The misunderstood Lord Walder Frey: He should’ve killed Robb

[TheWanderer]

On another note, who does Robb think he is breaking a marriage vow then getting all "high and noble" concerning the Karstarks? He deserved to die. Just, not at a wedding.

Robb broke a promise, Karstark broke the law. Robb's misdeed required that he make amends, which he did. Karstark's misdeed required that he be executed, which he was. The two acts aren't remotely similar and the appropriate response to them is equally different.

Okay, I never said the Freys are hated because of Cersei’s ruling, or Tywin’s death. The Freys are looked down upon because Walder arrived late to aid Robert Baratheon, and the fact that he has countless sons and daughters. But as I said throughout this post, Walder was loyal to Robb during the War of the Five Kings, until Robb broke his oath.

1) I don't honestly know why you brought up Cersei and Tywin. They are completely irrelevant in this debate.

2) The Frey's are looked down upon for being disloyal. Both during the Rebellion and during recent events. No one cares much about the fact that he has loads of kids.

3) You seem to have missed my point. Walder remained loyal even after Robb broke his oath. He remained loyal right up until the point where he killed him.

[ImpinDornish]

Robb broke a promise, Karstark broke the law. Robb's misdeed required that he make amends, which he did. Karstark's misdeed required that he be executed, which he was. The two acts aren't remotely similar and the appropriate response to them is equally different.

1) I don't honestly know why you brought up Cersei and Tywin. They are completely irrelevant in this debate.

2) The Frey's are looked down upon for being disloyal. Both during the Rebellion and during recent events. No one cares much about the fact that he has loads of kids.

3) You seem to have missed my point. Walder remained loyal even after Robb broke his oath. He remained loyal right up until the point where he killed him.

Then why not give his mother an execution as well? She aided the escape of a prisoner, severely weakened the position of the war effort and did it while knowing it was a treasonous act. Locking Karstark up made more sense, he gave his mother that treatment.

You can't say when Walder was loyal to. As soon as he heard about the betrayal he could have been plotting his revenge. He was loyal up to the point he began plotting.

[TheWanderer]

Then why not give his mother an execution as well? She aided the escape of a prisoner, severely weakened the position of the war effort and did it while knowing it was a treasonous act. Locking Karstark up made more sense, he gave his mother that treatment.

That's a perfectly valid point. Catelyn should have been punished more severely, possibly even executed. I understand why Robb didn't do that though. My point wasn't that Robb was always perfect in caring out justice, it was simply that the comparison between Robb's actions (in that specific case) and Karstark's is nonsense.

You can't say when Walder was loyal to. As soon as he heard about the betrayal he could have been plotting his revenge. He was loyal up to the point he began plotting.

I meant apparently loyal. I meant that Walder appears to remain completely loyal to Robb, regardless of his plotting.

[ImpinDornish]

That's a perfectly valid point. Catelyn should have been punished more severely, possibly even executed. I understand why Robb didn't do that though. My point wasn't that Robb was always perfect in caring out justice, it was simply that the comparison between Robb's actions (in that specific case) and Karstark's is nonsense.

I meant apparently loyal. I meant that Walder appears to remain completely loyal to Robb, regardless of his plotting.

Frey's apparent loyalty doesn't win him any extra points at all considering what he's done. As you yourself say, he made a bad decision in breaking a promise, not breaking a law, yet Walder slaughters him, his mother and lord knows how many others while they all have guest right - an ancient custom that even the wildlings acknowledge. His "apparent" loyalty is only part of his plot to get the most brutal revenge. Look at Doran's "apparent loyalty" as an example of someone who does everything in their power to conceal their true purpose until the time is right to make their play.

As for Catelyn and Robb's betrothal, my point is that Robb's arrogance got him killed. He felt he could decide when to be "Ned-level-honourable" but ignore the others. He executes one of his most important bannermen, losing thousands of troops as a result and keeps his mother around who, let's face it, added absolutely nothing to the cause and only severely ruined their chances of winning or making some kind of truce with Tywin.

[TheWanderer]

Frey's apparent loyalty doesn't win him any extra points at all considering what he's done. As you yourself say, he made a bad decision in breaking a promise, not breaking a law, yet Walder slaughters him, his mother and lord knows how many others while they all have guest right - an ancient custom that even the wildlings acknowledge. His "apparent" loyalty is only part of his plot to get the most brutal revenge. Look at Doran's "apparent loyalty" as an example of someone who does everything in their power to conceal their true purpose until the time is right to make their play.

I don't think we're actually disagreeing on this.

As for Catelyn and Robb's betrothal, my point is that Robb's arrogance got him killed. He felt he could decide when to be "Ned-level-honourable" but ignore the others. He executes one of his most important bannermen, losing thousands of troops as a result and keeps his mother around who, let's face it, added absolutely nothing to the cause and only severely ruined their chances of winning or making some kind of truce with Tywin.

I don't think Robb ever made a decision that Ned wouldn't have made.

Robb wasn't killed by being arrogant, he was killed by Walder Frey. A cowardly, spiteful and foolish old man who willingly committed the gravest of sins to 'avenge' a petty slight that the victim had every intention of making amends for.

[ImpinDornish]

I don't think we're actually disagreeing on this.

I don't think Robb ever made a decision that Ned wouldn't have made.

Robb wasn't killed by being arrogant, he was killed by Walder Frey. A cowardly, spiteful and foolish old man who willingly committed the gravest of sins to 'avenge' a petty slight that the victim had every intention of making amends for.

Ned wouldn't have broken his marriage vow. This is a guy who took over his dead brothers betrothal because it was the right thing to do for both houses and the regions they represent, not out of love.

Ned likely would have killed Karstark, I'll grant you. But I doubt he would've let Catelyn get away so softly. But that's a hard one to know. We know for certain he wouldn't have broken his marriage vow. This is the man who kept allowed honour and loyalty to get him killed. Robb fell in love and it blinded him. He was arrogant because he thought his position as King and all those battles he'd won would allow him to win this little battle with Walder. Yes, what Walder did was beyond an over-reaction and a despicable act. As I've said, if he'd betrayed Robb in the field and had him killed, I'd understand to an extent, but what he did was the worst thing he could do. But Robb only has himself to blame for putting himself in that position.

All the high lords would've told him to marry the Frey and keep as many women on the side as he wants, that's your right as King.

[helter skelter]

two words

guest right

[House Obama]

Robb broke a promise, Karstark broke the law. Robb's misdeed required that he make amends, which he did. Karstark's misdeed required that he be executed, which he was. The two acts aren't remotely similar and the appropriate response to them is equally different.

1) I don't honestly know why you brought up Cersei and Tywin. They are completely irrelevant in this debate.

2) The Frey's are looked down upon for being disloyal. Both during the Rebellion and during recent events. No one cares much about the fact that he has loads of kids.

3) You seem to have missed my point. Walder remained loyal even after Robb broke his oath. He remained loyal right up until the point where he killed him.

Robb broke an oath, find the definition of both and you will realize that an oath is much more serious than a promise. Karstark was killed because he killed some prisoners for vengeance, due to Robb's mother releasing the Kingslayer, which people believed was eventually going to be beheaded.

And read the previously posts to know why I brought up Cersei and Twin. I basically said that Walder was secured when he decided to commits the RW.

[TheWanderer]

Ned wouldn't have broken his marriage vow.

But he cheated on his wife.

But Robb only has himself to blame for putting himself in that position.

But if Walder had turned on Robb in the field he likely would've lost, he almost certainly wouldn't have died. So it's not Robb that is to blame, but Walder, the man who made the decisions that led directly to Robb's death.

Robb broke an oath, find the definition of both and you will realize that an oath is much more serious than a promise.

An oath is a formal promise, but I don't recall Robb ever formally swearing to marry one of Frey's daughters. Regardless, breaking a promise, even one made formally, is not the same as breaking the law.

Karstark was killed because he killed some prisoners for vengeance,

Kartark was executed because he committed murder and treason.

And read the previously posts to know why I brought up Cersei and Twin. I basically said that Walder was secured when he decided to commits the RW.

Which is irrelevant.

[ImpinDornish]

But he cheated on his wife.

But if Walder had turned on Robb in the field he likely would've lost, he almost certainly wouldn't have died. So it's not Robb that is to blame, but Walder, the man who made the decisions that led directly to Robb's death.

An oath is a formal promise, but I don't recall Robb ever formally swearing to marry one of Frey's daughters. Regardless, breaking a promise, even one made formally, is not the same as breaking the law.

Kartark was executed because he committed murder and treason.

Which is irrelevant.

It hasn't been proven that Ned cheated on his wife. If R+L=J then Ned let people he believe he cheated without ever explicitly denying it in order to protect his sisters child, and his nephew.

Who can say if the Freys would have lost? Taking them completely unawares, turning on Robb in the middle of a Lannister attack? Walder coordinates with Tywin that at a particular battle the Lannisters will hit them at the front and the Freys will break them from within. It'd be a slaughter.

Betrothals are oaths, recognised as a promise to both the gods and men. If you recall Joffreys farcical "I made a holy vow" speech at court when he was dumping Sansa to wed Margery, he needed the High Septon's blessing to get out of it. Robb didn't break a little promise. And the "hey, I didn't say for sure" excuse doesn't work. He consented to the match, that's all that needs to be said. We don't need a paragraph in the book where Robb has a meeting with Walder to "formally swear." The offer was made and he consented in front of witnesses, Northmen and Freys alike.

Breaking a marriage pact is breaking a promise to the gods. As we know, guest right is a rule believed to be set by the gods. Murder itself is a crime, but guest right isn't law, only an honoured tradition. So while Walder did murder the king, the act of doing it at a wedding isn't actually breaking a law. One could also argue that it wasn't murder - Robb was a casualty of war. What I'm getting at here is if you want to try and make extremely literal arguments between what a promise, oaths, and laws are, the argument doesn't really favour that position.

[TheWanderer]

It hasn't been proven that Ned cheated on his wife. If R+L=J then Ned let people he believe he cheated without ever explicitly denying it in order to protect his sisters child, and his nephew.

Ned made a decision to dishonour his wife and his marriage, whether by cheating or simply claiming to have cheated.

Who can say if the Freys would have lost? Taking them completely unawares, turning on Robb in the middle of a Lannister attack? Walder coordinates with Tywin that at a particular battle the Lannisters will hit them at the front and the Freys will break them from within. It'd be a slaughter.

Which is again contingent on Walder being spiteful and treacherous, not on Robb.

Breaking a marriage pact is breaking a promise to the gods.

Which is bad. I'm not saying it isn't. But a promise, even a promise to the gods, is only words and words are wind.

As we know, guest right is a rule believed to be set by the gods. Murder itself is a crime, but guest right isn't law, only an honoured tradition.

Guest right is a "sacred law" in Westeros. It is a law held by gods (both the Old and the New) and men alike.

One could also argue that it wasn't murder - Robb was a casualty of war.

For Robb to be a casualty of war he has to be at war with the Freys. Since they are (in all appearances) his loyal bannermen, he is clearly not at war with them.

Regardless, I wasn't talking about Walder's crime (which he has yet to receive punishment for) but Rickard Karstark's crime of murdering Robb's prisoners, for which he was justly (if harshly) executed.

What I'm getting at here is if you want to try and make extremely literal arguments between what a promise, oaths, and laws are, the argument doesn't really favour that position.

What is the punishment for breaking the law? Depending on the severity of the crime: maiming, imprisonment or death.

What is the punishment for breaking Quest Right? Being turned into a giant rat and forced to eat your children.

What is the punishment for breaking a betrothal? A souring of relations.

If these things are punished differently (and they are) and viewed differently (and they are) then they are different.

[Invicticus]

I think it was well deserved. The same way Jon and Samwell deserve death. They broke their wows as well, should they get away with it just because they are POV characters? Of course, that would mean killing (if that is the punishment) many, many men of the watch, but it's about justice, the most important thing. Don't swear unless it's an oath you can bear.

EDIT: Also, Guest right is a TRADITION, not an official law by the Iron Throne.

EDIT 2: Also, they were not in the north.

In the north, we hold the laws of hospitality sacred still.

”

- Roose Bolton to Jaime Lannister

[House Obama]

I think it was well deserved. The same way Jon and Samwell deserve death. They broke their wows as well, should they get away with it just because they are POV characters? Of course, that would mean killing (if that is the punishment) many, many men of the watch, but it's about justice, the most important thing. Don't swear unless it's an oath you can bear.

EDIT: Also, Guest right is a TRADITION, not an official law by the Iron Throne.

EDIT 2: Also, they were not in the north.

In the north, we hold the laws of hospitality sacred still. ”

- Roose Bolton to Jaime Lannister

I completely agree with you; however, Jon Snow (assuming that you are talking about Jon snow, and not Jon Connigton) and Samwell had to break their vows.

Jon was instructed by Qhorin Halfhand to blend in with the Wildings. Qhorin was his superior officer, so he had to follow his commands, which included killing him. And I guess someone can make the argument that Jon was breaking his oath of the NW by warring against Ramsey. However, Ramsey assumed he took Reek and his bride, which he did not. Therefore, Jon had every right to go to battle against Ramsey. The NW cannot participate in wars between the kingdoms, but they can protect themselves against attack, though the Wall’s southern defense is pitiful.

Now Samwell, he was commanded by Maester Aemon and Lord Commander Jon Snow to travel to Oldtown. Throughout the trip, Samwell kept his oath honorably, but he had to break it in order to get to his location. Remember, the captain’s daughter told him that if he did not have intercourse with Gilly, they were going to toss him overboard. To Sam’s credit, he tried to keep his oath even still, but realized that he had no other options of getting to Oldtown.

Neither Jon nor Samwell deserves to die. The other members of the NW are a different story though, but I can make an argument for them too (I won’t atm though).

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

EDIT 2: Also, they were not in the north.

In the north, we hold the laws of hospitality sacred still. ”

- Roose Bolton to Jaime Lannister

On the grounds of Guest Right, House Mooton (Riverlands house), refuses to kill Nettles when Rhaenyra's orders arrive, during the Dance of the Dragons.

[Invicticus]

I completely agree with you; however, Jon Snow (assuming that you are talking about Jon snow, and not Jon Connigton) and Samwell had to break their vows.

Jon was instructed by Qhorin Halfhand to blend in with the Wildings. Qhorin was his superior officer, so he had to follow his commands, which included killing him. And I guess someone can make the argument that Jon was breaking his oath of the NW by warring against Ramsey. However, Ramsey assumed he took Reek and his bride, which he did not. Therefore, Jon had every right to go to battle against Ramsey. The NW cannot participate in wars between the kingdoms, but they can protect themselves against attack, though the Wall’s southern defense is pitiful.

Now Samwell, he was commanded by Maester Aemon and Lord Commander Jon Snow to travel to Oldtown. Throughout the trip, Samwell kept his oath honorably, but he had to break it in order to get to his location. Remember, the captain’s daughter told him that if he did not have intercourse with Gilly, they were going to toss him overboard. To Sam’s credit, he tried to keep his oath even still, but realized that he had no other options of getting to Oldtown.

Yes i was talking about Jon Snow. And Sam, well...i think he liked his oathbreaking a bit too much ^^

Rhaenys: Oh, hm. I guess i was wrong then...but still not an official law. The wiki says it's a tradition...so is christmas, but you don't have to celebrate it if you don't want too. But i know what you mean. Still..

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Rhaenys: Oh, hm. I guess i was wrong then...but still not an official law. The wiki says it's a tradition...so is christmas, but you don't have to celebrate it if you don't want too. But i know what you mean. Still..

What I meant was that guest right is practised not only in the north ;) but thus also by southron houses.

[Shpati]

Don't agree with the OP at all. I think the Freys and Boltons killed 3k at the Twins? So Frey is upset that his heirs died fighting for a Stark so he goes on and kills thousands of others?

[House Obama]

Don't agree with the OP at all. I think the Freys and Boltons killed 3k at the Twins? So Frey is upset that his heirs died fighting for a Stark so he goes on and kills thousands of others?

No, and yes. Walder was not okay that his heirs died, but he never held it against Robb because they were at war. Walder did become upset when Robb chose not to marry one of his daughters. This is reasonable because Robb took a holy oath to do so, even though he never said the words to Walder Frey. Catelyn told Robb about walder Frey’s terms and he accepted. Don’t forget that Robb is not as mature as he was portrayed on the show. In the book, Robb does many immature acts (but he was only 15 or 16). Robb was also battling the Ironborns, as well as the Lannister and their new ally, the Tyrell. If the Vale committed to Robb, he would have had a chance…

Tbh, Robb was dishonorable to begin with. Eddard was a KNOWN supporter of Stannis, but Robb completely ignored his father’s proclamation that Stannis should be King of all seven kingdoms.

Did Lord Walder go overboard with the RW? Perhaps. But when a person breaks an oath against men and gods, the individual should be punish severely, especially in Westeros.

[House Obama]

Yes i was talking about Jon Snow. And Sam, well...i think he liked his oathbreaking a bit too much ^^

Rhaenys: Oh, hm. I guess i was wrong then...but still not an official law. The wiki says it's a tradition...so is christmas, but you don't have to celebrate it if you don't want too. But i know what you mean. Still..

Can you blame a virgin, who is experiencing sex for the first time, and is becoming too excited? I can’t….

[Shpati]

But when a person breaks an oath against men and gods, the individual should be punish severely, especially in Westeros.

"Individual"

Case in point. Murdering Robb in front of his mother, than killing his mother along with thousands of others linked to House Stark was way overboard. Especially when you take into consideration how upset Cat was when Robb found another woman and ditched the Frey girl. On top of this, poor Edmure is now a captive because he got in the middle of all this.

There were other ways to go about this.