Daenerys as a "Villain" Appreciation 2.0, with new take

[Metopheles]

Ah we had that crucification thing in the other thread. Can we scratch that ? Just read the old one please.

[Metopheles]

There is absolutely no textual evidence for this whatsoever.

Actually there is. And I think she had to do it to be a correct character. She wanted the usurper's dogs gone, so there is the list who has to go :

Jon Arryn

Robert

Eddard

Amoroy Lorch

Gregor Clegane

Stannis Baratheon (think we can pardon him as he failed in his mission and allowed her passing)

Jaime Lannister(I think Daenerys will pardon him, as he did it not for glory, but to protect his family and the kingdom)

[Cas Stark]

Another fault w/the Meereen storyline is that by the time ever gets to Westeros the people who would have been deserving of her vengeance...those who really did betray her family...will already be dead. Lame.

[El Guapo]

Well her father's murderer is still alive and kicking (for now).

[Dany Girl]

Actually there is. And I think she had to do it to be a correct character. She wanted the usurper's dogs gone, so there is the list who has to go :

Jon Arryn

Robert

Eddard

Amoroy Lorch

Gregor Clegane

Stannis Baratheon (think we can pardon him as he failed in his mission and allowed her passing)

Jaime Lannister(I think Daenerys will pardon him, as he did it not for glory, but to protect his family and the kingdom)

Since she refuses to harm the child hostages even after her people continue to be butchered in the streets, I highly doubt she will kill the children of the "usurper's dogs" (ugh, I hate that term, she uses it like once).

Now if they fight her and die, it's because they're enemy combatants not because of who their daddy was.

[Metopheles]

Another fault w/the Meereen storyline is that by the time ever gets to Westeros the people who would have been deserving of her vengeance...those who really did betray her family...will already be dead. Lame.

I think, of all her "plot gifts" this is the greatest. And the one I hate. GRRM clearly made this so she wont kill anybody of the Starks who the fans so root for. This is quite convenient, to be honest.

Daenerys should have been able to kill one.

Now she will only face the man who helped her escape, the man who killed her father for his father and half a million lives and the bastard of her brother and his lover.

[Metopheles]

Since she refuses to harm the child hostages even after her people continue to be butchered in the streets, I highly doubt she will kill the children of the "usurper's dogs" (ugh, I hate that term, she uses it like once).

Now if they fight her and die, it's because they're enemy combatants not because of who their daddy was.

My point.

As I said before, no inherited sin.

[Skagosi High Chef]

1. No

2. I don't see that she has much to offer other than dragons, and yes she is more villain than hero, but mostly gray like all the others in power.

3. Yes, most of the Noble houses are guilty of the same actions and possess the same motivations as Dany, so I don't cheer them on. I don't think the lives of the small-folk would change much with or without her other than more of them being killed.

If she abandons her IT desire and heads to the wall to fight the long night then I will jump on her bandwagon. Also, if she turns villain all the way and does not try to justify everything she does and pretend to be moral or a savior when she is not, and just raises hell and acts like her dad, it would be great reading.

[RoamingRonin]

1. I support her because I believe she has the military power to the end the War in Westeros and she also has a solid claim to the throne. We've been told there are leaders fit for times of peace and times of war and Dany is fit for war. She also has dragons which should prove super effective against the Others. If not, she can end the civil war if nothing else.

2. I don't see her as villainous at all. Especially when you compare her to the people she's been up against.

3. Westeros is in terrible shape. It needs someone to scourge the place clean of corrupt lords and leaders. With a solid council and consort, she can rebuild from there. The Mad Queen people need to concern themselves with is Cersei.

[Don Roberto]

Not one of those masters is an innocent person. They are freaking Great Masters, they are directly responsible for the people in their city being slaves. They run the city, they order the training of the slaves. Every single one of those masters has the blood of hundreds if not thousands of men, women and children on their hands, whether or not they were a part of the crucifixition of 163 very innocent slave children.

Not to mention that the city is run as a sort of senate or congress, so the idea that any of them were not at least aware of the plot to kill 163 innocent children is pretty ludicrous. They knew, they didn't care.

Not my intent to start this discussion again, but she killed 163 random masters in retribution for the killing of 163 slave children, whatever else other "crimes" they might have commited. It was "an eye for an eye", hence the specific number; can hardly be said she only intentionally killed those of blame.

[Lady Fevre Dream]

1. Do you support Dany's conquest of Westeros?

2. Why or why not is it villainous?

3. Are the noble families (not smallfolk) really worth your sympathy when they've already done what Dany's trying to do? (I don't include smallfolk because each faction has disregarded them as pawns, so they're all guilty of it)

Carry on.

I thought I would just trim it down to these questions, for starters, and try and explain where I'm coming from in this equation.

1. I don't necessarily support Dany coming for a conquest of Westeros. I support her getting her ass there, the sooner, the better. I do think conquest might be the initial reason for her finally leaving for Westeros, but I expect when she arrives that she'll find better uses for her dragons and her troops, ie.........The Others.

2. However it works out, as of now, I don't think it would be villainous or that Dany should be viewed as a villian.

3. Your question about the other noble families leaves me with the main point I'd like to make:

I don't support one family, person, or faction for the throne. I'm not even sure there should be a throne. What I support is the idea that some members of all these families we have come to know are going to have to work together, make a peace, and learn how to work together and coexist, if they want humanity to survive. I think Tyrion's eventual/probably meeting with Dany will be a good step in this direction, and it will give us the answer to whether this is possible or not. At first, I wouldn't be surprised to find some of our factions fighting each other, but what I'm waiting for is the realization that they must join forces to win a place for humanity, then......worry about that ugly iron chair.

As far as Dany and crimes against the smallfolk of Westeros, I'd think her crusade, done rightly or wrongly, against slavery shows that she may just surprise some people and be the one that actually cares about them.

I know, my whole idea is probably pollyanna, but.....many of our main characters HAVE to start making truces and work together, or there will be nothing left of them, or anyone, in the end.

[Toking Targaryen]

I am curious to see how Dany will react to the existence of Aegon Targaryen, the rightful heir to the Iron throne. If she doesn't recognize his claim then she is a traitor to the House Targaryen. If she continues to seek the throne after meeting him then in my eyes she becomes a "decent villain" someone who isn't evil but isnt doing the right thing.

[Dany Girl]

Not my intent to start this discussion again, but she killed 163 random masters in retribution for the killing of 163 slave children, whatever else other "crimes" they might have commited. It was "an eye for an eye", hence the specific number; can hardly be said she only intentionally killed those of blame.

If this isn't the discussion you wanted to start, why bring up the killing of the ggreat masters in an argument that she doesn't randomly kill innocent people? Were you just trolling? Unless you really think any of those men were innocent? Well then, where's your textual proof?

[RandomSmallfolk]

This is my first day on these boards so forgive any ignorance here but I'm pretty sure NO ONE is certain that Aegon is an actual heir as of yet.

So.. to these questions...

On the first, I agree with Lady Fevre Dream in that her first order of business upon landing in Westeros will likely involve the Others.

On the Second, she has an agenda that at times requires less than moral acts, that does not necc. make her a villian in the literal sense of the word, it just shows shes a serious player in the game.

and Third....each family has a unique agenda. To each family thier respective agenda is likley very honorable to them. To be honest, most of the agendas I could side with have been so polluted or twisted during the game and have some many tangential little side agendas that I fnid it impossible to carry a certain sigil. I find myself rooting for individuals to succeed more than Houses at this point.

[Metopheles]

This is my first day on these boards so forgive any ignorance here but I'm pretty sure NO ONE is certain that Aegon is an actual heir as of yet.

So.. to these questions...

On the first, I agree with Lady Fevre Dream in that her first order of business upon landing in Westeros will likely involve the Others.

On the Second, she has an agenda that at times requires less than moral acts, that does not necc. make her a villian in the literal sense of the word, it just shows shes a serious player in the game.

and Third....each family has a unique agenda. To each family thier respective agenda is likley very honorable to them. To be honest, most of the agendas I could side with have been so polluted or twisted during the game and have some many tangential little side agendas that I fnid it impossible to carry a certain sigil. I find myself rooting for individuals to succeed more than Houses at this point.

Well welcome then! :)

And you are right, the consensus is that Aegon is fake, but there is pretty much evidence he is real.

The thing is, I would hate it. He is a great character, but he pushes Daenerys out of the line and by extend Jon. And I do not jump the ship if it doesn't burn as yet.

Even if he is real, Daenerys deserves the throne. The one that brings the dragons back deserves the throne of the Targaryen line. If they would say that only because of a second x chromosome she doesn't deserve it over the male heir...

[Lord Reaver]

1. Do you support Dany's conquest of Westeros?

2. Why or why not is it villainous?

3. Are the noble families (not smallfolk) really worth your sympathy when they've already done what Dany's trying to do? (I don't include smallfolk because each faction has disregarded them as pawns, so they're all guilty of it)

1. Not in the slightest.

2. It will be more evidently villainous when she continues her "Fire and Blood" and "Dragons do not sow" regime of massacring innocents and pillaging cities in Westeros. Since she won't be up against cartoon-villains anymore, the contrast will be that much greater, removing the excuses from those people who do so only because of the relative "evilness" of her opponents in Essos.

3. No noble family with the ambition of ruling the 7k from the IT are worth my sympathy (and yes, that includes Euron). My wish is for them to keep killing each other so the Iron Isles can be left to their own devices. So in that regard, I do hope Daenerys makes it to Westeros, if only to increase the amount of havoc.

[Toking Targaryen]

This is my first day on these boards so forgive any ignorance here but I'm pretty sure NO ONE is certain that Aegon is an actual heir as of yet.

Welcome, i am new here myself.

If Young Griff is indeed Aegon Targaryen, the son of Rhaegar then that would make him the rightful heir, he was alive when Robert took the throne, he is Rhaegar's first and trueborn son. By all rights the throne belongs to him. If Daenerys meets him and refuses to recognize his rightful claim then she becomes a traitor to her house. In addition refusing his claim will automatically make her unlafwul, unlawful isnt exactly evil but you dont have to be evil to be a villain, you just need to oppose the rightful order of things.

Well welcome then! :)

And you are right, the consensus is that Aegon is fake, but there is pretty much evidence he is real.

The thing is, I would hate it. He is a great character, but he pushes Daenerys out of the line and by extend Jon. And I do not jump the ship if it doesn't burn as yet.

Even if he is real, Daenerys deserves the throne. The one that brings the dragons back deserves the throne of the Targaryen line. If they would say that only because of a second x chromosome she doesn't deserve it over the male heir...

You say there is a general consensus that he is a fake, i wont argue that but i havent seen any evidence. In fact the evidence seems to stack in his favor. Bringing dragons back to the world is obviously a sign of great power and it is something that needs to be recognized and respected but just returning dragons to the world is no decent claim on the throne. The chromosome of the individual means everything, in our world promoting a man over a woman is seen as sexist and ignorant but Westeros is not our world, by Andal law, culture and tradition the first born male is the heir to any titles unless otherwise stated by the current title holder (I.e. King Viserys I and his daughter). Assuming he is indeed Rhaegar's son i dont see anyway around his claim.

[Metopheles]

That last thing sounds like my predictions of the final chapter of Dream when Varys and LF stand in the destroyed hall of the throne with ashes falling like snow...and not a soul to hear.

Seriously ? Who should end up on the throne ? Nobody? Genocidal extinction of Westeros ?

[Wmarshal]

1. Do you support Dany's conquest of Westeros?

2. Why or why not is it villainous?

3. Are the noble families (not smallfolk) really worth your sympathy when they've already done what Dany's trying to do? (I don't include smallfolk because each faction has disregarded them as pawns, so they're all guilty of it)

Carry on.

1. No, she has proven to be a terrible monarch, she can't a new toy till she fixes the old one.

I don't think it is villainous to want it, it is her actions that makes her villainous.

what do mean by this?

[Lord Reaver]

Seriously ? Who should end up on the throne ? Nobody? Genocidal extinction of Westeros ?

Indeed. Nobody should be on the Iron Throne. The Kingdoms should regain their autonomy.

If the greenlanders want to exterminate each other over the Iron Throne, though, I can't say I'll be too distraught.