sj4iy Posted October 13, 2014 Author Share Posted October 13, 2014 the starks would ose more of thier credibility in the north, which they now desparetly need ...if they lose more credibility, then that would make one assume LESS of a massacre because there would be less men following Robb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibzit Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 ...if they lose more credibility, then that would make one assume LESS of a massacre because there would be less men following Robb. but then less people helping rickon and the others later on, ultimatly dooming the starks even more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raving Stark the Mad Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 the starks would ose more of thier credibility in the north, which they now desparetly need Robb could have peed on a weirwood and his bannermen would have still followed him. 1. He's the Ned's son. 2. He's King of tha Noth! 3. Everybody loves a winner, especially people who complain about "honor" and "stark stupidity". 4. After the Red Wedding, everybody would have been like, "oh yeah, Robb broke his vows and pardoned his criminal bastard brother and emotional mother, so he got what was coming to him", but not before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raving Stark the Mad Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 but then less people helping rickon and the others later on, ultimatly dooming the starks even more Yeah. I really see the Manderlys and the Umbers and all those Flints giving two poops about Robb's mistakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maid So Fair Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 Did Ned have an option to let Gared live? I personally think he did, that's why he was called there to judge the man and he himself talks about not executing someone if you can't bear to look them in the eye. The worst Robb could be accused of is nepotism but then again that's a principle the entire society is based on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robb_Warged Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 No. King of the North would have given a pardon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raving Stark the Mad Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 It's apparent to me that Robb was planning on having Jon legitimized and made his heir anyways. So he already committed to the possibility of getting Jon out of his vows. Jon would have just forced his hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Selig Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 Catelyn will volunteer to do the job for him. Problem solved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Qyburn Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 Nah. With his men watching, Robb would have ordered a "harsh" punishment, make Jon the waterboy or something.But when they finally get to be alone, Robb and Jon would have done a couple of chest pumps, a secret handshake and sat down to gossip about the girls who came for the harvest celebrations, while Ghost and Grey Wind chase each other's tails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion of the West Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 Did Ned have an option to let Gared live? I personally think he did, that's why he was called there to judge the man and he himself talks about not executing someone if you can't bear to look them in the eye. The worst Robb could be accused of is nepotism but then again that's a principle the entire society is based on. Lord Stark was there to execute him. I've never heard of any lord giving some other sentence than death to deserters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Santa of House Claus Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 I think the best solution would be for Robb to send him back to the Wall. He could not let Jon stay and I do not believe Robb would have been able to execute him. I think he would have sent Jon back to the Wall, in part, because I do not think Jon would have just road up to Robb in public, he would have tried to meet him in secret. Of course, it could come down to timing, if it took Jon a long time to travel to Robb in secret, say until after Theon takes Winterfell, then I think Robb would pardon him and work out a deal with the The Night's Watch by sending men to replace Jon because at that point, Robb would be thinking of naming Jon his heir. It would be yet another impossible situation for Robb, like with his mother, like with the Karstarks, hell like the whole war in general. (On a bit of a tangent here) I think Robb was put in the hardest position of almost any character and receives far more hate then he deserves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robb_Warged Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 It breaks my heart we never got to see Robb and Jon fight or travel together. Oh well. Here's hoping Jon and the other Stark kids can live and succeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buried Treasure Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 I agree he would have most likely sent Jon back to the Wall. He may have hoped that the LC would not have executed him, maybe even sent a message asking for leniency, but he would have to accept that it would be a possibility the Watch would execute him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Santa of House Claus Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 I agree he would have most likely sent Jon back to the Wall. He may have hoped that the LC would not have executed him, maybe even sent a message asking for leniency, but he would have to accept that it would be a possibility the Watch would execute him. I think the thing to do would be to send men with him, so that something positive comes from Jon's desertion. It maybe an obvious ploy to buy Jon's life with 50-100 men, but considering the desperate need of men in the Night's Watch, it could work. Robb might even be able to send Ravens to the lords that stayed in the North and collect maybe another 100-200 men on his trek back north. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Hodor Hodor of Hodor Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 No. King of the North would have given a pardon. ...and sent him to the NW :cool4: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregor Clegane's head Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 Would of released him of his vows and given the watch some equipment and manpower. Mormont is content with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raving Stark the Mad Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 ...and sent him to the NW :cool4: And then legitimize him and write him into his will as his heir? Good job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonBranRickon Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 Yes, here's to the rest of the Starks uniting and putting an end to this mummers farce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonBranRickon Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 I bet there has been and exception to the rule in past and certainly as it pertains to having a Stark in Winterfell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diregirl Posted October 13, 2014 Share Posted October 13, 2014 He would have killed him, because like Jon he tried to "kill the boy to become the man" and be "Robb the Lord". He had Karstark executed, right, although he needed him and it would cost him the support of many Northerners.Robb is devoted to honor and duty, and when push comes to shove will sacrifice family to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.