Stop apologising for Renly

[Minsc]

When you plan to steal something, you don't get to complain when the cops put you behind bars.

That doesn't connect with what I said at all.

Stannis isn't the cops.

[Ser Eric]

That doesn't connect with what I said at all.

Stannis isn't the cops.

Either Stannis or Joffrey is law depending on who you believe and Renly was planning to steal from both. There's no room for complaints on his side.

[Minsc]

Either Stannis or Joffrey is law depending on who you believe and Renly was planning to steal from both. There's no room for complaints on his side.

Again not addressing the issue I asked.

[Ser Eric]

Again not addressing the issue I asked.

You didn't ask anything. You were complaining that Melisandre killed Renly and he couldn't have seen it coming. Sorry, that doesn't receive sympathy from me.

And just to be clear, I don't hate Renly. He would have been the best Baratheon king.

[Minsc]

You didn't ask anything. You were complaining that Melisandre killed Renly and he couldn't have seen it coming. Sorry, that doesn't receive sympathy from me.

No, my point was asking what does bending the knee to Stannis bring Renly with the only answer being it would stop him from being shadow babied. And is generally ridiculous to expect Renly to know that Stannis has a deus ex machina that can kill him despite Stannis having a radically inferior position.

[Ser Eric]

No, my point was asking what does bending the knee to Stannis bring Renly with the only answer being it would stop him from being shadow babied. And is generally ridiculous to expect Renly to know that Stannis has a deus ex machina that can kill him despite Stannis having a radically inferior position.

It brings him his original goal, neutralizing the Lannisters.

[Minsc]

It brings him his original goal, neutralizing the Lannisters.

Something that he can easily do without bending the knee, in fact not bending the knee makes that even easier as it ensures he has the Tyrells assist him in his objective.

[Talleyrand]

So you think there's a "selfish or evil" hammer as well? Because in ASOIAF magic's just a tool.

And Maegor used a dragon to kill all the Faith Militant in KL. Jaehaerys used the same dragon to save the Wall. So are dragons 'white' magic or 'black' magic? The answer is neither. It's just 'magic'.

There is no such thing as black magic. You can you use magic to do a good thing and you can use the same magic to do a bad thing.

It's like saying there's an 'evil weapon'.

"Sorcery, some dark magic" and "Stannis had won it all with a single evil stroke" - both quotes from Cat

You can say magic is just magic and its all the same as much as you want but to the people of Westeros what Stannis did was some fucked up shit

[Ser Eric]

Something that he can easily do without bending the knee, in fact not bending the knee makes that even easier as it ensures he has the Tyrells assist him in his objective.

Except, he couldn't eh.

By doing what he did, he made himself a target. You reap what you sow.

[Minsc]

Except, he couldn't .

Again only because Mel had a hidden deus ex machina in her vagina. Therefore, once again that is a weak reason.

Moreover, Stannis's actions screwed him just the same

[Ser Eric]

Again only because Mel had a hidden deus ex machina in her vagina. Therefore, once again that is a weak reason.

Moreover, Stannis's actions screwed him just the same

He never would have died had he not declared himself king. He makes himself a target and thus, has no reason for any complaint.

His opportunism, while not entirely misplaced, was his undoing.

And btw there were rumours that Stannis had a sorceress with him.

[nastydream]

Too many people on these threads are apologising for and finding excuses for Renly's shitty behaviour. He tried to usurp the throne from three children whom he believed to be Roberts. Now let me stop you right there, you might say "Yeah well Joffrey would have become Mad King II so it's alright", lets pretend for a second it's okay to depose someone who is (to the best of your knowledge) the rightful heir because they may or may not become s shitty ruler, what about Tommen and Myrcella? From what we know Tommen's a sweet little boy and Myrcella seems like she would be a very capapble ruler, what's his excuse for tryin to get rid of them? And even if he did know the truth about them, than Stannis is still the rightful king. Renly would have killed Stannis to get the throne, his older brother and rightful king, he would have killed him to become king, just because he thinks Stannis would be a kind of crappy ruler. How can you find that okay? And then people give Stannis shit for killing Renly even though Renly would have done the same.

I can see by your name how you're not biased at all about Renly.

And yeah... no you're wrong.

[Consigliere]

Some people in this thread like to throw around the phrase 'deus ex machina'. I would just like to point out that the shadow babies are not a deus ex machina.

1. The shadow babies were not a contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event, character, ability or object. Martin clearly establishes in the prologue of AGoT that Westeros has a supernatural element to it. He establishes in the prologue of ACoK that Mel has supernatural abilities of some sort. Therefore the possibility of Mel using supernatural powers is fully consistent with the narrative.

2. This was not an unsolvable situation and therefore Martin had not written himself into a corner. Renly/Stannis could have reached a compromise (taken Cat's advice), a battle could have taken place, Stormlords could have declared for Stannis or Martin could have made Renly's army much smaller. All Martin had to do was write it this way. As such I am convinced that the use of the shadows was something that the author fully intended and not some cheap plot device.