Dany is going to conquer most of known Essos

[Wmarshal]

From what we see in WH, scorpians are usually stationed in position in peace time.

[Hodor's Dragon]

Stormcload hatched while aegon was a babe.

I haven't read TPATQ, but the wiki says the dragon egg was placed in Aegon's cradle and hatched "eventually," and that Aegon was 9 when the dragon died. Do you have anything more definite than that? "Eventually" could mean almost anything and suggests that it took a good while.

[Wmarshal]

No, I fear not.

[Creticus]

Arrows still got though his hide.

So? I've had particularly stiff hairs pierce the skin of my palm, but that doesn't mean I can die by being perforated with hairs. For a wound to be lethal, it has to be both deep enough and wide enough, which is where the poor lethality of bows come in. Anything capable of penetrating dragon-hide is going to have a small head, which is all the worse because it plugs the wound in the process.

Young dragons are obviously not immune to arrows, but it sounds pretty unreliable.

[Hippocras]

Hippocras, unless a city has only three guys guarding it, the rest would have time to call the whole watch and arm up.

Generally a city that doesn't even dream it will be attacked merely has lookouts, not armies manning the walls. The armies can be roused at short notice of course - but for the speed of an approaching army by ground or sea, not the air.

Obviously not very many cities could be taken by surprise this way, but Qarth could. That would be the prime candidate for such an attack.

Meanwhile Volantis will fall because of slave revolts and Dany will probably use the Dothraki to destroy Yunkai. I would think those would be the major targets at the top of her list. The rest of the slave cities would be a slower campaign that she would leave to the Dothraki while she heads to Westeros.

I do NOT believe the Dothraki will ever go to Westeros. They will be turned from slavers into anti-slavery enforcers.

[OldGimletEye]

I do NOT believe the Dothraki will ever go to Westeros. They will be turned from slavers into anti-slavery enforcers.

This idea that Dany will turn the Dothraki into a bunch of crusading abolitionist who will sing The Battle Hymn of The Republic, as they march from one slave city to the next, is absurd.

[Hippocras]

.This idea that Dany will turn the Dothraki into a bunch of crusading abolitionist who will sing The Battle Hymn of The Republic, as they march to one slave city to the next, is absurd.

It certainly is absurd if you describe it that way!

But no, that is not the vision.

She will conquer the Dothraki by defeating their Khals with Drogon. Because she won the fight, and rides the best mount, she will be Khal and her word will be law. The First thing she will do is demand their slaves all be freed. She will also give them the choice of staying with the Khalasar or leaving. The ones who stay will be armed. With armed ex-slaves among them, the rest will be asking for big trouble if they try to take slaves again.

She will tell the Dothraki they can take whatever city they want as long as that city practices slavery currently, and as long as they free the slaves they find. This will be fine with the Dothraki because they like sacking cities.

[Wmarshal]

Qarth, perhaps, their arrogance for never being sack shows a lot of lack of man power. Their city is in no where land, they should be less cocky.

[Hodor's Dragon]

It certainly is absurd if you describe it that way!

But no, that is not the vision.

She will conquer the Dothraki by defeating their Khals with Drogon. Because she won the fight, and rides the best mount, she will be Khal and her word will be law. The First thing she will do is demand their slaves all be freed. She will also give them the choice of staying with the Khalasar or leaving. The ones who stay will be armed. With armed ex-slaves among them, the rest will be asking for big trouble if they try to take slaves again.

She will tell the Dothraki they can take whatever city they want as long as that city practices slavery currently, and as long as they free the slaves they find. This will be fine with the Dothraki because they like sacking cities.

It's a complex idea. If the Dothraki can only sack certain cities, and then they can only sack them once (unless they revert to slavery), that's a change to their entire lifestyle.

Can a single person enforce that? I think the Dothraki way would be to challenge the khal(eesi, in this case). And of course Dany says "You choose your weapon, mine is Drogon." But at some point the Dothraki, if they can't defeat her, either have to all accept that or fracture. You'd think that fracturing would be most likely, and almost certainly one or more of the split-off khalasars would go after Dany and Drogon with the Dothraki weapon of choice, horse archers, which is a very difficult weapon for a young dragon to deal with. While Dany and Drogon can probably win any battle of single combat, going against a horde is a different matter entirely - unless her own horde is bigger, and protects her.

Like I said, it gets complicated.

[Hippocras]

It's a complex idea. If the Dothraki can only sack certain cities, and then they can only sack them once (unless they revert to slavery), that's a change to their entire lifestyle.

Can a single person enforce that? I think the Dothraki way would be to challenge the khal(eesi, in this case). And of course Dany says "You choose your weapon, mine is Drogon." But at some point the Dothraki, if they can't defeat her, either have to all accept that or fracture. You'd think that fracturing would be most likely, and almost certainly one or more of the split-off khalasars would go after Dany and Drogon with the Dothraki weapon of choice, horse archers, which is a very difficult weapon for a young dragon to deal with. While Dany and Drogon can probably win any battle of single combat, going against a horde is a different matter entirely - unless her own horde is bigger, and protects her.

Like I said, it gets complicated.

Yeah there is no obvious way things are going to go with the Dothraki, but once she has one Khalasar under her belt, it will be easier and easier to gather up the rest. So really her main test is this first confrontation where we left her.

[OldGimletEye]

It certainly is absurd if you describe it that way!

But no, that is not the vision.

She will conquer the Dothraki by defeating their Khals with Drogon. Because she won the fight, and rides the best mount, she will be Khal and her word will be law. The First thing she will do is demand their slaves all be freed. She will also give them the choice of staying with the Khalasar or leaving. The ones who stay will be armed. With armed ex-slaves among them, the rest will be asking for big trouble if they try to take slaves again.

She will tell the Dothraki they can take whatever city they want as long as that city practices slavery currently, and as long as they free the slaves they find. This will be fine with the Dothraki because they like sacking cities.

The reason I described it that way is because the entire notion deserves ridicule.

I think your theory of how this all goes done is based on wishful thinking. In order to believe it, I would have to believe that people are willing to forego what they percieve as being their own material interest. I would have to believe that deeply ingrained cultural practices could be changed in a few months. Sorry, I am not seeing it.

The Dothraki don't do labor. They percieve themselves as being warriors. Taking their slaves from them would require them to actually provide labor services for themselves. I don't see it happening. The Dothraki look down upon doing routine manual labor. In their eyes, it's beneath them.

I know the counter argument will be "but, but the Dothraki follow strength and Dany is the strongest, so ergo they will allow follow Dany and do whatever she commands." But, you really have to ask yourself why the Dothraki follow the strongest leader. Could it be because the Dothraki believe that by doing so they are advancing their own material interest?

And yeah, the Dothraki like plundering cities all right. They also enjoy killing people and raping them as well. When they get to Yunkai, or wherever, it's probably not going to be just the Wise Masters that get raped and killed. It's probably going to be some freedman and slaves too.

[Hippocras]

Well unless you are proposing she just burns the Dothraki rather than using them for what she wants to achieve I don't see where you think her story is going. You think she is just going to give up HER values? Because that is even more "worthy of ridicule".

[OldGimletEye]

Well unless you are proposing she just burns the Dothraki rather than using them for what she wants to achieve I don't see where you think her story is going. You think she is just going to give up HER values? Because that is even more "worthy of ridicule".

Short Answer:

Dany will probably have to comprimise a great deal on her values.

Longer Answer:

Nope, I think Dany will get a great number of Dothraki to follow her. But most likely she'll have to make a great deal of moral/ethical comprises to do so. She'll get some sort of resolution in Essos, but it isn't going to be as neat and clean as some Dany fans would like to believe.

This idea that the application of raw military power can solve the complex social, political, and economic problems that Dany faces is, I believe, stunningly naive. Too many Dany fans just assume that all of Dany's or Essos' problems can be solved by saying "Dracrays" enough times. Given GRRM's apparent views about war, I doubt he believes that the solution to many of Dany's or Essos' problems is just a matter of finding another army or just firebombing something.

The bottom line is that, I think, Dany will get some sort of resolution in Essos. But, I think she is going to get very soiled in the process.

[Hodor's Dragon]

Short Answer:

Dany will probably have to comprimise a great deal on her values.

Longer Answer:

Nope, I think Dany will get a great number of Dothraki to follow her. But most likely she'll have to make a great deal of moral/ethical comprises to do so. She'll get some sort of resolution in Essos, but it isn't going to be as neat and clean as some Dany fans would like to believe.

This idea that the application of raw military power can solve the complex social, political, and economic problems that Dany faces is, I believe, stunningly naive. Too many Dany fans just assume that all of Dany's or Essos' problems can be solved by saying "Dracrays" enough times. Given GRRM's apparent views about war, I doubt he believes that the solution to many of Dany's or Essos' problems is just a matter of finding another army or just firebombing something.

The bottom line is that, I think, Dany will get some sort of resolution in Essos. But, I think she is going to get very soiled in the process.

We do know, though, that Dany has already absorbed a number of Dothraki into her following, and that not all of them are women, children and the old, and we also know that they follow her absolutely and implicitly.

If, for example, Dany got to speak - from dragonback, of course - to the gathered hordes at Vaes Dothrak and invite them all to join her anti-slavery/limited-sacking/no-rape khalasar, I can easily see her getting enough takers to give her a significant force, particularly if she has the crones' backing, as her vision implies she will.

It does seem to me a stretch that she could gather the whole Dothraki nation to embrace that kind of drastic societal change.

[Veltigar]

Mass archery could be more problematic for young dragons. My impression is that at some point their armor is sufficient that they become basically impervious to archery except for the eyes, but I'm not certain about that. In the picture of Balerion that has been circulating recently you can see he is actually wearing a breastplate - but that's a head-scratcher to me. How the heck do you get a gigantic breastplate on a gigantic dragon, and then what happens when the dragon keeps growing? Assuming it's true that they ever do, I have no idea when Dany's dragons would reach the "impervious to archery" phase.

Either Ran or GRRM has remarked that that picture of Balerion is not accurate. It's actually my biggest grievance with TWOIAF, it's supposed to be an in universe text, and yet the illustrations contain such huge errors. I'm happy to get more content, but if I have to pay extra for some illustrations I don't care for, they should at least be accurate.

As to the dragons, tPatQ has thoroughly killed the idea that they are unstoppable flying tanks. It is actually quite easy to slay a dragon, the trick is landing your blows. Massive volleys of arrows can kill a dragon and they can kill a rider, which is basically the same, since the dragons either go crazy or they loose interest.

You're right, I'm talking about field battles when I talk about camouflage. And I think dragons are the most useful in the field.

Actually, no, a dragon is used most effectively against fixed defensive positions. You can't outmanoeuver dragonfire when you're locked inside a castle. As to field battles, the field of fire is really the outlier there. Aegon had everything going for him at that battle. He fought opponents without any experience with dragons, he had three very large, very experienced dragons with seasoned riders and he had the weather on his side. Even with all those advantages, he still only got 4000 kills. If the armies of Reach and Rock had kept on fighting, Aegon would have lost that day.

If you look at other pitched battles, like the battle of the storm and the battle of bitterbridge, the fight was much harder for House Targaryen. Both times the weather severly limited the effectiveness of a dragon. And really, it is very easy to adapt to dragon warfare. You can of course go full on guerilla warfare like the Dornish, but you can also see a development in tPatQ.

The armies in tPatQ are very small when compared to the armies during the conquest. That's very strange, since the Realm had just been through like 80 years of peace. There should be an abandunce of young men and more than enough gold and food to train and equip them. Part of it can be ascribed to the nature of a conflict (civil war), but it's mostly an adaptation to the reality of warfare with dragons. No armies of 20 000 men to line up on opposite side of the fiels (pitched battles were rare anyway), but many smaller forces (think two to five thousand men) who combat all over the map and can easily run away from a dragon.

Obviously not very many cities could be taken by surprise this way, but Qarth could. That would be the prime candidate for such an attack.

Dany's dragons, even when combined, aren't strong enough to destroy a city. It took all the dragons of Valyria to destroy Old Ghis. Qarth is less grand and a city doesn't need to be as thoroughly trashed to surrender, but even when taking that into account Dany's dragon are not up to the task.

Short Answer:

Dany will probably have to comprimise a great deal on her values.

Longer Answer:

Nope, I think Dany will get a great number of Dothraki to follow her. But most likely she'll have to make a great deal of moral/ethical comprises to do so. She'll get some sort of resolution in Essos, but it isn't going to be as neat and clean as some Dany fans would like to believe.

This idea that the application of raw military power can solve the complex social, political, and economic problems that Dany faces is, I believe, stunningly naive. Too many Dany fans just assume that all of Dany's or Essos' problems can be solved by saying "Dracrays" enough times. Given GRRM's apparent views about war, I doubt he believes that the solution to many of Dany's or Essos' problems is just a matter of finding another army or just firebombing something.

The bottom line is that, I think, Dany will get some sort of resolution in Essos. But, I think she is going to get very soiled in the process.

I rather doubt it. Given Dany's dedication to her ideals, which will be rekindled after she realizes that her compromising on them in ADWD hasn't led to anything good, she will not compromise with the Dothraki. Of course that doesn't mean that everything will go smooth, however, instead of looking at Dany's side of the equation, you should look at the Dothraki.

I'm sure that most Dothraki in Vaes Dothrak will follow her, but there are 28 khalesars and there is no reason to assume that they'll all be there. Those that are present will probably be amazed by the spectacle Dany will unleash with Drogon and they'll follow her with an almost religious zeal. However, many of the Khals that aren't present will not want to bow down to her. She's a teenager, a woman and a foreigner. And on top of that she wants to take away the Khal's main source of wealth, the slave trade. I think many of them will call her a fake and fight her Khalesars in Essos. That way she's tSwwMtW, but she doesn't get instantly unbeatable, since her Dothraki will have to fight the other khals to establish her beliefs.

[Hodor's Dragon]

Either Ran or GRRM has remarked that that picture of Balerion is not accurate. It's actually my biggest grievance with TWOIAF, it's supposed to be an in universe text, and yet the illustrations contain such huge errors. I'm happy to get more content, but if I have to pay extra for some illustrations I don't care for, they should at least be accurate.

Glad I can ignore that picture, it doesn't make sense.

As to the dragons, tPatQ has thoroughly killed the idea that they are unstoppable flying tanks. It is actually quite easy to slay a dragon, the trick is landing your blows. Massive volleys of arrows can kill a dragon and they can kill a rider, which is basically the same, since the dragons either go crazy or they loose interest.

I haven't read TPATQ, but do you see mature dragons being felled by normal arrows? My impression was "only the eyes" for that.

Actually, no, a dragon is used most effectively against fixed defensive positions. You can't outmanoeuver dragonfire when you're locked inside a castle.

What I'm thinking is that, in a war where dragons are present, you can set up large dedicated anti-dragon defenses in/on a castle: camouflaged scorpions, over-large scorpions protected by smaller scorpions, other imaginative defenses that you can build up when you're working with a fixed location. And if we're talking young dragons, I don't think there's all that much they can do to a stone castle except fire the outbuildings.

But the ability to use large weapons with poor mobility, like scorpions, is very limited in the field. Those things are hard to move around. Further, you'd have to entirely reorganize your armies to face dragons in the field. Cavalry is the most powerful arm of a Westerosi army, but it is pretty much a liability against dragons, as the horses will panic and cause disorder in the ranks, with their panic undoubtedly spreading to some of the men. You would at the very least need to disperse archers among your other troops. Not only would this probably necessitate training a lot of new archers, which is no easy or quick task, but it would interfere with maneuvering your units in the field: archery and infantry maneuver entirely differently against a closing enemy. In fact, if you're fighting mature dragons who are impervious to archery (notice I said "if") then you pretty much are facing unstoppable tanks if the dragons are handled correctly, because they will just stay out of the firing arc of your scorpions and nothing else can touch them.

Also? Once you've got their forces cooped up in their castle, you have the upper hand. You can feed off the fat of the land while the price of boiled rat rises steadily inside the castle. With very few exceptions if any at all, you must take the field to win a war.

* * *

The armies in tPatQ are very small when compared to the armies during the conquest. That's very strange, since the Realm had just been through like 80 years of peace. There should be an abandunce of young men and more than enough gold and food to train and equip them. Part of it can be ascribed to the nature of a conflict (civil war), but it's mostly an adaptation to the reality of warfare with dragons. No armies of 20 000 men to line up on opposite side of the fiels (pitched battles were rare anyway), but many smaller forces (think two to five thousand men) who combat all over the map and can easily run away from a dragon.

Smaller armies, smaller targets certainly makes sense, because there are only a few dragons. But . . . once I've divided my army into five pieces to face your dragons, what happens when you gather your armies together and hit each of my little armies one at a time? I get to experience "defeat in detail." Smaller armies only makes sense when both sides have dragons.

Dany's dragons, even when combined, aren't strong enough to destroy a city. It took all the dragons of Valyria to destroy Old Ghis. Qarth is less grand and a city doesn't need to be as thoroughly trashed to surrender, but even when taking that into account Dany's dragon are not up to the task.

This is true, but they could sure give Qarth a damned hard time. I think Qarth's best chance would be to hire enough mercenaries to take the battle to Daenerys, not cowering behind their walls.

I rather doubt it. Given Dany's dedication to her ideals, which will be rekindled after she realizes that her compromising on them in ADWD hasn't led to anything good, she will not compromise with the Dothraki. Of course that doesn't mean that everything will go smooth, however, instead of looking at Dany's side of the equation, you should look at the Dothraki.

I mostly agree with this, although I would expect her to make small compromises.

I'm sure that most Dothraki in Vaes Dothrak will follow her, but there are 28 khalesars and there is no reason to assume that they'll all be there. Those that are present will probably be amazed by the spectacle Dany will unleash with Drogon and they'll follow her with an almost religious zeal. However, many of the Khals that aren't present will not want to bow down to her. She's a teenager, a woman and a foreigner. And on top of that she wants to take away the Khal's main source of wealth, the slave trade. I think many of them will call her a fake and fight her Khalesars in Essos. That way she's tSwwMtW, but she doesn't get instantly unbeatable, since her Dothraki will have to fight the other khals to establish her beliefs.

I'm certainly wondering how the heck the word gets out to all the khals to assemble in Vaes Dothrak, but nevertheless I'm actually kind of expecting all the Dothraki to be there. Why else would Martin have taken pains to design and describe a city big enough to hold all khalasars and then make sure we knew it could hold all khalasars? But I think there will be divisions and argument - sure, everybody will be impressed, but they won't all be impressed enough to Join The Army. They won't be able to fight in Vaes Dothrak - except Dany and Drogon, I guess who don't need a blade - but I can see a big battle outside the city.

Nice post, even though I don't agree with all of it.

[Veltigar]

Glad I can ignore that picture, it doesn't make sense.

I'm hoping others will make more sense, but I fear that most of them are there just to be pretty.

I haven't read TPATQ, but do you see mature dragons being felled by normal arrows? My impression was "only the eyes" for that.

It's been a while so the details are a bit sketchy and I don't want to spoil anything for you. However, let me put it like this, I'm pretty sure my mates and I could kill a dragon and we aren't exactly super physically fit. The difficulty lies in landing your blows, since dragons can fly fast and are agile, but the actual act of killing them was surprisingly easy. Just remember one word when you read tPatQ: 'pit'. You'll understand what I mean when you get to that scene.

What I'm thinking is that, in a war where dragons are present, you can set up large dedicated anti-dragon defenses in/on a castle: camouflaged scorpions, over-large scorpions protected by smaller scorpions, other imaginative defenses that you can build up when you're working with a fixed location. And if we're talking young dragons, I don't think there's all that much they can do to a stone castle except fire the outbuildings.

The thing is none of these weapons have a large enough firing rate and they aren't easily handled to change the trajectory of a projectile. A dragon under the command of an experienced rider can easily avoid the slow firing rate. To really get a fix on a dragon, you need to establish crossfire and that can't be done with those scorpions and the castle structures in Westeros. Really big dragons like Balerion might even be able to outrange those scorpions.

Outlandish machinery is unlikely to have an affect on that, regular scorpions and onagers are already cumbersome as hell. Castles are also not built to withstand an attack from above and Westeros is still not very far in fortress development, so that's unlikely to chance. You also need a lot of trained men to effectively operate your siege equipment. Men who can't be used for anything else, so that the dragonriders troops can easily scale the walls or work on making a breach in your walls or gates.

As to what fire can do to stone castles, there's quite a lot actually. Those fortresses aren't entirely made of stone, they have wooden beems that can burn, food stores and armories that can go up in flames and of course the people inside aren't immune to fire. A couple of blasts of dragonfire can clear walls, so that your own troops can gain a foothold. It also ties up the people it doesn't kill, since the fire needs to be put out. That's very tiresome work, which will take up lots of manpower and if water is scarce drain the enemies supply heavily. Fire has been used in siege warfare for a very long time.

But the ability to use large weapons with poor mobility, like scorpions, is very limited in the field. Those things are hard to move around. Further, you'd have to entirely reorganize your armies to face dragons in the field. Cavalry is the most powerful arm of a Westerosi army, but it is pretty much a liability against dragons, as the horses will panic and cause disorder in the ranks, with their panic undoubtedly spreading to some of the men. You would at the very least need to disperse archers among your other troops. Not only would this probably necessitate training a lot of new archers, which is no easy or quick task, but it would interfere with maneuvering your units in the field: archery and infantry maneuver entirely differently against a closing enemy. In fact, if you're fighting mature dragons who are impervious to archery (notice I said "if") then you pretty much are facing unstoppable tanks if the dragons are handled correctly, because they will just stay out of the firing arc of your scorpions and nothing else can touch them.

Those types of artillery are not the way to defeat dragons that's true (unless you can set a trap somewhere, but even then it's tricky). As to the issues with the horses, I don't see them. In the old days, horses were scared of war elephants, what gave the proprietor of said elephants a massive advantage. Eventually, warhorses were trained to handle them, and the elephants were never as effective again. You can train your horses to get them used to dragons.

As to how you defeat the dragon. Never engage in a pitched battle unless you have to is the rule of thumb. Pitched battles were rare before dragons came (it's actually quite odd that Westeros knows so many of them) and they'd become even rarer. If you have no other choice, than you have to choose your position wisely. Either a location were dragons aren't of much use or you engage the dragon during a bout of bad weather. Preferably both of course ;)

On both occasions, the objective is to destroy the dragon's support troops. Wars are won by boots on the ground, superior airpower gets you a long way, but against a smart and dedicated opponent that is not enough. If you engage a dragon on the ground, it's best to try and contain them and go for the troops.

If you really want to kill a dragon, you'll either have to be patient (wait untill the dragons ground support has dwindled and follow it to where it lands) or engage under the right circumstances. During the battle of the Last Storm, Meraxes was forced on the ground, that's when you can get the upperhand on it. It's fire isn't an issue then and it can't get away. You need to swarm it, like how asian bees kill japanese giant hornets.

Crossbowmen to offer support and kill the rider (and perhaps an elite who can try and go for the eyes as well), light cavalery to draw the dragons attention and heavy infantry to jump on top of the dragon and kill it. Axes, maces, warhammers, pikes, mauls. Everything that you usually use to pry a knight out of his heavy armor will be more than sufficient. Perhaps in a larger perspective it's even better not to kill a dragon. All you have to do is make sure it can't fly again. If that happens, the enemy is left with a large clumsy beast that it needs to protect and feed.

You can also engage the armies in a place like the boneway. The Dornish apparently did that and the dragons were useless, Aegon and his sisters had to look on while the Dornish slaughtered their armies inside the pass.

Also? Once you've got their forces cooped up in their castle, you have the upper hand. You can feed off the fat of the land while the price of boiled rat rises steadily inside the castle. With very few exceptions if any at all, you must take the field to win a war.

I concur. Castles are a very cost-efficient way to protect your lands. That's why these type of conflicts were usually so cruel, because the attackers would do everything they could to draw their opponents out of their castles. Tywin's campaign against the Riverlands is a perfect example of that.

Dragons are best used against fixed defensive positions and offer a strategic benefit precisely because of it. You don't need to burn crops and kill smallfolk to get the attention of the people inside the castle (you can easily set up a PR-campaign that will win the inhabitants of the area over to you), it's also impossible for people to hold out long enough to get help, since dragons are siege enders. There is also no place to run to after a battle, handy. Another advantage is that a large ammount of the wealth of Lords and Ladies is tied up in their castles (plus emotional value). Many of them wouldn't want to see that wasted (the Dornish truly are an exceptional people). Or think about the North, if you burn their castles, were will all those soldiers go to when winter strikes?

Of course, eventhough dragons are the best at dealing with defensive positions, they aren't worthless in the field. A dragon will always be a force multiplier, but imo nowhere is the advantage as big as when your attacking a castle or a fort.

The armies in tPatQ are very small when compared to the armies during the conquest. That's very strange, since the Realm had just been through like 80 years of peace. There should be an abandunce of young men and more than enough gold and food to train and equip them. Part of it can be ascribed to the nature of a conflict (civil war), but it's mostly an adaptation to the reality of warfare with dragons. No armies of 20 000 men to line up on opposite side of the fiels (pitched battles were rare anyway), but many smaller forces (think two to five thousand men) who combat all over the map and can easily run away from a dragon.

Smaller armies, smaller targets certainly makes sense, because there are only a few dragons. But . . . once I've divided my army into five pieces to face your dragons, what happens when you gather your armies together and hit each of my little armies one at a time? I get to experience "defeat in detail." Smaller armies only makes sense when both sides have dragons.

Smaller armies move much faster than smaller ones, they also need considerably less supplies to keep on going. And a good strategist can do all kinds of wonky stuff with that. If you get your enemy chasing after you, you have the initiative. You can take him on a wild goose chase, burn the earth, so that he can't fourage and make him take so much land, that his supply lines become overextended. Other small armies can follow from the rear, cut his supply line, reconcur the lands he left behind etc. And all the while, lay traps and ambushes, use hit-and-run tactics and so on.

This is true, but they could sure give Qarth a damned hard time. I think Qarth's best chance would be to hire enough mercenaries to take the battle to Daenerys, not cowering behind their walls.

Dany can't really do anything without groundtroops to back her up. The Red Waste means that that is nigh on impossible. The Qartheen fleet is still strong and ships are a surprisingly hard target for dragons. Furthermore, Drogon is just not strong enough. Qarth has more than enough soldiers to wait untill she makes a mistake, shoot her off Drogon or wound the dragon enough to get it to the ground and then kill it.

Qarth even has a way to combat Drogon's fire. No, I'm not talking about the Qarthinian magic that kept Valyria at bay (though that's also a factor). There are lot's of slaves there, I can't see Dany burning the easy targets in the city (slums and stuff). They can even protect their important buildings with that. Just chain a whole bunch of slavechildren to the walls and be done with it. Aegon I would burn them all, but such a human shield would probably keep Dany away. Strange that none of her opponents has used that strategy yet, instead of crucifying those children, the Meereenese masters should have put them on the walls.

I mostly agree with this, although I would expect her to make small compromises.

But what small things are there to compromise on? She won't tolerate the existence of slavery and she'll not sanction mindless rape and carnage (acquiring slaves to sell was always the main thing that caused the mindless rape and carnage anyway), I don't think there is anything else that she has a problem with. And the Dothraki don't have any objectional qualities beside those things. Sure, they are fond of horses and live a nomadic life, but there's more than enough space to do that.

I'm certainly wondering how the heck the word gets out to all the khals to assemble in Vaes Dothrak, but nevertheless I'm actually kind of expecting all the Dothraki to be there. Why else would Martin have taken pains to design and describe a city big enough to hold all khalasars and then make sure we knew it could hold all khalasars? But I think there will be divisions and argument - sure, everybody will be impressed, but they won't all be impressed enough to Join The Army. They won't be able to fight in Vaes Dothrak - except Dany and Drogon, I guess who don't need a blade - but I can see a big battle outside the city.

Maybe one of the Khals is hosting a slumberparty? :P or perhaps there is a religous festival ;) Anyway, this scenario is equally possible. But discord between the Dothraki is almost inevitable imo. Although I don't see just one big battle settling it all.

I can see perhaps only Drogo's former khalesar joining her (+ some other riders who follow the crones) and then there is a big battle outside. Then we get a repeat of the field of fire. The Sea of Dothrak is bone dry, Dothraki have never fought against dragons, there also incredibly stupid etc. Dany wins and part of the Dothraki that fought against her bow down. Others will surely escape. EDIT: Although, I don't know if there's going to be room to show a scenario like this in the books. If you don't have all the Khal's present, GRRM could just introduce the problem of Khal's refusing to bend the knee with a throwaway line later on. Like Dany is in Volantis and they are planning the invasion of Westeros, she get's word, orders her loyal Khal's to destroy those that oppose her, the end.

I feel like a big part of the Dothraki discord has to do with keeping the odds even. WIth all Dothraki bowing down to her, winning against Faegon would be easy. The Dothraki are comically bad at what they do, but with 28 khalesars backing her, they don't need to be good fighters. Like I said up thread, Dany could keep on throwing them at Faegon until the later dies of fatigue from slaughtering them.

If there is a prolonged war between her grand Khalesar and the others (plus perhaps some free cities thrown in the mix), the Dothraki are tied up in Essos. Dany could ignore that conflict and let her loyal Dothraki deal with it and focus on Westeros herself.

Nice post, even though I don't agree with all of it.

Thanks, the feeling is mutual by the way :cheers:

[OldGimletEye]

I rather doubt it. Given Dany's dedication to her ideals, which will be rekindled after she realizes that her compromising on them in ADWD hasn't led to anything good, she will not compromise with the Dothraki. Of course that doesn't mean that everything will go smooth, however, instead of looking at Dany's side of the equation, you should look at the Dothraki.

I'm sure that most Dothraki in Vaes Dothrak will follow her, but there are 28 khalesars and there is no reason to assume that they'll all be there. Those that are present will probably be amazed by the spectacle Dany will unleash with Drogon and they'll follow her with an almost religious zeal. However, many of the Khals that aren't present will not want to bow down to her. She's a teenager, a woman and a foreigner. And on top of that she wants to take away the Khal's main source of wealth, the slave trade. I think many of them will call her a fake and fight her Khalesars in Essos. That way she's tSwwMtW, but she doesn't get instantly unbeatable, since her Dothraki will have to fight the other khals to establish her beliefs.

I think the only ones that are looking at the “Dany Side of Equation” are those who have invested in the idea that Dany should get ten of thousands of Dothraki troops, without any cost. Dany may have her ideals, such as they may be, but reality doesn't give a shit about Dany's ideals.

I am very much looking at this from the “Dothraki Side of The Equation”. The Dothraki horse rider is a warrior by trade. Like anybody else, he expects to be paid for his services. His payment has traditionally included the taking of slaves, plunder and “entertainment” in the form of killing innocent people and raping them. All these things he likely expects for fighting for his Khal. Now suddenly, he'll be asked to give most of them up. Basically he will be asked to take a big pay cut. Just as bad, he'll be asked to start providing his own domestic services because he'll no longer have slaves to do those things for him.

But, apparently, he will won't balk at taking this massive pay cut because he'll get to bask in the eternal glory of the God Like Khaleesi, as compensation for his losses. While that may keep him in line for a while, it's novelty will probably wear off pretty quickly. Particularly after a few long marches and hard fights. Septimius Severus proclaimed to be a god too, be even he knew to pay the troops.

Even if we were to assume that Dany will be able to limit the Dothraki to plunder of the non-human kind, it still isn't going to be pretty. The wealth they will take for themselves will be wealth the slaves and freedman won't have to rebuild their lives. There are already severe shortages in Mereen, et al. Having the Dothraki take it all, isn't going to be very helpful. And if the Dothraki are prohibited from taking their traditional spoils of war, they will probably demand a great deal of plunder for their services. Material goods that won't be available for the slaves or freedman.

Also, fighting a Dothraki Civil War could take quite a while. How many square miles is the Dothraki Sea exactly?

[Hippocras]

Dany doesn't need to destroy all of Qarth. That wasn't the proposal. Doing some damage for revenge's sake is about specific targets. In Qarth's case, the Thirteen, and the fleet. All she needs to do is fly there, burn a few key things and then leave and they wouldn't even have time to react. If she burns their ships she cripples their trade and the city would starve with only a few foreign ships to compensate.

[Hippocras]

As for the complaint that this is about Dany idealism, sorry but bullshit.

GRRM is absolutely not writing a story about a girl who wants to end slavery but gives up because it is just too hard.

It IS hard to transform a culture, as she has been learning. That doesn't mean she will just throw up her hands and leave.