OldGimletEye Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 Daeron II. Seemed like an all round decent guy and king. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boarsbane Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 It looks like there are no good qualities to Daemon besides "he was strong." So going by that train of thought, I guess I'm going to have to go for King Gregor Clegane.All you have to do is look at his treatment of Gwayne Corbray to know that isn't true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bironic Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 Daemon's choice of counselors and friends is quite dubious: aegor bittersteel, glendon ball, etc., and that's one of the most important qualities of a king: the right choice of counselors. If you don't get that right you end like Bobby B or Aerys II. All you have to do is look at his treatment of Gwayne Corbray to know that isn't true. And just because he was chivalrous (in one instance some might argue), it doesn't mean he would have made a good king. After all his chivalry severely damaged his chances to win the battle of Redgrass field and with that the IT. That reminds me of Ned's mercy...Furthermore Daemon's sons seem quite bad compared to Baelor, Maekar and Aerys.Daeron II on the other hand was perhaps the most competent ruler of the 7 Kingdoms, his only fault was that he didn't look good and that he wasn't a warrior.And why the hell did he start this rebellion in the first place? I can understand Aegor Bittersteel's and Glendon Ball's motives as well as the motives of some of the Lords who were showered with favors during Aegon IV reign. But Daemon's motives are less clear IMHO. He could have made an easy living in his castle and become a famous tourney knight, why the hell did he put that away for some damn Iron Chair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the conquering bastard 25 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Just so we all know my comment was tongue and cheek. I was serious about the black or red comment, and sort of about the crazy. But I'm a Jon Snow fan so don't want the Targs back in Valarya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veltigar Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 Cousin to cousin, niece to uncle is different to brother and sister. And the Lannisters practicing incest seems to be only case of non-Valyrian incest :lmao: Type in Rickard Stark on the wiki of ice and fire :P It will open a new world for you XD That said, I would support Daemon. The Targaryen post Daeron remind me a lot of the late Merowingian kings whereas the Blackfyres more than once showed the strength and determination of the Carolingians.The Targaryen started to believe their own hype without backing it up with facts anymore. A weak dynasty and it started with Daeron II. :lol: A weak dynasty you say. Best joke of the week. Maekar, Aegon V, even Jaeherys II, all of them were strong kings. Maekar was the most warrior-like King since the Young Dragon, but he also governed ably. Aegon V was one of the strongest Kings to sit on the IT and he was certainly the most visionary King since Jaeherys I. His son Jaeherys II ruled for only a short period of time, but even so he curbstomped the ninepenny Kings before they were even able to set foot on Westerosi soil. Aerys I was bookish true, but he had the good sense to appoint his uncle as his hand. Together they steered the Realm through one of the most difficult periods in its history (Great Drought, two Blackfyre Rebellions, the Spring Sickness and an Ironborn uprising). So, even he hardly counts as weak. The only King who truly counts as weak was Aerys II. In a feudalistic society a leader has to lead amongst others by strength, in order to command respect and loyalty. That is an universal truth throughout human history. Those who we call great kings, emperors, caliphs, sultans, khans or whatever didnt become great because they were nice people but because they were ruthless if neccessary.Please note that this is not a value judgement but simply stating facts.Being good at swinging a sword is not the same as being ruthless. Bittersteel was ruthless, Daemon I wasn't. If Daemon had been ruthless, he would have won the battle of the Red Grass field. He would have defeated Corbray and then he would have stepped over his warm corpse to gain the high ground, instead of waisting valuable time on a wounded enemy. He payed dearly for that mistake. No, Andals were just religious zealots who tried to force their religion down everyone's throats, and the First Men just committed genocide, they were obviously so much better :agree: Daemon's choice of counselors and friends is quite dubious: aegor bittersteel, glendon ball, etc., and that's one of the most important qualities of a king: the right choice of counselors. If you don't get that right you end like Bobby B or Aerys II. And just because he was chivalrous (in one instance some might argue), it doesn't mean he would have made a good king. After all his chivalry severely damaged his chances to win the battle of Redgrass field and with that the IT. That reminds me of Ned's mercy...Furthermore Daemon's sons seem quite bad compared to Baelor, Maekar and Aerys.Daeron II on the other hand was perhaps the most competent ruler of the 7 Kingdoms, his only fault was that he didn't look good and that he wasn't a warrior.And why the hell did he start this rebellion in the first place? I can understand Aegor Bittersteel's and Glendon Ball's motives as well as the motives of some of the Lords who were showered with favors during Aegon IV reign. But Daemon's motives are less clear IMHO. He could have made an easy living in his castle and become a famous tourney knight, why the hell did he put that away for some damn Iron Chair.Quentyn Ball ;) Glendon Ball is fireball's alledged son in tMK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoIaF Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 :lmao: Type in Rickard Stark on the wiki of ice and fire :P It will open a new world for you XDCame to say this as well and to add Edric and Jonnel Stak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Melnibonean Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 I probably woulda been some peasant named Wat or Pate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cladinator Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 You had me at Bloodraven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic G Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 Blackfyre. What we here about Daeron is from the masters or from Egg the guys grandson so I really doubt he was as perfect as they say. Bloodraven no doubt altered the history to make Daeron sound amazing and labeling him "the good" just like how charectors in the book talk about Jeffrey's glorious reign and crushing of the rebels with the help of his uncles. While at the same time he more than likely produced anti-daemon propaganda also Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VVSINGOFTHECROSS Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 Blackfyre. What we here about Daeron is from the masters or from Egg the guys grandson so I really doubt he was as perfect as they say. Bloodraven no doubt altered the history to make Daeron sound amazing and labeling him "the good" just like how charectors in the book talk about Jeffrey's glorious reign and crushing of the rebels with the help of his uncles. While at the same time he more than likely produced anti-daemon propaganda also As the Blaclfyres would have done had Daemon won. Really, Daemon just seemed like a warrior with little no political acumen shown by the fact he rebelled some ten years after his supposed love was married off. Really was just a puppet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 Daemon. He should had took the Throne since his mother would came before Viserys if the Targs were sane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic G Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 As the Blaclfyres would have done had Daemon won. Really, Daemon just seemed like a warrior with little no political acumen shown by the fact he rebelled some ten years after his supposed love was married off. Really was just a puppetLike Stannis who was trying to take the throne from King Joffery and waited a while after Robert's death to name himself King. We never get the real reason he rebelled so saying he did it for one reason just to make him sound stupid isn't reasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllOfTheHours Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 Neither, honestly I would have voted for them to destroy themselves. Tbh, without dragons Westeros is too large and too diverse a continent to be ruled by a handful of people in KL. "Blood and fire" kept the 7 kingdoms united through fear, but they were always separate culturally and in terms of fealty. Otherwise Tywin wouldn't have set the Mountain and co. and the Bloody Mummers on people in the Riverlands. He was destroying the people he was supposed to rule/protect as Hand of the King - basically cutting off his nose to spite his face. The Targaryens could be good, but they could also be terrible like Aerys (and Viserys if Robert hadn't taken KL). I think Westeros should become like the European Union. The 7 kingdoms would be political and economic allies who administer themselves (without a possibly incompetent or cruel king causing wars, like Aerys and Joffrey). Of course that has down sides too, but I think it would be preferable. (King in the North!!) :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonWolfRose Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 My support would go toward King Daeron II Targaryen. King Daeron II seemed to be a decent fellow, who worked hard to correct many wrongs, which the realm endured under its previous ruler. Besides, the diversity he brought to the high court is a positive thing, especially if it helps to bring about peace and unity (but that’s probably a topic for another discussion). Considering the long term effects of this situation, aligning with House Targaryen would be in my best interests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrell_like_Squirrel Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 I do really the Blackfyres, Bittersteel needs more credit for being just as much of a badass on the opposite side of the conflict. But I probably would have supported Daeron II. That said, Aerys I was a pretty crappy king, I might have become a Blackfyre convert. Mostly just for the chance to join up with Bittersteel. So to answer the question, I'd back the Targ's in 196 and the Blackfyre's in 219. BTW, this is all under the assumption that I have no clue who Egg is. Cause I'd back him till the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King17 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 I will follow bloodraven so daeron II Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King17 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 All blackfyre supporters must be executed for treason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Melnibonean Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 I would follow the son of the Dragonknight over the son of the Unworthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VVSINGOFTHECROSS Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 Like Stannis who was trying to take the throne from King Joffery and waited a while after Robert's death to name himself King. We never get the real reason he rebelled so saying he did it for one reason just to make him sound stupid isn't reasonable. That was what some gave as the main reason he was rebelling. Furthermore, the type of people Daemon surrounded himself with would've just brought more ruin to the kingdom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion of the West Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 I would follow the son of the Dragonknight over the son of the Unworthy. The Dragonknight had no sons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.