Robb_Warged Posted June 8, 2015 Author Share Posted June 8, 2015 I don't see why the northerners would want to work with the seven kingdoms. Apart from Dorne and maybe the Iron Islands they are the most culturally distinct region. Including Robb 4 Stark leaders of Winterfell went south and died. The North is the only kingdom that gives a damn about the wall. At least Renly wasn't a douche the Starks. He was willing to let Robb keep his title. Stannis just attempted blood magic because he's a cheater. I feel bad for Robb I don't know why anyone would want to give him problems for not backing Stannis Baratheon. Nobody wants to back Stannis Baratheon except fanatics of the red god. Such a bitter man should not sit the iron throne. Agreed. Robb made damning errors. Not backing down from his secession claim and supporting Stannis is no longer something I consider to be one of those errors though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sullen Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 At least Renly wasn't a douche the Starks. He was willing to let Robb keep his title. I'm a Renly supporter, but Renly was absolutely a douche to Robb and Cat, rightfully so though, Robb was a rebel and he needed to make that clear. Robb keeping the title of "King in the North" would have been meaningless, just like Dorne's princely titles, and the Iron Isles's King of Salt and Rock, meaningless labels for vassals of the Iron Throne. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Mulder Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Could Rob have said no when the Northern Lords declared him King in the North? He could have said no. But I don't think he should of. He could have kept the North Independent if he had fought more of a defensive war. Plus he should have razed the twins in the first place. They are a vassal of Edmure Tully and rather then doing their duty they basically extort him. Yes taking the Twins would have probably used up a lot of resources but I think if he started the process Walder frey would have surrendered and complied with Robb's demands. Plus it would have given him time to summon a greater Northern Army that would actually have been a force to be reckoned with rather than his small army that was ridiculously outnumbered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sullen Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 He could have said no. But I don't think he should of. He could have kept the North Independent if he had fought more of a defensive war. Plus he should have razed the twins in the first place. They are a vassal of Edmure Tully and rather then doing their duty they basically extort him. Yes taking the Twins would have probably used up a lot of resources but I think if he started the process Walder frey would have surrendered and complied with Robb's demands. Plus it would have given him time to summon a greater Northern Army that would actually have been a force to be reckoned with rather than his small army that was ridiculously outnumbered. 1) He doesn't have the strength to take the Twins by force, and they are pretty much impossible to siege without two armies anyways. 2) The Freys might be a vassal of the Tully's, but they are sworn to the Iron Throne as well. They did nothing wrong at that point in the storyline. 3) Summoning a "greater Northern army" means the North is even less defended when Balon strikes, except for what Manderly left at White Harbour, there wasn't much left in the North either way. 4) Fighting a defensive war means abandoning Sansa, Arya, and revenge in general, I don't think that rings with what the Northmen wanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guess who's back Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Robb should had supported Stannis , and don't compare the stupid show with the books Lol'd support the guy with how many troops? Like 5k? When he was about to have a battle with a guy with 100k troops? Don't go full retard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
averde Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Robb and the rest of Westeros would have been in a much better situation had Stannis not interfered at all.Regardless of whether your statement is true or not, this topic is about Robb being right about not backing Stannis, not whether Stannis should have done nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
averde Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 How did declaring the North independent make the situation unwinnable? He was well on his way to winning when the Red Wedding happened. At worst he could have retreated to the North, retaken Winterfell, and waited out the implosion of King's Landing. This has been talked about at length on a great many topic boards so I'll make this short, Robb was being attacked from the North and South, he had declared himself king of the North AND riverlands (so he can't retreat north completely and leave half his kingdom to be destroyed), he had no significant allies to help him. You can't bank on what happens later in the story like Tywin dying to guarantee Robb the win, and it still wouldn't. At the time of the Red Wedding Robb is in an almost unwinnable situation strategically and politically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pashernate Reader Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 If Robb had backed Stannis it would never have come to this - ergo Robb killed Shireen. :devil: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 What I understood from what I saw in the interviews Shireen will die, however she doesn't need to die like that. I don't see her being burned by Stannis because of multiple reasons. I believe that Mel and Selyse will do it but Selyse will regret it. In anycase I don't see why the TVseries should change someone opinion about BookStannis? How many changed their opinion about Cat after they lernt that she was voodooing Jon to die? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robb_Warged Posted June 8, 2015 Author Share Posted June 8, 2015 If Robb had backed Stannis it would never have come to this - ergo Robb killed Shireen. :devil: Eddard killed Shireen. Robert Baratheon killed Shireen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olibar Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Stannis was the ONLY king that was fighting to save Westeros. Everyone else is fighting each other for the throne while Stannis risked life and limb to protect the world from the Others. That is whhy I supported him. How could he do this? God I feel sick. Risked life and limb to protect the world from the Others? Fighting to save Westeros? He left The Wall virtually undefended to continue to press his claim to the Iron Throne, which is the only thing he cares about. He had the opportunity to be the savior of Westeros but turned it down in favor of his own ambition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hol Horse Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 We shall see, Renly. Come the dawn, we shall see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris999 Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Risked life and limb to protect the world from the Others? Fighting to save Westeros? He left The Wall virtually undefended to continue to press his claim to the Iron Throne, which is the only thing he cares about. He had the opportunity to be the savior of Westeros but turned it down in favor of his own ambition. No, actually it was a conscious decision he made. Davos read Mormont's letters from the wall requesting men and Davos came up with the plan that win the hearts of the people by confronting the new threat at the Wall. ACOK IIRC. Plus Mel is constantly reminding him that the real war is s against the great Other, not the war for the throne. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guess who's back Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Eddard killed Shireen. Robert Baratheon killed Shireen. I'm pretty sure it was actually LF that killed Shireen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biglose Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 I don't mind that this is happening, but I see in this thread we're shifting towards discussion about Robb fighting a lost cause. I'm not saying Robb made every right call. I think not backing Stannis is a major complaint against Robb among fans since the Red Wedding happened. I'm just saying, as we are seeing what sort of a man Stannis is, and blundering his raid against KL, I really don't hold it against Robb for not declaring for Stannis way back when. If Robb was able to survive Theon's betrayal and consolidate his troops and efforts to the North/Riverlands and hold off on storming KL and getting Sansa (maybe if he had been in on the Jaime trade, Sansa could have been returned to the North?), I think the North (as we knew it under Stark leadership) could have survived long enough to see Dany reach Westeros. I think Robb would have been willing to bend the knee to Dany, uniting the North to the rest of Westeros again Whaaaa? Are you confusing Robb for JON!? Robb doesn't have a stepmom nor Ghost Yeah, I was. My brain just refused to discuss blame about long dead characters so I automatically jumped to the one who did not "ally" with stannis... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biglose Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Risked life and limb to protect the world from the Others? Fighting to save Westeros? He left The Wall virtually undefended to continue to press his claim to the Iron Throne, which is the only thing he cares about. He had the opportunity to be the savior of Westeros but turned it down in favor of his own ambition. Thats not true. They could not support his troops at the wall. They needed food. So he probably had to take a castle. For the supplys alone... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pettes Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Stannis would be the worst Choice as a king. His Whole nature is justice, justice and more justice. While his Brother pardoned the lords who supported the Targaryens Stannis would have killed the all losing the Reach, Dorne and most of the crownlands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pettes Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 DP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SerDesmondHume Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 I'm a Renly supporter, but Renly was absolutely a douche to Robb and Cat, rightfully so though, Robb was a rebel and he needed to make that clear. Robb keeping the title of "King in the North" would have been meaningless, just like Dorne's princely titles, and the Iron Isles's King of Salt and Rock, meaningless labels for vassals of the Iron Throne. Still Renly would have let Robb keep his title and even if his words were probably empty he still paid respect to Ned and showed respect to Robb for actually doing work in the war by fighting the Westerland armies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Santa of House Claus Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 The book Stannis is clearly on the same path as the show Stannis. While I have repeatedly said that had Stannis reached out to Robb, instead of just wishing him dead, that Robb would have bent the knee instead of fighting Stannis, because Robb's fight was with the Lannisters and even though it changed into independence, Robb taking off his crown for the sake of peace seems like what he would have done had the situation raised. I am glad Robb never backed him, because 1) Robb did not have the evidence to support Stannis as the rightful king, he would have been supporting another rebel, and 2) I never liked Stannis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.