Most Despicable Act in the Series

[Asve]

The most despicable? I think it might be the blood sorcery that was practiced in Basilisks Isles,

"as beasts were mated to slave women to bring forth twisted half-human children"

The practice in Gogossos was an abomination that "its is said their stink reached even the nostrils of the gods and a terrible plague emerged from the slave pens of Gogossos"

[BitsOfBrains]

I've seen a lot of people listing, "Blood and Cheese" as one of the most heinous acts.

It was a single revenge killing. Thats it. I thought it showed quite a bit of reserve and even a bit of justice, in an old testament brutal sort of way. I mean Daemon could have just as easily wiped out all the kids and the mother but he didn't. It was a brutal revenge killing but if 1 revenge killing is bad, 163 has to be worse, nay?

I personally think Daenerys crucifying the 163 was the most heinous atrocity we have seen up close. Crucifixion, aside from burning to death, is by design one of the worst ways to go imaginable.

Combine that with the fact that it was done at the whim of a child makes it all the worse.

Also the Dothraki as a people are a pretty much one giant roaming despicable act. Their entire society is based on, "Guess how many peaceful farmers I butchered right before raping their daughters, wives, mothers, and grandmothers, THIS MANY! HAHAHA!" and their king is selected based on who is the rapenist, mass murderingest, bestest slaver alive.

[SeanF]

I've seen a lot of people listing, "Blood and Cheese" as one of the most heinous acts.

It was a single revenge killing. Thats it. I thought it showed quite a bit of reserve and even a bit of justice, in an old testament brutal sort of way. I mean Daemon could have just as easily wiped out all the kids and the mother but he didn't. It was a brutal revenge killing but if 1 revenge killing is bad, 163 has to be worse, nay?

I personally think Daenerys crucifying the 163 was the most heinous atrocity we have seen up close. Crucifixion, aside from burning to death, is by design one of the worst ways to go imaginable.

Combine that with the fact that it was done at the whim of a child makes it all the worse.

Also the Dothraki as a people are a pretty much one giant roaming despicable act. Their entire society is based on, "Guess how many peaceful farmers I butchered right before raping their daughters, wives, mothers, and grandmothers, THIS MANY! HAHAHA!" and their king is selected based on who is the rapenist, mass murderingest, bestest slaver alive.

Mosaic law would have endorsed killing Aemond in return for his murder of Lucerys, but not the murder of an innocent child. Helaena and her children were completely innocent. And forcing Helaena to choose which child would die was vile.

Crucifixion is a very harsh punishment in-universe. But, it was retaliation for the crucifixion and dissembowellment of 163 children. Dany should be blamed for not investigating the guilt of individual Great Masters. But, we can assume that many of the Great Masters were guilty, even if some were probably innocent, whereas every one of the crucified children was innocent.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

I've seen a lot of people listing, "Blood and Cheese" as one of the most heinous acts.

It was a single revenge killing. Thats it. I thought it showed quite a bit of reserve and even a bit of justice, in an old testament brutal sort of way. I mean Daemon could have just as easily wiped out all the kids and the mother but he didn't. It was a brutal revenge killing but if 1 revenge killing is bad, 163 has to be worse, nay?

I personally think Daenerys crucifying the 163 was the most heinous atrocity we have seen up close. Crucifixion, aside from burning to death, is by design one of the worst ways to go imaginable.

Combine that with the fact that it was done at the whim of a child makes it all the worse.

As you said, Dany could have simply killed all of the slavers but she did not. She killed the exact number of people that also crucified children. Rather than revenge, it was a cruel punishment, but as you said, very "old testamental" kinda way. The whole "she should have investigated" suggestion is a bit naive. None of them was going to confess and instead, would actually accuse each other.

Cruel is what happened, for instance, in an old Star Trek TNG episode. This race attacked a planet and killed one of the woman who tried to defend it. Her husband happened to have been really a powerful entity that, in grief, killed the whole race of attackers, the 50 billions of them.

[BitsOfBrains]

forcing Helaena to choose which child would die was vile.

Crucifixion is a very harsh punishment in-universe. But, it was retaliation for the crucifixion and dissembowellment of 163 children. Dany should be blamed for not investigating the guilt of individual Great Masters. But, we can assume that many of the Great Masters were guilty, even if some were probably innocent, whereas every one of the crucified children was innocent.

If you reread that chapter you will see that Daenerys did the same thing and made the women of the brave masters chose who dies.

My only point is that if blood and cheese is on the list, the sack of Mereen has to be way above it because its almost the exact same scenario only 163 times and much slower and more painful.

[BitsOfBrains]

As you said, Dany could have simply killed all of the slavers but she did not. She killed the exact number of people that also crucified children. Rather than revenge, it was a cruel punishment, but as you said, very "old testamental" kinda way. The whole "she should have investigated" suggestion is a bit naive. None of them was going to confess and instead, would actually accuse each other.

Cruel is what happened, for instance, in an old Star Trek TNG episode. This race attacked a planet and killed one of the woman who tried to defend it. Her husband happened to have been really a powerful entity that, in grief, killed the whole race of attackers, the 50 billions of them.

Ah yes, Survivors. I always took that ep to be more about not being a wimp. If Kevin had just manned up and wrecked the invaders nothing would have happened. Besides the race destroyed were like interstellar Dothraki and they had it coming.

[SeanF]

If you reread that chapter you will see that Daenerys did the same thing and made the women of the brave masters chose who dies.

My only point is that if blood and cheese is on the list, the sack of Mereen has to be way above it because its almost the exact same scenario only 163 times and much slower and more painful.

If Dany had simply captured a city and forced its inhabitants to choose 163 of the inhabitants to be crucified, I agree it would be one of the very worst acts in the series, perhaps the worst.

In this case, the leaders of the city had first chosen 163 children to be crucified and disembowelled. That was a worse act than Dany's act in retaliation, because every one of the children was innocent. A lot of Dany's victims were guilty of having ordered the first atrocity, although we can assume that some were not.

In relation to the latter, Dany's order was pretty dreadful.

[ShadowCat Rivers]

Large scale, it has to be Saltpans... On individual level it's IMO Vargo Hoat's death - even if the victim was more than despicable himself, what the Mountain did to him was unimaginably monstruous.

[Knight Of Winter]

Blood and Cheese

Tywin's treatment of Tysha

Jeyne Poole's suffering, both by Ramsay and LF

163 crucified children

And one of my personal favourites: Cersei's treatment of Falyse.

[BitsOfBrains]

On individual level it's IMO Vargo Hoat's death - even if the victim was more than despicable himself, what the Mountain did to him was unimaginably monstruous.

Yeah I totally forgot about that. That was definitely horrible.

If Dany had simply captured a city and forced its inhabitants to choose 163 of the inhabitants to be crucified, I agree it would be one of the very worst acts in the series, perhaps the worst.

In this case, the leaders of the city had first chosen 163 children to be crucified and disembowelled. That was a worse act than Dany's act in retaliation, because every one of the children was innocent. A lot of Dany's victims were guilty of having ordered the first atrocity, although we can assume that some were not.

In relation to the latter, Dany's order was pretty dreadful.

We don't know that the crucified "great masters" were anything besides slaves wrapped up in tokars. Maybe maybe not. Second we don't know that the crucified children were innocent. Slaves have a monetary value so it seems likely that the great masters would stake up the criminals first. So we don't know that the "great masters" were guilty or that the "slaves" were innocent.

I'm still not convinced that it matters.In the words of the one true king of Westeros, "A good act does not wash out the bad, nor a bad act the good. Each should have its own reward."

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

Yeah I totally forgot about that. That was definitely horrible.

We don't know that the crucified "great masters" were anything besides slaves wrapped up in tokars. Maybe maybe not. Second we don't know that the crucified children were innocent. Slaves have a monetary value so it seems likely that the great masters would stake up the criminals first. So we don't know that the "great masters" were guilty or that the "slaves" were innocent.

I'm still not convinced that it matters.In the words of the one true king of Westeros, "A good act does not wash out the bad, nor a bad act the good. Each should have its own reward."

I think you are grasping at straws here. They were child slaves. They were innocent. Period. As for the Great Masters being slaves wrapped in tokars: Did the book specifically say "The great masters are not slaves wrapped in tokars" No, the book also does not specifically say that Dany is not Daffy Duck but we know with a fair degree of certainty that she isn't. I can hardly see the Great Masters saying "Hey guys you wear our tokars so you look like the guilty ones" and no one saying anything about it. They don't mention that the people in tokars are slaves when they are being nailed up OR after it is done and the former slaves can come to court to talk to Dany about grievances? Don't you think at least ONE of them would have mentioned she crucified the wrong group?

As stated several times above we can assume some of the great masters that were crucified were probably innocent of the crime in question anyway. We can also assume that many more were guilty & actively participated in the crucification of 163 children.

[Ramsay Gimp]

Second we don't know that the crucified children were innocent. Slaves have a monetary value so it seems likely that the great masters would stake up the criminals first. So we don't know that the "great masters" were guilty or that the "slaves" were innocent.

"

Jesus, this is the first time I've seen someone actually defend the Great Masters for crucifying children. Have you really thought this through, or are you just that desperate to condemn Dany for one of her finest moments?

Actually, on second thought I'm sure you're right: all 163 of those kids were vile criminals who got what they deserved. :lol:

[Nictarion]

We don't know that the crucified "great masters" were anything besides slaves wrapped up in tokars. Maybe maybe not. Second we don't know that the crucified children were innocent. Slaves have a monetary value so it seems likely that the great masters would stake up the criminals first. So we don't know that the "great masters" were guilty or that the "slaves" were innocent.

Congratulations, you have made the most ridiculous post I've seen in my time here. Well done!

[JonCon's Red Beard]

We don't know that the crucified "great masters" were anything besides slaves wrapped up in tokars. Maybe maybe not. Second we don't know that the crucified children were innocent. Slaves have a monetary value so it seems likely that the great masters would stake up the criminals first. So we don't know that the "great masters" were guilty or that the "slaves" were innocent.

:lmao: (i can't stop laughing, for real... I'm crying...)

[teemo]

We don't know that the crucified "great masters" were anything besides slaves wrapped up in tokars. Maybe maybe not. Second we don't know that the crucified children were innocent. Slaves have a monetary value so it seems likely that the great masters would stake up the criminals first. So we don't know that the "great masters" were guilty or that the "slaves" were innocent.

wtf? lol

Probably the Dothraki as a whole, the crucifixions, and on a personal level I thought the part where Theon chopped off Farlen's head was pretty gruesome.

[SeanF]

Jesus, this is the first time I've seen someone actually defend the Great Masters for crucifying children. Have you really thought this through, or are you just that desperate to condemn Dany for one of her finest moments?

Actually, on second thought I'm sure you're right: all 163 of those kids were vile criminals who got what they deserved. :lol:

Maybe the children were lazy; or disobedient; or cheeky; or refused to learn their lessons. For all we know, they may have merited crucifixion and disembowelment.

[Nictarion]

Maybe the children were lazy; or disobedient; or cheeky; or refused to learn their lessons. For all we know, they have merited crucifixion and disembowelment.

They probably refused to be dipped in honey and thrown to bears. The nerve.

[SeanF]

They probably refused to be dipped in honey and thrown to bears. The nerve.

Or objected to being sold into brothels at the age of 9.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

The 163 children thought Feast and Dance were good books... they totally had it coming...

[BitsOfBrains]

You guys act like its totally beyond the pale that there are criminal children. Narbo is a thief. Arya runs around killing people. Hell, how many murdering children did we see in the epilogue of Dance?

Besides thats not my argument. My point wasn't that the kids were bad or that the great masters were good.

My point is that we don't know ANYTHING about how the crucifati were chosen other than the fact that Daenerys forced the women of the great masters to serve up 163 guys. One has to assume they would have tried to NOT give up their own men if at all possible.

IF they did serve up their own sons and brothers etc. then the 163 has to be 163 times worse than blood and cheese.

IF they some how weaseled out of it then some more innocent people were killed.

Either way it has to be worse than blood and cheese.