpart) Stannis is an impressive commander, but would he fight with Lannister? They just murdered his brother and put an abomination on the throne, I dont see Stannis risking his life for Joffrey I thought this was post Robert, but Ima be honest (even if I know ima receive flack) Roberts kinda meh. From my understanding most battles were won when half of his opponents switched sides in the battle, then theres the Trident where some nut with a Jesus complex decides to cross a river in front of an enemy army. The clearest battle we see Robert in was the Bells, which made him look kind of like a joke, Again, I thought he was dead, but yea hes dangerous. So his his son uncle and brother in law. (still known enemies of Lannister) Hes supposed to be a big deal because he beat Robert (he didnt, Mace did, lol jk), but I dont think thats that impressive. I wish we saw more of the Chuck Norris of Westeros so I can judge him clearer. I think theres more bad then good, for every one Imp you get a Jaime and an Imrey. (Because like the enemies of Meereen the Sunset fight with politics in mind, therefore the half cousin half wits will usually command of the army)
  9. Thats true, but most people in westeros generally hate their neighbors. Like Crangormen and Twinsmen, or Bracken and Blackwood. Their bows can shoot further then their western counterparts. If the combatants were like pro general Drogo vs brother Stafford then Id surely put my money on the Dothraki Of course they were. What? Mohi was the definition of a wiped floor. Bela IV and frankly all of Central Europe (consequently soon to be Western Europe) only got saved when Batu went back home to press his claim for khan. No they were not, but they obeyed. That Dothraki in the Brave Companions, iirc the one that chopped off Jaimes hand, isnt singled out. Also define everywhere? Because theyd only be attacking the ones that dont acknowledge Targaryen hegemony Why? Id think the Dothraki could gallop through the deserts relatively quickly Whispering Wood, maybe theyd be at a disadvantage, trees and such. BW theyd kill it, on either side. Battle at the wall theyd be very beneficial for either side too. I dont see the screamers failing at Oxcross or outside Winterfell either for example. Out of all warfare in asoiaf when would the Dothraki be at disadvantage? Westerosi are a savage lot. Up north they flay down south they burn, Seven Kingdoms in despair, the village around Darry for example isnt even a village, just corpses and gatehouse Ami. The dothraki arent known for that, nor do they crucify children like the Ghiscari. The Dothraki are bad, but so is everyone else.
  10. Maybe, either way it's a dead village See, Westerosi be wild'n. Besides, those guys were Karstark men, not Tywins. I don't think the fact that theyre foreigners really matters. Like the people and nobility hated the brave companions true but not for any xenophobic reason or anything. Like a lot of insults were thrown but they didn't have anything to do with being foreign. Why? Drogo can control his men, we see the Dothraki under Dany acting like a liberating army, practically unsullied like. The savagery and barbarianism (which is how Essosi think of the sunset kingdoms) are just stereotypes. (Not saying they're not savages and barbarians, they are. But so is Tywin and co) The public doesn't have much of a say. Besides my point was some lord is bound to piss off another lord in the distant future. Robb and Walder, Lannister infighting, Greyjoy infighting, etc. There's always an uglier fish. To me, the GC and a Targaryen invasion is a non starter. They served Bittersteel and are damn surely not going to put a red dragon anywhere near daemons throne. (But I'll just pretend you said Dornish or whomever because at a minimum we know Viserys and Arianna are supposed to get married.) Of course they'd have a unified command, which is I guess the whole problem. Literally almost anybody, like the last king of Aspator, would be better then Viserys. (poor Arianna, lucky girl) That's true but that was like a thousand years ago against an army that seems specifically designed for fighting Dothraki. They are prideful, with their bells and such. But that concept kinda means that they understand taking a L and moving on is acceptable, even if you're virtually starting again from level one. Besides, I'm not entirely convinced that a khallasar wouldn't wipe the floor with a Westerosi army.
  11. I thought it was at the start of war of 5. But if it's earlier and Stannis is mustering his forces to strike at Lannister then I don't see him impending an invasion anyway. The way the Sworn Sword is written makes is seem that these minor lords and their minor wars are a constant Westerosi are brutal too. They're the type to chop off wolf heads and sew them on teenagers, kill guests cook them and serve them to their cousins. It's true that the real horror shows like the acts of Tywin and Hoster committed lives decades later but they all do that, and I think in these two cases it was on purpose. I mean we see the smallfolk throw their prisoners in crow cages till they die of thirst, I don't think brutality throws people that off So they listen to Drogo and his bloodriders I don't think so. Plus in Westeros the jerk just needs to wait until his jerky neighbor out jerks him. Like if a RW situation happens then PR gets fundamentally shifted They can adapt. Drogos khallasar looked professional enough, Dany studied their strategy and utilized it later in her future campaigns. I don't see why their attacks would have to be uncoordinated
  12. Why not? I don't think much more then against any other kingdom. Ironborn are always raiding, so is Dorne and the Reach, in peace times. Granted the pushback from the community in the Riverlands, mainly against Lannister, carries substance but that's more to do with the magical leadership of Beric and later Catelyn. They can starve her like the lords declarant do, but if she's neutral then there's no need for hostility. If they respected whomever enough to cross the narrow then they can follow simple directions. Danys Dothraki under the leadership of her Bloodriders (who started off green as the sea) always preform their tasks acceptably. Can't hurt. It might be a bit of bad PR but it still won't touch Lannisters twincest and stuff Why couldn't they have their own commanders? Also they follow strength so like if Robb and greywind for example was leading a chance I'd think they'ld love to follow
  13. I think they had a shot, why not? The traitors will rise, undoubtedly. Mainly Dorne but it's hard to imagine Robb and Edmure siding with Lannister over anything. Lysa won't fight because she just won't. So out of the great houses alone a Targaryen invasion looks promising, then all the minor houses may make an early play as well like Tully and later Tyrell did last time. Castles huh? Westerosi themselves aren't great at capturing them, look at the Frey's siege of Riverrun in affc for example. But also look at thrice captured Harrenhal, twice Winterfell, twice Stormsend. Eventually Riverrun. All through trickery and guile. It's not unreasonable to assume Targaryen and Dothraki are incapable of bribing the one legged cook. And Dothraki are mean spirited? Well the last time Targaryen tried this instead of Dothraki they had dragons. I think Westerosi can expect a little meanness with a Targaryen invasion. The way I see it is Aerys lost because his army is actually other people's armies. Aside from the GC the king only commands seven swords, it was ok when there were dragons too but now there's not and the king must rely on his subordinates which isn't always great. So even if the Dothraki can't compete with a standing army, well they won't have to, that's someone else's job. They're there for quick raids and to spread terror and absolutism. Like dragons.
  14. I don't think all question if Jon was morally right from attacking Ramsay, just if the realpolitik is in his favor. Like an old argument was about the Ghiscaris economy (corporations are people too!), It's a no brainer that slavery is evil but is destroying it worth a potential worldwide economic depression? (I'd say yes) Now here, is defeating Ramsay worth the consequences of adjusting NW precedence when it's very institution and armageddon itself is in question? (Again I'd say yes lol, but mainly because I don't like the NW and find the pitiful crow to act too much like wights. A war against zombies doesn't seem that big of a deal when they act like zombies anyway)
  15. Yea exactly That kinda sounds right Lol. Yea pretty much. Although while Varys and Petyr are certainly detrimental to the regime they're also kinda necessary. Although it's probable that Petyr embezzled he also brought Robert and Joffrey unseen amounts of money, we see Cerseis govt going flat broke as soon as Petyr leaves. Same thing with the Spider, for example if it weren't for him the antler men would have almost certainly taken the city for Stannis
  16. For sure, but even that work didn't seem very pressing to me. It's different with Tyrion and Tywin although they're fighting a war so it makes sense why there's work to be done. Cersei too though, she's constantly working and expecting her revolving SC to work as well. And her regime is kind of similar to Roberts, mostly peaceful and a strong desire to reshape the dynasty and it's rule I don't think Robert had bad faith in Renly, or if he did it would be too political to act on it. Besides if the sc is type useless then the most useless job there is is master of laws only because I have no idea what they do.
  17. Run what though? House sitting for Balerion? Tbh I've never been that impressed with Robert and his SCs workload. But anyway, Barri and Renly leave KL and join Roberts party in the Riverlands, so whoever was feeding the cat wasn't one of them Certainly not appearance, with antlers on his helmet and his knights of varying color
  18. Renly seemed a bit dull I think if Stannis is able to take the entire navy and sail to his fortress without explanation or a return date, and remain master of ships it shows Robert is not going to fire his brother on almost any condition
  19. Renly is sort of like lead, kinda soft. Also in the past they thought it acceptable but that wound up just killing most of them
  20. I'm not that funny Yea that's my line of thinking Like when? I mean when's the best time to kingslay? I guess when Ghosts not around lol. Lol commandership, I like it. But I think it's just command. That's a good point. Yea, why not? Jon basically did it, Mance did it like once a week. Alliser straight up says they'll be seeing each other again
  21. Yea maybe I was just joking Yea when he drops out he endorses Janos. I'd think Bowen would have a decent amount of friends, I mean more then three people, and not all would be stewards, the fact that he didn't ask a ranger shows his confidence. Besides the minimum is 4, we don't know the full extent. I think they probably will. I think it's Satin because Mel said it'd be a betrayal from someone he trusts, as in not Marsh. And I think it's Alliser because he's a dick
  22. No way he's making it to the end, agreed. But Bowens been in all these books now and he finally did something exciting, I think he's got to flesh out a bit before he goes. Also not sure about villain. He's kinda racist and killed Jon but, idk, I'd call him an antagonist. I'd say he's a prong less then Alliser who's a few less then Ramsay who's way less then the Others. Certainly not bad, but I was thinking, why not just follow Jon to Winterfell and stab him on the way or whenever? If the plan was make it look like an accident, boar hunt mishap, well Ramsay Snow mishaps sound believable too. (It's not a days ride, they'd have to make camp and sleep) Can't really tell the king what to do, LC Jon and only LC Jon can kinda get away with it, but it's unwise for even the LC to tell him what not to do. And as long as his men do what Jon says I don't think it's interfering. Sketchy but not alarming. Lol, can't blame you. He's like a somehow worse version of Tywin but with a sense of humor. Although for me a sense of humor goes a long way which is why I rather like him and dislike Tywin When the giant is in heat or whatever and they advise is to lower your weapons, well Bowen couldn't have picked a less risky time I don't mean same page like ding dong the witch is dead, and I expect people to get upset, giant too. But not murderously upset. I just meant he wanted it to be in their face. He's not unpopular, aside from Janos and the joke candidates he was the last to pull out of the race in CB, he definitely has substantial support. I can't get past The Ides of Marsh, which has got to be the greatest phrase this sites ever produced. It really looks like it though, it seems the old order slayed the tyrant in the most public way imaginable. I do still agree it's easy to blame Alliser, honestly the fourth knife has to be either him or Satin, nothing else would add to the story. (Benjin? Ramsay? Osmund Kettleblack?)
  23. I think he was joking, in his Stannis Baratheon way. Like, he never actually gave a certain time or any endorsement or anything. He did lock them all in a room repeatedly but I would say that's minimal interference I don't see anything wrong with that either, the castles do need to be garrisoned after all, and Stannis begrudgingly accepted that the castles will legally remain part of the NW I would have. Even if it's breaking the NW neutrality and possibly writing the end for the NW and wall. I just don't really care about their neutrality, let alone their order or wall. Actually I guess I do care about them, and I'm pretty opposed lol. I don't think Bowens trying to cover up his crime, I think he publicly did it so the entirety of CB can be on the same page
  24. I don't think he messed with them that much, he heeded Jon's advise but that's more on Jon then Stannis For sure, and while Jon was their brother, so is Bowen. So while I think many will be pissed or confused or whatever they may not be immediately antagonistic either That'd probably be his first reaction, but if Jon wasn't popular then Leathers certainly isn't, and I think if he acts in vengeance he too will be cut down (probably through confusion, but maybe on purpose). I don't think Leathers is suicidal. Definitely interesting
  25. Nah lol. They were non believers, who cares about them. Plus her actions in pumping up Stannis brought her to Snow
  • Create New...