Jump to content

Alternate History: What if Tywin Lannister had never been born


Recommended Posts

Pycelle Yronwood. Allies with the Lannisters, tells Aerys to open his gates so tywin can come in and kill a Martell princess and her kids.

Okay, that's too morbid.

Don't think it'd end up quite that plot relevant :P

His actions are already explained well enough by who he is, Grand Maester who thought Tywin truly was better for the realm than Aerys II.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. So Tywin is suddenly responsible for what his children do with their own free will? Is Daeron the Good responsible for Aerys II? I say that basically every human has a free will and is responsible for what they did, not for what others did.

2. Which is because we have anti-Lannister POVs where the Westermen are but no anti-Stark POV in the West. If we get a POV to the West I am confident we'll get to see what the Northmen did in enemy territory, and we've already seen they were not as nice every time in friendly territory.

3. No, the gates were opened and Tywin stormed the city to take advantage of the enemy's blunder. According to Eddard Stark there were thousands of loyalists inside the city when Tywin attacked, but maybe he's lying on Tywin's behalf? Also we don't know the exact numbers of dead. Even a couple of hundreds of people would have been remembered badly, for obivous reasons.

4. I'll tell you what info Tywin had. Robert appoints Eddard Stark as Hand of the King, a very short time after Tyrion is accused of a crime and arrested by Riverland soldiers on the orders of Lady Stark, born a Tully, and then Jaime arrives to tell him that Eddard Stark has confessed that Lady Stark acted on his orders. Then Lady Tully does not take Tyrion as her prisoner to face the King's Justice in King's Landing, where both the king and the Hand is, but takes her in the opposite direction to her sister in the Vale.

What chances do you think that Tywin would have when the Hand is masterminding a kidnapping with the seeming consent and support of three Great Houses?

Don't know about you, but its kind of like Robb coming after Eddard imprisonment to King's Landing with a small following, say a dozen men, to negotiate Eddard's realese. I don't think it would have worked very well for Robb.

5. We don't know what these reforms did nor if it was for personal gain, only that the lords calmed down by their removal.

6. Actually if you read the world book you can find that he ensured that a conflict with the Iron Bank didn't happen in the same way it has happened for Cersei.

7. For the sake of the mods' wishes I'll keep silent

8. So you kind of making it up these numbers, yes? I don't doubt that there were many dead in the war or that many will suffer, but I don't really believe in these numbers.

9. I don't really get what you're trying to tell me. Could you elaborate?

1. That comment was concerning the butterfly effect of removing Tywin. It doesn't matter whether or not he's responsible; removing Tywin means no Jaime or Cersei.

2. Neutral POVs also go on about the cruelty of the Westerlanders and the reputations of men like Vargo Hoat, Gregor Clegane, Tywin Lannister, Amory Lorch, etc. What North/Riverlands war leader has this kind of reputation?

3. The only loyalists would be the city watch and maybe a few scattered survivors. The battle lasted a few hours, tops, so no excuses. His savagery had to be very methodical. A few hundred dead doesn't even remotely fit the description of the massacre. Piles of dead filled the streets, every woman in sight was raped, the whole city was in chaos, etc.

4. He was accused of a crime for quite justifiable reasons. The Lannisters WERE behind both of the attempts on Bran's life, and any sane person could make the basic connection between "Lannisters arrive" and "son gets two assassination attempts in two days". The Hand approving of this act is just one more indication that HE SHOULD NOT INVADE ANOTHER KINGDOM AND START BUTCHERING THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE in response. Because, you know, it'd start a war, where the central authority and every single kingdom would be against him.

That makes no sense. He can still talk to Robert, while in your analogy, there is no Robert.

5. It was obviously for personal gain. He had no other real motivation.

6. Okay, so he paid debts on time rather than defaulting on them for no reason? How is that sign of him being brilliant and irreplaceable?

7. Please tell me you know what rape is.

8. Okay, why? The reports of Gregor and Tywin's raids have entire towns with populations likely in the thousands being completely butchered, and this went on for well over a year, in a thickly populated kingdom with millions of citizens. Tens of thousands is conservative. And how exactly are the Riverlands NOT going to suffer a depopulation bomb, with Tywin destroying their stockpiles and crops, and winter about to hit?

9. Sure. Tywin not being Hand when he did all that stupid shit is a pointless technicality. He was Hand right after, and so he should have been working with a Hand's mindset. His overall ineptitude as a lord (especially in regards to his evil acts, which were largely petty and short-sighted) is directly responsible for House Lannister's collapse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. That comment was concerning the butterfly effect of removing Tywin. It doesn't matter whether or not he's responsible; removing Tywin means no Jaime or Cersei.

2. Neutral POVs also go on about the cruelty of the Westerlanders and the reputations of men like Vargo Hoat, Gregor Clegane, Tywin Lannister, Amory Lorch, etc. What North/Riverlands war leader has this kind of reputation?

3. The only loyalists would be the city watch and maybe a few scattered survivors. The battle lasted a few hours, tops, so no excuses. His savagery had to be very methodical. A few hundred dead doesn't even remotely fit the description of the massacre. Piles of dead filled the streets, every woman in sight was raped, the whole city was in chaos, etc.

4. He was accused of a crime for quite justifiable reasons. The Lannisters WERE behind both of the attempts on Bran's life, and any sane person could make the basic connection between "Lannisters arrive" and "son gets two assassination attempts in two days". The Hand approving of this act is just one more indication that HE SHOULD NOT INVADE ANOTHER KINGDOM AND START BUTCHERING THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE in response. Because, you know, it'd start a war, where the central authority and every single kingdom would be against him.

That makes no sense. He can still talk to Robert, while in your analogy, there is no Robert.

5. It was obviously for personal gain. He had no other real motivation.

6. Okay, so he paid debts on time rather than defaulting on them for no reason? How is that sign of him being brilliant and irreplaceable?

7. Please tell me you know what rape is.

8. Okay, why? The reports of Gregor and Tywin's raids have entire towns with populations likely in the thousands being completely butchered, and this went on for well over a year, in a thickly populated kingdom with millions of citizens. Tens of thousands is conservative. And how exactly are the Riverlands NOT going to suffer a depopulation bomb, with Tywin destroying their stockpiles and crops, and winter about to hit?

9. Sure. Tywin not being Hand when he did all that stupid shit is a pointless technicality. He was Hand right after, and so he should have been working with a Hand's mindset. His overall ineptitude as a lord (especially in regards to his evil acts, which were largely petty and short-sighted) is directly responsible for House Lannister's collapse.

1. You still have the fact though that Tywin is not responsible for Jaime and Cersei's actions that comes from their free will.

2. Brynden Tully, Roose Bolton and Rickard Karstark? Against these three we have Tywin Lannister, Gregor Clegane and Amory Lorch. Since Vargo Hoat switched sides I'd pull that one as on both sides.

I could dig up even more quotes about the nice Northmen and their gallant Rivermen allies.

3. So you mean that Eddard Stark is either a Lannister toad or a Lannister propagandist? because he seems to swell the Targaryen ranks significantly from your description.

"So when the Targaryen host broke and ran, you gav pursuit into my hands. The remnants of Rhaegar's army fled back to King's Landing. We followed. Aerys was in the Red Keep with several thousand loyalists. I expected to find the gates closed to us."

Chapter 12* Eddard, A Game of Thrones

That's a rather artistic description.

4. No, one was done by a knight of the Kingsguard and one by Robert's Baratheon heir. That the Starks pins the guilt on people they already disliked says just as much of how prejudiced and judgemental they are as they swallow everything Littlefinger and Varys feeds them.

5. You kind of miss the situation, again.

The Hand is acting on his own to dislodge the Lannisters from court and the king is known coward who will never stand up against the Lannisters as he's already shown on several occasions. Its rather clear that there will be a conflict and that Robert will keep his head down, or go hunting, untill its resolved. And when soldiers from a multitude of Houses from the Riverlands act in union with the orders of a daughter of House Tully, you can't pretend these guys are close to neutral.

Also I don't recall the Reach, Stormlands, Iron Islands and Dorne caring much for the war in the Riverlands.

6. It isn't. Its a sign of his comptence and I can dig up more for you if you wish. But then again I also kind of assume it would be fairly pointless since you've already made up your mind on it.

7. I know well what it is, but I'm not sure that you do.

8. For one thing, there were a limited number of people who could do the raids, as they don't have heavy bombers etc. And I'm not saying that people didn't die or won't die, but I say that I won't throw out numbers just like that. And I don't think that Gregor Clegane and Amory Lorch are as ultra-efficient as you would paint them.

I kind of wait for the Winds of Winter to see more details on how badly the Riverlands were burnt.

9. He did work with a Hand's mindset; to support his king and defeat the enemies of said king. If people don't being attacked by the king's forces they shouldn't rebel against the king in the first place.

*A bit unsure about the chapter number

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ thank you for that quote by Eddard about the number of loyalists in Kings Landing, LionoftheWest. It was a well garrisoned city, and the overall brutality of the sack was therefore not out of the ordinary

and do people not understand that it would have been sacked anyway?

Instead of a swift and bloody sacking by Tywin it would have been a long drawn out siege followed by a bloody sacking.

Neds problem is more to do with the treachery than the destruction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pycelle Yronwood. Allies with the Lannisters, tells Aerys to open his gates so tywin can come in and kill a Martell princess and her kids.

Okay, that's too morbid.

Does Pycelle even know what Tywins plans are when he advises the King?

"Shall I proclaim a new king as well?" Crakehall asked, and Jaime read the question plain: Shall it be your father, or Robert Baratheon, or do you mean to try to make a new dragonking?

If his own men are not aware of Tywins plans during the actual sack then it is possible that Pycelle was unaware as well.

I actually dont think Pycelle knew and its possible Varys didn't as well. Both may have thought there was a genuine chance that Tywin was coming to support the Targ crown which is why Pycelle was for it and Varys against it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and do people not understand that it would have been sacked anyway?

Instead of a swift and bloody sacking by Tywin it would have been a long drawn out siege followed by a bloody sacking.

Neds problem is more to do with the treachery than the destruction.

No, it makes much more sense that Tywin ordered his men to pointlessly rape as much as possible! /sarc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Tywin was much more ruthless than your average Westeros lord, while he was much more intelligent and strong-willed.



Aerys would have become a crazy, paranoid tyrant and provoked a rebellion regardless of who served him as Hand



Without Tywin, Kevin would have become a dutiful, competent Lord of Castelry Rock. He probably wouldn't have had the same ambition for House Lannister as Tywin did, and under his rule the Lannisters would most likely "just" be one of the most powerful houses of Westeros.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. You still have the fact though that Tywin is not responsible for Jaime and Cersei's actions that comes from their free will.

2. Brynden Tully, Roose Bolton and Rickard Karstark? Against these three we have Tywin Lannister, Gregor Clegane and Amory Lorch. Since Vargo Hoat switched sides I'd pull that one as on both sides.

I could dig up even more quotes about the nice Northmen and their gallant Rivermen allies.

3. So you mean that Eddard Stark is either a Lannister toad or a Lannister propagandist? because he seems to swell the Targaryen ranks significantly from your description.

"So when the Targaryen host broke and ran, you gav pursuit into my hands. The remnants of Rhaegar's army fled back to King's Landing. We followed. Aerys was in the Red Keep with several thousand loyalists. I expected to find the gates closed to us."

Chapter 12* Eddard, A Game of Thrones

That's a rather artistic description.

4. No, one was done by a knight of the Kingsguard and one by Robert's Baratheon heir. That the Starks pins the guilt on people they already disliked says just as much of how prejudiced and judgemental they are as they swallow everything Littlefinger and Varys feeds them.

5. You kind of miss the situation, again.

The Hand is acting on his own to dislodge the Lannisters from court and the king is known coward who will never stand up against the Lannisters as he's already shown on several occasions. Its rather clear that there will be a conflict and that Robert will keep his head down, or go hunting, untill its resolved. And when soldiers from a multitude of Houses from the Riverlands act in union with the orders of a daughter of House Tully, you can't pretend these guys are close to neutral.

Also I don't recall the Reach, Stormlands, Iron Islands and Dorne caring much for the war in the Riverlands.

6. It isn't. Its a sign of his comptence and I can dig up more for you if you wish. But then again I also kind of assume it would be fairly pointless since you've already made up your mind on it.

7. I know well what it is, but I'm not sure that you do.

8. For one thing, there were a limited number of people who could do the raids, as they don't have heavy bombers etc. And I'm not saying that people didn't die or won't die, but I say that I won't throw out numbers just like that. And I don't think that Gregor Clegane and Amory Lorch are as ultra-efficient as you would paint them.

I kind of wait for the Winds of Winter to see more details on how badly the Riverlands were burnt.

9. He did work with a Hand's mindset; to support his king and defeat the enemies of said king. If people don't being attacked by the king's forces they shouldn't rebel against the king in the first place.

*A bit unsure about the chapter number

1. Which, again, has absolutely nothing to do with the butterfly effect. What are you trying to say here?

2. Roose is an exception. Brynden and Rickard aren't known for their war crimes. The Westermen, on the other hand, are spoken of time and again as butchering entire towns, burning crops, bringing terror everywhere they go, and generally being a nuisance.

3. Rhaegar's army was completely shattered. The idea that a significant number of them would manage to make a long march over a thousand miles to the east is just ridiculous. A few scattered remnants made it back. That's it, judging by the fact that the battle and sack wrapped up really quickly, quickly enough for Ned to walk in and see Jaime with fresh blood on his sword. That had to be intentional and methodical, it wouldn't have been so quick otherwise.

The scale of destruction described means tens of thousands of deaths and rapes is pretty likely.

4. Yes, the Kingsguard Jaime LANNISTER, and the child who was half [officially, in truth he was full] LANNISTER. I don't know why you think this makes the slightest bit of difference. The Starks made the only logical assumption. The Lannisters show up, starting causing trouble (Lady, Micah, etc.), and two assassinations attempt happen on the same person in two days. Then they find the dagger. They were completely justified in their suspicions, they just grabbed the wrong Lannister.

5. You're truly underestimating what this would mean. Tywin was planning on attacking and killing men under the king's banner, and kidnapping the king's hand. This is way different than a dispute over a dog, or a street brawl that results in a few deaths. This is a deliberately planned treason, AFTER an unjustified invasion full of war crimes. Robert needs to do something, or else his authority means absolutely nothing, which will have far, far more problems along the line. He's not THAT stupid. Not to mention that a civil war would be completely unavoidable at that point; Tywin was building up his army long before Robert actually died, and the Riverlands were doing the same. He has to pick a side, and it just so happens that the anti-Lannister side would gain the support of the vast majority of Westeros. As in, pretty much all of it, except the Westerlands.

Those other regions would feel like jumping in a scenario where Tywin's plan goes off as planned. Every region has reason to fight the Lannisters, while absolutely none of them have any reason to side with the Lannisters. The Tyrells and Renly were already planning on booting out the Lannisters prior to their aggression, so they're in. Dorne and the Iron Islands would be the opportunists, jumping in when one side looks to have a clear advantage. Especially since Doran hates the Lannisters.

6. I don't see how it's competence. It's just not being a complete moron. I haven't actually seen any evidence that Tywin was anything other than an average Hand and Lord- aside from the stupidity he engages in whenever his pride gets insulted, of course.

7. So you don't. Great.

8. The Riverlands have a population of, like, 5 million or more. Assuming that the Lannister raids, which are explicitly described as massacres of entire towns, only killed tens or hundreds of thousands in 1-2 years is, if anything, labeling them as slackers. In the 13th century, the Mongols wiped out 1/3 of Hungary's population in less than a year. With swords. And not only was that Hungarian kingdom larger than the Riverlands, the Mongols brought less men than Tywin did.

9. No he did not. He acted like a short-sighted fool by making enemies out of half the continent (the Riverlands weren't "rebelling" until after he invaded), and earning the hatred of both nobles and smallfolk alike. A true Machiavellian leader would have avoided being hated at all costs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...